Vietnam warns of food supply disruptions as African swine fever spreads
Vietnam has this year detected 514 outbreaks in 28 out of 34 cities and provinces nationwide, the government said in a statement, adding that the authorities have culled more than 30,000 infected pigs.
"The risk of African swine fever is on a rising trend, negatively affecting the pig farming industry, food supplies and the environment," the government said.
African swine fever has disrupted the global pork market for years. In the worst outbreak over 2018-19, about half the domestic pig population died in China, the world's biggest producer, causing losses estimated at over $100 billion.
The recent outbreaks in Vietnam have prompted Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh to send an urgent directive to provinces and government agencies this week to deploy measures to curb the disease.
Vietnam in 2023 approved the domestic commercial use of its first home-grown African swine fever vaccines, but officials said the rate of vaccinated pigs remains low.
"Only around 30% of the pigs in my province have been vaccinated," said an animal health official of Quang Ngai province, where infections have been reported over the past few weeks.
"It's not clear why the rate is low - it could either be the issue of vaccine availability, efficiency or cost," said another provincial official, who declined to be named as the person is not authorised to speak to the media.
The agriculture ministry's Department of Animal Health didn't respond to Reuters' request for comment. Calls to AVAC Vietnam JSC, the country's main African swine fever vaccine producer, went unanswered.
AVAC said last month it had sold 3 million vaccine doses in the domestic market and exported 600,000 doses to the Philippines and Indonesia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Telegraph
Antimicrobial resistance and the fight to prevent a real-life The Last of Us
In the popular zombie-apocalypse TV show The Last of Us, humans become infected with parasitic fungi, causing a blooming fungal amour to sprout from their skulls. It's gripping TV but in the real-world, deaths from fungal infections have doubled in the last decade and drug-resistant fungi are showing an alarming upward trajectory, making this fictional threat feel uncomfortably close to reality. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR), when fungi, bacteria, viruses and parasites evolve to resist the antimicrobial medicines designed to kill them, is quickly accelerating, fuelling a 'silent pandemic'. Since 1990, at least one million people have died from AMR every year. In the next 25 years, it could cause the deaths of almost 40 million people. Low- and middle-income countries like my own, Nigeria, face a dual challenge. First, a lack of access to antimicrobials leads to more deaths from AMR and actually makes the resistance problem worse. And overuse of antimicrobials in other parts of the world – particularly in healthcare and agriculture – is also fuelling resistance. The result is not just a health crisis but a development emergency. A recent study found that AMR economically hits low- and middle-income countries the hardest. Today, it costs approximately $66 billion and this is set to rise to $159 billion if action is not taken to effectively curb it. In the midst of this worsening crisis, the UK Government recently announced that it is shutting the Fleming Fund – named after the discoverer of penicillin and a key player in the fight against AMR. While bad for UK science and the broader global effort to tackle AMR, it now falls on others to take up the baton to tackle one of the world's most existential threats. The good news is that new leadership is emerging in the countries hit the hardest. This month, the Government of Nigeria announced it will host the fifth Global High-Level Ministerial Conference on AMR in 2026 – the first time the event will be held in Africa. While promising developments, such as the antibiotic zosurabalpin, currently undergoing human trials, or the use of artificial intelligence in drug discovery, give reason for cautious optimism, there is much more to be done to ensure that life-saving treatments are available to the people that need them. First, we must prioritise access to quality diagnostic tools, our first line of defence against AMR. Diagnostics ensure that antimicrobials are used appropriately, increasing patients' chances of recovery while slowing resistance. They also protect new discoveries by preventing unnecessary use. Diagnostics are not just critical for individual patients, they are vital for tracking resistance patterns across animal, and environmental health; sectors which are deeply interlinked in our fight against AMR. Today most of the world is fighting AMR without access to diagnostics. Without them, we're not just under-equipped – we're fighting blind. Second, we must expand access to antimicrobials, create the market conditions needed for further drug development, and ensure that every country implements and enforces a national action plan for AMR. Research in the Lancet across eight low- and middle-income countries found less than seven percent of people with drug-resistant bacterial infections could access the antibiotics they needed. Without these medicines, both patients and the wider community are at risk, as pathogens spread and evolve. Third, we must dramatically increase investment in innovation and strengthen the fragile antimicrobial pipeline. New antimicrobials are urgently needed to meet growing global demand and unmet needs. At the fourth Global High-Level Ministerial Conference on AMR in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, leaders acknowledged the weak pipeline for new antibiotics and the market failures holding back development. The economic model is broken. Antibiotic research is costly, slow, and high-risk: for new classes of antibiotics, only one in 30 candidates will reach patients, and these are often reserved as a last resort. Government and industry must act urgently and ambitiously to reform the market to mobilise innovation. We need new economic models that reward long-term public health benefits, not just short-term profits. Finally, diagnostic and antimicrobial access and innovations must be backed by strong national action plans. At the second high level meeting on AMR at the 79th United Nations General Assembly, global leaders committed to developing or implementing national AMR action plans. At that time, while 178 countries had developed multi-sectoral national action plans, only 68 percent were implementing these plans. Last year, Nigeria launched its second national action plan on AMR, building on efforts to curb overuse and misuse of antimicrobials across human and animal health. But as we have learnt from Covid-19, pathogens do not know borders. Containing AMR demands global, coordinated action and accountability. We're not in the apocalyptic world of The Last of Us just yet but AMR has long been claiming lives, and is a blight on our health systems and economies. The decisive action we take in the next year will be key to preventing the unravelling of modern medicine.
Reuters
8 hours ago
- Reuters
Organ donation groups sue to block new US certification system
Aug 4 (Reuters) - A group of non-profits that procure organs for transplant is suing to block the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services from using a new method to evaluate their work, saying it violates federal law and will likely cause many providers to lose their certification. The lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court in Tampa, Florida, said the new certification process, set to begin next year, unfairly ranks providers by the number of donations and transplants they complete, using the same scale to assess organizations covering vastly different geographic areas and populations. The plaintiffs asked the court to bar the new process before it begins, arguing it was not properly implemented under the Administrative Procedure Act and runs afoul of Congress' directive in the 1984 National Organ Transplant Act to use multiple measures to evaluate providers. The legal challenge comes as HHS has announced increased scrutiny of organ procurement organizations and threatened to close a major provider after an HHS probe identified cases where doctors had begun to retrieve organs while patients still showed signs of life. The organizations that filed the lawsuit, including LifeLink Foundation and OneLegacy, said they will be seeking recertification next year to retrieve donated organs in states including Texas, Florida and Georgia. The plaintiffs in a statement said they are suing to require the agency "to comply with its statutory obligations, which is necessary to protect patients' access to lifesaving transplants and ensure the stability of our nation's organ donation and transplant system." An HHS spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit but said the agency "remains committed to holding organ procurement organizations accountable and restoring integrity and transparency to organ donation and transplant policy, always putting patients first." HHS adopted the new evaluation process in a 2020 regulation. The lawsuit said it will rank organizations based on the number of donations and transplants they completed in the last 12 months and would decertify the lowest-ranked providers. The rule was introduced as part of HHS' effort to implement an executive order on kidney donations issued during President Donald Trump's first term. The agency said the change was meant to increase transparency and competition in the organ transplant system. HHS announced last month it was undertaking a series of reforms for the organ transplant system, following a New York Times report and an investigation by the agency's Health Resources and Services Administration. The probe examined 351 cases where organ donation was authorized but not completed. It found 73 patients had shown neurological signs incompatible with organ donation and at least 28 patients may not have been deceased at the time the organ retrieval process began. The lawsuit is LifeLink Foundation v. Kennedy, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, No. 8:25-cv-02042. For the plaintiffs: Val Leppert, Mark Polston, Ashley Parrish, Adam Robison and Christie Cardon of King & Spalding; and Brigid Merenda and Richard Hanchett of Trenam, Kemker, Scharf, Barkin, Frye, O'Neill and Mullis For HHS: Not yet available
Glasgow Times
13 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
'As shadow minister for women's health, I see scandalous injustices'
But it is my current role as shadow minister for women's health where I see some of the most scandalous injustices. The various facets of gender inequality are well documented, and hardly exclusive to Scotland. Across the developed world, we are paid less than our male counterparts, less likely to be promoted and the caring responsibilities at home almost always fall on us. More seriously, women are predominantly the victims of domestic violence, a scourge that gets worse every year. And of course, elsewhere in the world, the picture for female welfare is worse still, even when it comes to the most basic of human rights. One area that tends to slip under the radar in Scotland is women's health, especially those conditions that are exclusive to us. Last week, statistics were finally published in relation to cervical cancer, a serious killer among women. The data gathering for this has been a farce over the past few years, and some of the statistics published by Public Health Scotland pose more questions than they answer. Within the document, it stated that of those invited for screening last year, barely 50% showed up for the process. When my office's own research produced a similar figure earlier this year, a Scottish Government minister got in touch to say my conclusion was wrong. And yet PHS, the SNP government's own agency, appears to have arrived at the same result. For women in deprived areas, the screening rate is even poorer. That means, right across the country, there are thousands of women at risk of serious illness and death because the government cannot properly get through to them and convince them of the need to get checked. Another poorly served cohort is women suffering from endometriosis, a painful and debilitating disease that can have a major impact on those trying to have a baby. The situation is different from cervical screening, as anyone requiring treatment will know about it due to the hellish impact it has on their life. Addressing those issues should be a priority for the NHS, yet the statistics indicate it is anything but. My research shows that across Scotland, there are hundreds of women waiting in agony to commence treatment. In some health boards, the longest waits for this to happen run into hundreds of days. For a woman living with this, the experience is unbearable. It's not just the pain and anxiety – often their entire life is on hold. That can range from family planning and long-held personal ambitions to career progression or further study. Again, these issues aren't exclusive to Scotland. But they are exclusive to women, and if we are to be serious about reducing all gender inequalities, the care of conditions which only women experience needs to be better. We keep hearing about the challenges the NHS faces in Scotland, but the fact it is entirely devolved to the Scottish Parliament can also be considered an opportunity. By improving the treatment of and screening for conditions which only affect women, we could be a genuine world leader and example in this field. Better still, achieving it would also greatly improve the quality of life for a great many females in this country.
