Epidemic and Economic Impacts of Delayed Detection of Foot-And-Mouth Disease: A Case Study of a Simulated Outbreak in California

The epidemic and economic impacts of Foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) spread and control were examined by using epidemic simulation and economic (epinomic) optimization models. The simulated index herd was a ≥2,000 cow dairy located in California. Simulated disease spread was limited to California; however, economic impact was assessed throughout the United States and included international trade effects. Five index case detection delays were examined, which ranged from 7 to 22 days. The simulated median number of infected premises (IP) ranged from approximately 15 to 745, increasing as the detection delay increased from 7 to 22 days. Similarly, the median number of herds under quarantine increased from approximately 680 to 6,200, whereas animals slaughtered went from approximately 8,700 to 260,400 for detection delays of 7–22 days, respectively. The median economic impact of an FMD outbreak in California was estimated to result in national agriculture welfare losses of $2.3–$69.0 billion as detection delay increased from 7 to 22 days, respectively. If assuming a detection delay of 21 days, it was estimated that, for every additional hr of delay, the impact would be an additional approximately 2,000 animals slaughtered and an additional economic loss of $565 million. These findings underline the critical importance that the United States has an effective early detection system in place before an introduction of FMDV if it hopes to avoid dramatic losses to both livestock and the economy.

[1]  P. Paarlberg,et al.  Potential revenue impact of an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the United States. , 2002, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.

[2]  N. Ferguson,et al.  Transmission Parameters of the 2001 Foot and Mouth Epidemic in Great Britain , 2007, PloS one.

[3]  J. Scudamore,et al.  Control of foot and mouth disease: lessons from the experience of the outbreak in Great Britain in 2001. , 2002, Revue scientifique et technique.

[4]  Mark C Thurmond,et al.  Results of epidemic simulation modeling to evaluate strategies to control an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. , 2003, American journal of veterinary research.

[5]  L. Matthews,et al.  The construction and analysis of epidemic trees with reference to the 2001 UK foot–and–mouth outbreak , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[6]  Scudamore Jm,et al.  Control of foot and mouth disease: lessons from the experience of the outbreak in Great Britain in 2001. , 2002 .

[7]  Mark C Thurmond,et al.  A Simulation Model of Intraherd Transmission of Foot and Mouth Disease with Reference to Disease Spread before and after Clinical Diagnosis , 2004, Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.

[8]  Mark C Thurmond,et al.  Benefit-cost analysis of vaccination and preemptive slaughter as a means of eradicating foot-and-mouth disease. , 2003, American journal of veterinary research.

[9]  T E Carpenter,et al.  Direct and indirect contact rates among beef, dairy, goat, sheep, and swine herds in three California counties, with reference to control of potential foot-and-mouth disease transmission. , 2001, American journal of veterinary research.

[10]  M. Schoenbaum,et al.  Modeling alternative mitigation strategies for a hypothetical outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the United States. , 2003, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[11]  C. Ribble,et al.  Description of recent foot and mouth disease outbreaks in nonendemic areas: exploring the relationship between early detection and epidemic size. , 2007, The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne.

[12]  M. Thurmond,et al.  Modeled detection time for surveillance for foot-and-mouth disease virus in bulk tank milk. , 2006, American journal of veterinary research.

[13]  H. T. Sung,et al.  Epidemiological characteristics and financial costs of the 1997 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in Taiwan , 1999, Veterinary Record.

[14]  Rowland R Kao,et al.  Disease dynamics over very different time-scales: foot-and-mouth disease and scrapie on the network of livestock movements in the UK , 2007, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[15]  Christl A. Donnelly,et al.  Transmission intensity and impact of control policies on the foot and mouth epidemic in Great Britain , 2001, Nature.

[16]  R L Sanson,et al.  A comparison of predictions made by three simulation models of foot-and-mouth disease , 2007, New Zealand veterinary journal.

[17]  M. Rowland,et al.  Economic costs of the foot and mouth disease outbreak in the United Kingdom in 2001. , 2002, Revue scientifique et technique.

[18]  T. Carpenter,et al.  Potential impact of introduction of foot-and-mouth disease from wild pigs into commercial livestock premises in California. , 2010, American journal of veterinary research.

[19]  C. C. Huang,et al.  Characteristics of foot and mouth disease virus in Taiwan. , 2000, The Journal of veterinary medical science.

[20]  S. Cornell,et al.  Dynamics of the 2001 UK Foot and Mouth Epidemic: Stochastic Dispersal in a Heterogeneous Landscape , 2001, Science.

[21]  R. Sellers,et al.  The epidemic of foot-and-mouth disease in Saskatchewan, Canada, 1951-1952. , 1990, Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire.

[22]  J. W. Wilesmith,et al.  Descriptive epidemiology of the 2001 foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in Great Britain: the first five months , 2001, Veterinary Record.