FMD is considered by some to be greatest disease threat the US currently faces due to its rapid spread, damage to domestic productivity, and implications for trade of animals and animal products. As a result of the economic costs and the controversy associated with extensive suppressive culling as well as the challenges of culling large numbers of animals in a short period of time, renewed interest in emergency vaccination has emerged. Emergency vaccination as a control strategy alternative has been the source of controversy among policy makers and scientists as the inclusion of emergency vaccination in an eradication program has both epidemiologic and economic consequences. Emergency vaccination has the potential to confine virus spread to a smaller region, reduce shedding and thereby reduce the number of infected animals and shorten the duration of an outbreak. FMD vaccination also has the potential, among other factors, to delay the re-opening of international markets.
Historically, countries that have employed emergency vaccination have had to decide how to manage vaccinated animals in the recovery phase of the outbreak. One management option is to depopulate vaccinated animals (vaccinate to die or vaccinate to waste) in the same way infected animals are depopulated. Under this vaccinate to waste approach, vaccinated animals would not enter the
…show more content…
A key parameter in determining how long markets are closed is the time it takes to eradicate the disease. If the use of vaccination can eradicate the disease more quickly, as a consequence markets would be allowed to reopen more quickly. Whether the positive consequences of slower disease spread are more than outweighed by the negative consequences of greater slaughter would also need to be included in the