Note that the production losses can be more than 100% because they are not only the marginal losses to the infection but the infection could also result in culling of other animals, or long‐lasting economic losses, higher than the value of the farm at the moment of infection. Therefore, if a disease occurred (either reported to the OIE, or published in scientific literature) in at least one country within a UN region, then the entire UN region was marked as positive. This proportion was calculated by overlaying the areas with the vector presence (see previous step), and a high host density (more than 25 horses per km2 or more than 50 animals per km2 for the other hosts).
insects, arachnids and crustaceans) by means other than repulsion or attraction. H317: may cause an allergic skin reaction, H400: Aquatic Acute 1. The items that are influential for reporting were assumed to be hierarchical, i.e. The impact on production losses on infected farms with BTV was estimated to be very low to low depending on the region in the EU. The ranges of the obtained R0 from literature, or the calculated R0 were evaluated against the ranges provided in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model: Very low (< 0.3), Low (0.3–1), Moderate (1–3), High (3–10) and Very high (> 10). When entomological surveillance activities have been carried out to detect a given vector species, but this could not be detected, than this vector species was recorded as absent. Subsequently, if the combined overall rate of introduction exceeded 0.001 introductions per year the annual extent of spread (taking into account the existing mitigation measures) was calculated (TOR 2 and TOR 5). The score of the overall production losses of each disease was then combined with the estimated epidemic size to obtain the impact on production in the infected farms (Figure 23). The confidence intervals around the outputs values visualised in Figure 18 can be found in Table D.1 in Appendix D. Impact on animals health and welfare of 8 VBDs with an overall rate of introduction that was higher than 0.001 per year. To answer the five questions in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model to assess the probability of overwintering the data items described below were collected. The following considerations have been used to guide this process: For strictly vector‐borne diseases, only the probability of contact of the imported host with local vectors should be considered for the first transmission step. The work of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) should focus primarily on diseases listed by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) as well as emerging diseases that are recognised as a serious threat for the EU.
The most frequent risk is that of impact on aquatic organism if some of the products are not properly used and result in contact with aquatic environments (i.e. However do your developers have time to develop something that is already controlled with CTS? In general, there is a much higher probability of establishment for animals which are imported for breeding, compared to animals which are imported for direct slaughter upon arrival. * Efficacy of products will be assessed thoroughly at the stage of product authorisation. According to the model Crimean‐Congo haemorrhagic fever virus, bluetongue virus, West Nile virus, Schmallenberg virus, H. canis, L. infantum, Bunyamwera virus and Highlands J. virus have an overall rate of introduction (being the combination of entry, vectorial transmission and establishment) in each of the four EU regions of more than 0.001 overall introductions per year, for the other diseases, the rate of introduction of VBD‐agents was estimated to be lower. A risk score of 0 translates to 1 host, a score of 0.2 translates to 10 hosts, a score of 0.4 translates to 100 hosts, etc. In the future, this risk assessment will be updated on a regular basis in the light of new relevant information. Given an example, when for Question 11 (see Section 4.3.1): ‘What is the estimated value of the basic reproduction ratio?’ There was no information available about the reproduction number (R0) in the literature based on passed outbreaks elsewhere or no data were found to calculate the reproduction number, then ‘Unknown’ was chosen as answer, together with a high uncertainty.
Any potential impact on the environment of the use of biocidal products beyond the intended uses, doses and target species as evaluated by ECHA is unknown. You will have to get your developers to write a program to somehow download the variant and then upload into a target system/client.
There were five questions that needed to be answered to assess the probability of overwintering (Figure 19) in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model (Step 5 of the risk assessment framework, see Figure 4). Given an example, the model estimated that RVFV had a rate of entry through livestock or pets either moved from inside and outside the EU, for breeding or slaughter, of zero.
Fischer et al., 2013).
Similarly product type 19 (i.e. Note also that this assessment is only based on vector transmission (i.e. The probability was based on expert opinion and compared with the classes provided in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model: Very low (< 0.1%), Low (0.1–1%), Moderate (1–10%), High (10–80%) and Very high (> 80%).
In order to calculate the size of the infected areas relative to the positive UN regions, the following fraction was used: Decision tree to choose the ranges for the duration of undetected spread, The ranges of the prevalence values reported in the cross‐sectional prevalence surveys carried out in the different regions found by the scientific literature were aggregated for each VBD per animal family and evaluated against the available prevalence classes in the. moth (Tineola bisselliella), European Food Safety Authority, The basic steps of the risk pathways distinguished in FEVER are displayed in Figure 4. which diseases must be tested for in the export country, quarantine details, veterinary checks and commodity treatments such as heating and freezing etc. The changing distribution of arthropod vectors can create the conditions for the vector‐borne animal diseases to enter and spread across the EU, with a variable speed, depending on the epidemiology of each disease. PART 1: THE PRODUCT Ice is abundant in places like Siberia, Alaska and Greenland. BTV in northern, W‐ and S‐EU), the R0 values were associated with a moderate to high uncertainty, due to the lack of documented data related to one or more of the parameters needed to calculate the ratio (such as the biting rate, the vector competence or the extrinsic incubation period in the vectors). To answer each question in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model, data were collected as described in Section 2.1.
Bunyamwera virus, Eastern equine encephalitis virus, Shuni virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Western equine encephalitis virus, Getah virus, Highlands J. virus and Middelburg virus were estimated to have a low to very low level of transmission everywhere in the EU with R0 values smaller than 0.3. For commodities, the probability that a viable disease agent would still be present upon arrival in the EU equals approximately = exp−[duration of the journey/(maximum duration of survival in particular matrix at given temperature)]. Information was recorded about specific requirements, e.g. The fraction of immunised hosts in the population will depend on the time that has passed since the immunisation, the duration of the immunity, the efficacy of the vaccines and the lifespan of the immunised hosts (replacement). When scientific evidence of vertical transmission was found in scientific literature, an arbitrary probability of vertical transmission of ‘0.9’ was chosen. Animal species belonging to other families were not taken into account for this assessment. When combining the estimated size of the epidemic with the severity of the infections, Schmallenberg virus and bluetongue virus introductions were estimated by the model to cause a low impact on animal health and welfare in S‐and W‐EU and very low in the other regions. Learn more about CaringBridge.
insects, arachnids and crustaceans) by means other than repulsion or attraction. H317: may cause an allergic skin reaction, H400: Aquatic Acute 1. The items that are influential for reporting were assumed to be hierarchical, i.e. The impact on production losses on infected farms with BTV was estimated to be very low to low depending on the region in the EU. The ranges of the obtained R0 from literature, or the calculated R0 were evaluated against the ranges provided in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model: Very low (< 0.3), Low (0.3–1), Moderate (1–3), High (3–10) and Very high (> 10). When entomological surveillance activities have been carried out to detect a given vector species, but this could not be detected, than this vector species was recorded as absent. Subsequently, if the combined overall rate of introduction exceeded 0.001 introductions per year the annual extent of spread (taking into account the existing mitigation measures) was calculated (TOR 2 and TOR 5). The score of the overall production losses of each disease was then combined with the estimated epidemic size to obtain the impact on production in the infected farms (Figure 23). The confidence intervals around the outputs values visualised in Figure 18 can be found in Table D.1 in Appendix D. Impact on animals health and welfare of 8 VBDs with an overall rate of introduction that was higher than 0.001 per year. To answer the five questions in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model to assess the probability of overwintering the data items described below were collected. The following considerations have been used to guide this process: For strictly vector‐borne diseases, only the probability of contact of the imported host with local vectors should be considered for the first transmission step. The work of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) should focus primarily on diseases listed by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) as well as emerging diseases that are recognised as a serious threat for the EU.
The most frequent risk is that of impact on aquatic organism if some of the products are not properly used and result in contact with aquatic environments (i.e. However do your developers have time to develop something that is already controlled with CTS? In general, there is a much higher probability of establishment for animals which are imported for breeding, compared to animals which are imported for direct slaughter upon arrival. * Efficacy of products will be assessed thoroughly at the stage of product authorisation. According to the model Crimean‐Congo haemorrhagic fever virus, bluetongue virus, West Nile virus, Schmallenberg virus, H. canis, L. infantum, Bunyamwera virus and Highlands J. virus have an overall rate of introduction (being the combination of entry, vectorial transmission and establishment) in each of the four EU regions of more than 0.001 overall introductions per year, for the other diseases, the rate of introduction of VBD‐agents was estimated to be lower. A risk score of 0 translates to 1 host, a score of 0.2 translates to 10 hosts, a score of 0.4 translates to 100 hosts, etc. In the future, this risk assessment will be updated on a regular basis in the light of new relevant information. Given an example, when for Question 11 (see Section 4.3.1): ‘What is the estimated value of the basic reproduction ratio?’ There was no information available about the reproduction number (R0) in the literature based on passed outbreaks elsewhere or no data were found to calculate the reproduction number, then ‘Unknown’ was chosen as answer, together with a high uncertainty.
Any potential impact on the environment of the use of biocidal products beyond the intended uses, doses and target species as evaluated by ECHA is unknown. You will have to get your developers to write a program to somehow download the variant and then upload into a target system/client.
There were five questions that needed to be answered to assess the probability of overwintering (Figure 19) in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model (Step 5 of the risk assessment framework, see Figure 4). Given an example, the model estimated that RVFV had a rate of entry through livestock or pets either moved from inside and outside the EU, for breeding or slaughter, of zero.
Fischer et al., 2013).
Similarly product type 19 (i.e. Note also that this assessment is only based on vector transmission (i.e. The probability was based on expert opinion and compared with the classes provided in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model: Very low (< 0.1%), Low (0.1–1%), Moderate (1–10%), High (10–80%) and Very high (> 80%).
In order to calculate the size of the infected areas relative to the positive UN regions, the following fraction was used: Decision tree to choose the ranges for the duration of undetected spread, The ranges of the prevalence values reported in the cross‐sectional prevalence surveys carried out in the different regions found by the scientific literature were aggregated for each VBD per animal family and evaluated against the available prevalence classes in the. moth (Tineola bisselliella), European Food Safety Authority, The basic steps of the risk pathways distinguished in FEVER are displayed in Figure 4. which diseases must be tested for in the export country, quarantine details, veterinary checks and commodity treatments such as heating and freezing etc. The changing distribution of arthropod vectors can create the conditions for the vector‐borne animal diseases to enter and spread across the EU, with a variable speed, depending on the epidemiology of each disease. PART 1: THE PRODUCT Ice is abundant in places like Siberia, Alaska and Greenland. BTV in northern, W‐ and S‐EU), the R0 values were associated with a moderate to high uncertainty, due to the lack of documented data related to one or more of the parameters needed to calculate the ratio (such as the biting rate, the vector competence or the extrinsic incubation period in the vectors). To answer each question in the EFSA-VBD_RISK model, data were collected as described in Section 2.1.
Bunyamwera virus, Eastern equine encephalitis virus, Shuni virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus, Western equine encephalitis virus, Getah virus, Highlands J. virus and Middelburg virus were estimated to have a low to very low level of transmission everywhere in the EU with R0 values smaller than 0.3. For commodities, the probability that a viable disease agent would still be present upon arrival in the EU equals approximately = exp−[duration of the journey/(maximum duration of survival in particular matrix at given temperature)]. Information was recorded about specific requirements, e.g. The fraction of immunised hosts in the population will depend on the time that has passed since the immunisation, the duration of the immunity, the efficacy of the vaccines and the lifespan of the immunised hosts (replacement). When scientific evidence of vertical transmission was found in scientific literature, an arbitrary probability of vertical transmission of ‘0.9’ was chosen. Animal species belonging to other families were not taken into account for this assessment. When combining the estimated size of the epidemic with the severity of the infections, Schmallenberg virus and bluetongue virus introductions were estimated by the model to cause a low impact on animal health and welfare in S‐and W‐EU and very low in the other regions. Learn more about CaringBridge.