FAO-University of Pretoria Network

for Worms in Africa

FAO-University of Pretoria Network

for Worms in Africa

Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases

University of Pretoria, South Africa

Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases

University of Pretoria, South Africa

J.A. van Wyk J.A. van Wyk

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

FAO-University of Pretoria Network for Worms in Africa

• Present network commissioned by my predecessor

• Serious limitations– Space per item reported– No indication of visitors to web page– Service provider unsatisfactory

• New web page being developed (not yet completed)

New FAO-University Pretoria Homepage

• More space per item• More interactive• Improved collection of hyperlinks• Added information on epidemiology &

management by region (WormBoss the model, although slowly – lack of funds)

• Selected members to add and edit material• Possibly limited personal service, but difficult

(lack of funds)

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

Drive to Contact Institutions in Africa

• Almost complete frustration

– Some names– Many more promises than actual results

BUT– E-mails & letters sent out & Internet requests– Less than 10 % reaction– Practically no contact details

AND• Even FAO Network in North Africa no reaction

Drive to Contact Institutions in Africa

• Some excellent personal contacts being followed up

• Each African embassy being targeted

• Personal e-mail to every member in Africa

• Published articles to be searched

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

Electronic Conference III : Automated Technology Transfer To

Resource-Poor Farmers

FAO-UP Network for Worms in Africa

J.A. van Wyk

Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, University of Pretoria [Suggestion of A. Nari]

Importance (comparative) of worms to the poor (Perry et al. ILRI 2004)

• Consulted range of experts working with the resource-poor farmers in Africa and South-East Asia through workshops (both on the ground and electronic)

• Took into account the dominant animal species in the entire region

• Considered all veterinary conditions causing losses to these farmers

Veterinary condition (all farm animals)

Index (range 0-100)

Rank (of 43 conditions)

Gastro-Intest. WormsNeonatal deathsFoot-&-Mouth DiseaseExternal ParasitesHaemonchus (own right)

10067646342

1 st2 nd3 rd4 th

11 th

Importance (comparative) of worms to the poor (Perry et al. ILRI 2004)

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

Problems of Resource-Poor: No access to modern technology

• Infrastructure poor to non-existent

• Few if any trained extension personnel

• Long distances between points of help

• Landline systems not dependable

• Internet inaccessible to the poor

• E-mail erratic if available

Resource-Poor: Funds & services inaccessible & incorrect advice

• Sample analysis• Money for drugs to treat all animals• Accessibility of drugs• Knowledge of correct worm management• Marketing pressure from drug firms once

development starts to succeed• Same sort of drug use propagated by many

companies (to sell at any cost) that landed & is landing commercial farmers in trouble

 

 

Prominent advertisement May 2003, South Africa 

8 Drenches of sheep per year ! 3 of these comprised combinations of different drugs Closantel recommended for 5 of the treatments Only 30 days/year no selection ?

 

 

Prominent advertisement May 2003, South Africa 

8 Drenches of sheep per year ! 3 of these comprised combinations of different drugs Closantel recommended for 5 of the treatments Only 30 days/year no selection ?

EXAMPLE OF MISLEADING PROMOTIONAL MATERIALEXAMPLE OF MISLEADING PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL

RECOMMENDATIONS IN ADVERT OF MAY 2003 IN SOUTH AFRICA :

RECOMMENDATIONS IN ADVERT OF MAY 2003 IN SOUTH AFRICA :

Month Anthelmintics

JanuaryFebruaryAprilJuneJulySeptemberOctoberDecember

Closantel + BenzimidazoleClosantel (10 mg kg-1)Closantel + BenzimidazoleIvermectin injectableLevamisoleClosantel + BenzimidazoleIvermectin oralClosantel (10 mg kg-1)

------------------------------------------------------- Averred that farmer still satisfied after 20 years! 

Costs < 0,5 kg prime lamb in South Africa-------------------------------------------------------

Inflation on anthelmintics over 3 decades < 25 % of general inflation in South Africa 

What chance few poorly funded researchers !

------------------------------------------------------- Averred that farmer still satisfied after 20 years! 

Costs < 0,5 kg prime lamb in South Africa-------------------------------------------------------

Inflation on anthelmintics over 3 decades < 25 % of general inflation in South Africa 

What chance few poorly funded researchers !

MISLEADING ADVERT: DRENCHING PROGRAMME

MISLEADING ADVERT: DRENCHING PROGRAMME

“COMMERCIAL PRESSURE”

When communal farmers develop commercially :• Company reps flock to the region• Extension officers encourage this out of

ignorance• Good results with programmes recommended

since still little worm resistance (as initially in case of commercial farmers)

• Then incredibly difficult to get turn-around to targeted selective treatment

[J.A. van Wyk, personal observations 2005]

Extension Officer Training

• “Jack of all trades”• Cannot be up to date on all new

developments in all fields• No expert on worm management• Not au fait with radical changes in worm

management in last decade, following on resistance escalation

• Their advice on worms thus “dangerous”

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

How to overcome problems !

• Where infrastructure very poor: New technology or combinations perhaps applicable ?

• MAKE IT PRACTICAL: Potential & not complete practicality necessary now !

We have some potential answers

• Clinical evaluation for worm effect– FAMACHA©– Body Condition Scoring– DAG (diarrhoea) Score

• BUT– Difficult to apply optimally (need graded drenching

proportions at different stages of worm season)– Technology Transfer problems as above– Poverty getting worse– Serious opposition from drug firms to maintain sales

Technology Transfer: New systems with potential ?

Wireless systems

– Mobile (cellphone) via country networks– Mobile via satellite (e.g. “Greenstar” for monitoring

and controlling farm implements & actions like amount of fertilizer applied per section of each field)

– Radio (GPRS – Global Package Radio Service)

Any others ?

CELLPHONES THE ANSWER FOR SOME REGIONS ?

• More cellphones per capita in developing than developed nations

• Africa’s “cellphone revolution” (Finance24, 17 Apr 2005)– 82 million cellphones– More cellphone users than fixed line (First

region of world to achieve this)

• GSM (“Groupe Speciale Mobile”, or wireless) : effects in developing nations twice that in their developed counterparts

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

Software for “side-stepping” problems with technology transfer ?

SUGGESTION ON WHAT TO DO :

• Develop decision-support software to help farmer at ground level with targeted selective treatment

• Enter data on climate, animal species + class, region, pasture (type & history)

• Get specific recommendation on– Intervals between clinical evaluations– Proportion animals to treat– Drugs not to use (e.g. resistance, residual action)– Risk involved

USE OF SUGGESTED DECISION-SUPPORT SOFTWARE

• Develop multifactorial system centrally

• Add region-specific data e.g. worm species

• Run via satellite or similar to farmers and/or their advisers

• Proportions of animals graded according to reigning worm challenge

• Keep up to date with latest developments

Train the trainer/adviser by example ?

• Must adviser be an expert parasitologist - perhaps not ?

• Rather supply information via software and perhaps adviser will learn by example of decisions generated by software ?

• “Top-up” with short information pieces also supplied on computer

• Communal/poor farmer : no computer, but single adviser with computer can relay information (cellphone, or else whatever is being used now) ?

Advantages of a centralised decision support system

• Little physical infrastructure required (e.g. no landlines & relatively small numbers advisers)

• No dedicated computer expert for each local area network

• The adviser need not be an expert parasitologist• Relatively cheap (few experts at a single central

point)• Change in approach to parasite management

easily instituted without much re-training• Counterbalance against “irresponsible”

recommendations by some drug marketers

Disadvantages of centralised system

• Who decides on content of central system (will probably have competing systems ?)

• How is a “central” body of experts to be maintained to ensure continued development of policy

• Still have the problem of accessibility of drugs, etc., even for selective treatment

What is the next step ?

• Firstly, I’m no expert - do not have all, or perhaps even some of the answers

• Lets organise a group to look into this matter and include computer experts

• Incredible potential for help for the poor

• But where will the funding come from

FAO-UP Network for Africa

1. New homepage2. Drive to increase members in Africa3. Importance of worms to the resource-poor4. Electronic Conference III:

– Problems facing the poor– Potential of new technology– Decision-support software to “side-step” problems

with Technology Transfer ?

5. Conclusions

FARMER CONFUSED BY MULTITUDE OF OPINIONS

[Next slide by FA.S. Malan, Intervet, South Africa)

INDUSTRY

Drug Companies•Sales Team•Technical Vets•Publications

FARMER

Private Vets•Personnel •Vet Shops

StateVetsA.H.T.

•Universities,•Specialists

AnimalScientists

Outlets:Coops

FarmerStudyGroups

Media

INFORMATION FLOW

INDUSTRY

Drug Companies•Sales Team•Technical Vets•Publications

FARMER

Private Vets•Personnel •Vet Shops

StateVetsA.H.T.

•Universities,•Specialists

AnimalScientists

Outlets:Coops

FarmerStudyGroups

Media

INFORMATION FLOW

FAO-University of Pretoria Network for Worms in Africa: Conclusions

• Companies will possibly be dissatisfied with some things said here

HOWEVER

• Radical changes will come, no matter what• “Balance of power” now with drug companies

(money poured into marketing and advertising)• But I suggest effective decision support software

will go a long way to negate this• It must just be in place before the last drug is

finally destroyed by over- and incorrect usage propagated in the media