In a recent study published in the LancetThe researchers followed contemporary evidence on how a one-health approach could improve health protection against unprecedented health threats globally, such as those posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
Additionally, they reviewed the infrastructure and surveillance-feedback systems of the combined health services to demonstrate the incremental benefits of the one health approach. Furthermore, he stressed the urgent need to strengthen coordination at the local, national and global levels to improve One Health’s operations and enhance and maximize its benefits.
The researchers examined and reviewed OneHealth’s theoretical approaches and case studies. This helped them to understand how well the joint health services reported a health outlook to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN). In addition, they assessed whether this reporting adhered to the International Health Regulations of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF) of the Performance of Veterinary Services of the World Organization for Animal Health (WOH). The former name of WOAH was Office International des Epizoites (OIE).
The International Health Regulations (IHR), an international framework revised in 2007, obliges all UN member states to develop core capacities to prevent, detect and respond to public health emergencies (PHE), including zoonoses control Because it can adversely affect the health of the people. travel, and trade globally.
The quadrilateral group of international agencies is now working on launching and implementing a global One Health Joint Action Plan for 2022 to 2026, leveraging the IHR’s legal mandate. Similarly, WOAH has developed a monitoring and evaluation tool, the Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS), to assess veterinary services.
Unfortunately, both the IHE MEF and PVS, due to their ineffective operations, failed to respond adequately to the COVID-19 pandemic. In other words, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed the flaws in the conduct of all global health protection agency functions. Also, it helped build capabilities to address threats at the human-animal (both domestic and wildlife)-environment interface. Most importantly, it brought the operational value of integrated approaches like OneHealth back to the forefront.
In the current study, the researchers reviewed the existing literature, following the classification of threats to global health security outlined in the World Health Organization Health Emergencies and Disaster Risk Management Framework, to assess the specific threats that would most benefit from a health perspective. Will be This is a four-series review, with the first examining the evidence for the benefits of the One Health approach. The second part focuses on a method for mapping a health network globally. It also explores the characteristics of flourishing multi-sectoral cooperation and its expansion.
The third part analyzes monitoring and evaluation tools for evaluating PHE preparedness at the national level and makes recommendations for strengthening them using an all-inclusive one health approach. In the fourth part, the researchers discuss the primary challenges in operating OneHealth and suggest solutions accordingly.
A Brief History of the One Health Concept
Calvin Schwabe, a veterinary epidemiologist, coined the term forest medicine in the 1960s to reflect attention to the harmony of human and animal health. Much later, the phrase – One World, One Health was coined by the Wildlife Conservation Society in 2004. It underscored the importance of protecting human and animal health and the integrity of entire ecosystems under the Declaration of the Manhattan Principles, which were updated with the Berlin Declaration. principle in 2019.
The Berlin Principles of One Health address contemporary issues, such as climate change and antimicrobial resistance, emphasizing their relationship to sustainable development. In the medical literature, the term One Health appeared for the first time in 2005 to emphasize the added value of greater collaboration between animal and human health, unattainable from a punitive approach alone.
In this context the ginstag and others, To prevent future human influenza pandemics, the urgency of modifying smallholder livestock systems and live-animal markets while researching for vaccines to limit interactions between wildlife and livestock is emphasized.
Benefits of a One Health Approach
One Health is a logical approach to identifying potential health threats as early as possible and aligning resources to deal with long-term consequences. A notable example of these benefits is the combined human and animal routine vaccination services for pastoralists in Chad. It saved financial resources both in the form of shared cold chain and transportation. Another example is the mass vaccination of animals against brucellosis in Mongolia.
However, the most notable example is the Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS), which saved infrastructure resources, was cost-effective, and importantly, reduced the time it took to detect antimicrobial resistance. In 2013, this integrated surveillance system showed positive effects of regulating antimicrobial use on Salmonella isolates detected in humans and chickens. According to a 2012 World Health Organization (WHO) estimate, 23% of global human deaths are attributable to lack of clean drinking water, sanitation, air and noise pollution, and breaking road safety rules, all modifiable factors.
It shows how better integrating the environmental sector, such as implementing and scaling up biological control programs against endemic infectious diseases, can strengthen global health security. Introducing river prawns that eat Cercariae (its host species) may help control schistosomiasis, a neglected endemic disease. Similarly, predatory copepods may help prevent dengue fever, as shown in Vietnam.
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the link between population density and the spread of the pandemic and how air quality management is important to control respiratory diseases and co-morbidities. Therefore, research should focus on measures to prevent future pandemics and not just profit-making vaccine and drug research.
zoonotic potential of brucella melitensis ~100 times higher than that of bovine tuberculosis caused by Mycobacterium bovis. Thus, controlling brucellosis in the livestock reservoir has a higher benefit-cost ratio of 3:1 than control of bovine tuberculosis, i.e. less than one. In fact, the One Health approach is more relevant to address some of the threats and risks based on evidence for its effectiveness.
One Health has the potential to improve global health security for all, especially in resource-limited settings. OneHealth’s comprehensive operations can maximize and expand its benefits. As such, it should be included in budgets and national plans for pandemic prevention to help better respond to future pandemic(s).
- Jacob Ginstag, Andrea Kaiser-Grolimand, Catherine Heitz-Tokpa, Rajesh Sreedharan, Juan Lubroth, François Kaya, Matthew Stone, Hannah Brown, Basirou Bonfoh, Emily Dobell, Dilys Morgan, Nusrat Homaira, Richard Cock, Jan Hattendorf, Lisa Crump, Stephanie Mauti, Victor Del Rio Vilas, Sohail Saikat, Alimuddin Jumla, David Heyman, Usman Dar, Stephen De La Roque. (2023). Advancing a human–animal–environmental health divide for global health security: what does the evidence say? the Lancet, Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01595-1m https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673622015951