Search

Your search keyword '"Rojas JLG"' showing total 4 results
Start Over Author "Rojas JLG"
4 results on '"Rojas JLG"'

1. Assessment of the control measures for category A diseases of Animal Health Law: Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia

Author

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare, Nielsen, Søren Saxmose, Alvarez, Julio, Bicout, Dominique Joseph, Calistri, Paolo, Canali, Elisabetta, Drewe, Julian Ashley, Garin-Bastuji, Bruno, Gonzales Rojas, José Luis, Gortázar, Christian, Herskin, Mette, Michel, Virginie, Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel, Padalino, Barbara, Pasquali, Paolo, Spoolder, Hans, Ståhl, Karl, Velarde, Antonio, Viltrop, Arvo, Winckler, Christoph, Gubbins, Simon, Stegeman, Jan Arend, Thiaucourt, François, Antoniou, Sotiria-Eleni, Aznar, Inma, Papanikolaou, Alexandra, Zancanaro, Gabriele, Roberts, Helen Clare, Nielsen, SS, Alvarez, J, Bicout, DJ, Calistri, P, Canali, E, Drewe, JA, GarinBastuji, B, Rojas, JLG, Gortazar, C, Herskin, M, Michel, V, Chueca, MAM, Padalino, B, Pasquali, P, Spoolder, H, Stahl, K, Velarde, A, Viltrop, A, Winckler, C, Gubbins, S, Stegeman, JA, Thiaucourt, F, Antoniou, SE, Aznar, I, Papanikolaou, A, Zancanaro, G, Roberts, HC, European Food Safety Authority, Producció Animal, and Benestar Animal

Subjects
Veterinary (miscellaneous), surveillance zone, TP1-1185, Plant Science, L73 - Maladies des animaux, Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia, Microbiology, Péripneumonie contagieuse bovine, mycoide, Surveillance épidémiologique, TX341-641, Disease control measures, sampling procedures, Nutrition. Foods and food supply, Santé animale, Chemical technology, Contrôle de maladies, Mycoplasma mycoides subsp, Disease control measure, sampling procedure, protection zone, Scientific Opinion, Maladie des animaux, Animal Science and Zoology, Parasitology, Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. mycoides, monitoring period, Food Science
Abstract

This article also appears in: Animal Health Law: Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of terrestrial animals., EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of some of the control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases (‘Animal Health Law’). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures will be assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia (CBPP). In this opinion, EFSA and the AHAW Panel of experts review the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period, (iii) the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones, and (iv) the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere. Several scenarios for which these control measures had to be assessed were designed and agreed prior to the start of the assessment. Different clinical and laboratory sampling procedures are proposed depending on the scenarios considered. The monitoring period of 45 days was assessed as not effective and at least 90 days (3 months) is recommended in affected areas where high awareness is expected; when the index case occurs in an area where the awareness is low the monitoring period should be at least 180 days (6 months). Since transmission kernels do not exist and data to estimate transmission kernels are not available, the effectiveness of surveillance and protection zones for CBPP was based on expert knowledge. A surveillance zone of 3 km was considered effective, while a protection zone including establishments adjacent to affected ones is recommended. Recommendations, provided for each of the scenarios assessed, aim to support the European Commission in the drafting of further pieces of legislation, as well as for plausible ad hoc requests in relation to CBPP., The EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare wishes to thank P95 and Evangelos Tsiamadis for the support provided to this scientific output.

Published
2022

2. Assessment of the control measures of category A diseases of the Animal Health Law: Infection with rinderpest virus (Rinderpest)

Author

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW), Nielsen, Søren Saxmose, Alvarez, Julio, Bicout, Dominique Joseph, Calistri, Paolo, Canali, Elisabetta, Drewe, Julian Ashley, Garin-Bastuji, Bruno, Gonzales Rojas, José Luis, Gortázar, Christian, Herskin, Mette, Michel, Virginie, Miranda Chueca, Miguel Ángel, Padalino, Barbara, Pasquali, Paolo, Spoolder, Hans, Ståhl, Karl, Velarde, Antonio, Viltrop, Arvo, Winckler, Christoph, De Clercq, Kris, Gubbins, Simon, Libeau, Genevieve, Gervelmeyer, Andrea, Roberts, Helen Clare, Nielsen, SS, Alvarez, J, Bicout, DJ, Calistri, P, Canali, E, Drewe, JA, Garin-Bastuji, B, Rojas, JLG, Gortazar, C, Herskin, M, Michel, V, Chueca, MAM, Padalino, B, Pasquali, P, Spoolder, H, Stahl, K, Velarde, A, Viltrop, A, Winckler, C, De Clercq, K, Gubbins, S, Libeau, G, Gervelmeyer, A, Roberts, HC, Producció Animal, Benestar Animal, and European Food Safety Authority

Subjects
RP, Veterinary (miscellaneous), surveillance zone, TP1-1185, Plant Science, L73 - Maladies des animaux, Microbiology, Virus peste bovine, TX341-641, Surveillance épidémiologique, sampling procedures, Nutrition. Foods and food supply, Chemical technology, Santé animale, Contrôle de maladies, Anim7316, sampling procedure, protection zone, Scientific Opinion, disease control measures, Maladie des animaux, disease control measure, Animal Science and Zoology, Parasitology, monitoring period, Food Science, rinderpest
Abstract

This article also appears in: Animal Health Law: Assessment of the control measures of the category A diseases of terrestrial animals., EFSA received a mandate from the European Commission to assess the effectiveness of control measures against diseases included in the Category A list according to Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases ('Animal Health Law’). This opinion belongs to a series of opinions where these control measures are assessed, with this opinion covering the assessment of control measures for rinderpest (RP), the only animal disease to have been globally eradicated. In this opinion, the AHAW Panel reviewed the effectiveness of: (i) clinical and laboratory sampling procedures, (ii) monitoring period and (iii) the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zone, and the minimum length of time the measures should be applied in these zones. The general methodology used for this series of opinions has been published elsewhere. The transmission kernels used for the assessment of the minimum radius of the protection and surveillance zones are shown. Several scenarios for which control measures had to be assessed were agreed prior to the assessment. Considering that RP has been eradicated globally, a re-emergence that is not stopped in its early phases could have a devastating impact on animal health and the economy. The panel concludes that no suitable strategies are available to entirely mitigate the risk associated with granting derogations from killing of animals in an affected establishment or for animal movements. Therefore, the panel recommends to not grant any derogations. The monitoring period of 21 days was assessed as effective, except for the hypothetical first re-emergence of RP, when lack of awareness and diagnostic capability may extend the time to detection. It was concluded that the protection and the surveillance zones would contain 90% and > 99%, respectively, of the infections from an affected establishment. Enlarging the protection zone to 4 km would contain the disease spread with 95% probability., European Commission: EFSA-Q-2020-00805

Published
2022

3. Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429): infectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN).

Author

Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Calistri P, Canali E, Drewe JA, Garin-Bastuji B, Rojas JLG, Gortázar C, Herskin MS, Michel V, Miranda MÁ, Padalino B, Pasquali P, Roberts HC, Spoolder H, Ståhl K, Velarde A, Viltrop A, Winckler C, Bron J, Olesen NJ, Sindre H, Stone D, Vendramin N, Antoniou SE, Kohnle L, Papanikolaou A, Karagianni AE, and Bicout DJ

Abstract

Infectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN) was assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular, the criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on its eligibility to be listed, Annex IV for its categorisation according to disease prevention and control rules as in Article 9, and Article 8 for listing animal species related to IPN. The assessment was performed following a methodology previously published. The outcome reported is the median of the probability ranges provided by the experts, which indicates whether each criterion is fulfilled (lower bound ≥ 66%) or not (upper bound ≤ 33%), or whether there is uncertainty about fulfilment. Reasoning points are reported for criteria with an uncertain outcome. According to the assessment here performed, it is uncertain whether IPN can be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention according to Article 5 of the AHL (50-90% probability). According to the criteria in Annex IV, for the purpose of categorisation related to the level of prevention and control as in Article 9 of the AHL, the AHAW Panel concluded that IPN does not meet the criteria in Section 1 (Category A; 0-1% probability of meeting the criteria) and it is uncertain whether it meets the criteria in Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 (Categories B, C, D and E; 33-66%, 33-66%, 50-90% and 50-99% probability of meeting the criteria, respectively). The animal species to be listed for IPN according to Article 8 criteria are provided., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. Rift Valley Fever - epidemiological update and risk of introduction into Europe.

Author

Nielsen SS, Alvarez J, Bicout DJ, Calistri P, Depner K, Drewe JA, Garin-Bastuji B, Rojas JLG, Schmidt CG, Michel V, Chueca MÁM, Roberts HC, Sihvonen LH, Stahl K, Calvo AV, Viltrop A, Winckler C, Bett B, Cetre-Sossah C, Chevalier V, Devos C, Gubbins S, Monaco F, Sotiria-Eleni A, Broglia A, Abrahantes JC, Dhollander S, Stede YV, and Zancanaro G

Abstract

Rift Valley fever (RVF) is a vector-borne disease transmitted by a broad spectrum of mosquito species, especially Aedes and Culex genus, to animals (domestic and wild ruminants and camels) and humans. Rift Valley fever is endemic in sub-Saharan Africa and in the Arabian Peninsula, with periodic epidemics characterised by 5-15 years of inter-epizootic periods. In the last two decades, RVF was notified in new African regions (e.g. Sahel), RVF epidemics occurred more frequently and low-level enzootic virus circulation has been demonstrated in livestock in various areas. Recent outbreaks in a French overseas department and some seropositive cases detected in Turkey, Tunisia and Libya raised the attention of the EU for a possible incursion into neighbouring countries. The movement of live animals is the most important pathway for RVF spread from the African endemic areas to North Africa and the Middle East. The movement of infected animals and infected vectors when shipped by flights, containers or road transport is considered as other plausible pathways of introduction into Europe. The overall risk of introduction of RVF into EU through the movement of infected animals is very low in all the EU regions and in all MSs (less than one epidemic every 500 years), given the strict EU animal import policy. The same level of risk of introduction in all the EU regions was estimated also considering the movement of infected vectors, with the highest level for Belgium, Greece, Malta, the Netherlands (one epidemic every 228-700 years), mainly linked to the number of connections by air and sea transports with African RVF infected countries. Although the EU territory does not seem to be directly exposed to an imminent risk of RVFV introduction, the risk of further spread into countries neighbouring the EU and the risks of possible introduction of infected vectors, suggest that EU authorities need to strengthen their surveillance and response capacities, as well as the collaboration with North African and Middle Eastern countries., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results