Publications

Found 2 results

Sort by: Author Title Type [ Year  (Desc)]
Filters: First Letter Of Last Name is R  [Clear All Filters]
2012
Grace D, Gilbert J, Randolph T, Kang’ethe E. "The multiple burdens of zoonotic disease and an ecohealth approach to their assessment.". 2012. Abstract

Zoonoses occur at the interface of human and animal disease and partly because their impact and management fall across two sectors they are often neglected. The Global Burden of Disease captures the impact of zoonoses on human health in terms of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Based on this, we estimate that in low income countries, zoonoses and diseases which recently emerged from animals make up 26 % of the DALYs lost to infectious disease and 10 % of the total DALYs lost. In contrast, in high income countries, zoonoses and diseases recently which emerged from animals represent less than 1 % of DALYs lost to infectious disease and only 0.02 % of the total disease burden. We present a framework that captures the costs of zoonoses and emerging disease to human, animal and ecosystem health in terms of cost of treatment, cost of prevention, health burden and intangible and opportunity costs. We also discuss how ecohealth concepts of transdisciplinarity, participation and equity can help in assessing the importance of zoonoses in developing countries and illustrate these with an example of assessing milk-borne disease.

2007
Randolph TF, M'Ibui GM, Kang'ethe EK, Lang'at AK. "Prevalence of aflatoxin M1 and B1 in milk and animal feeds from urban smallholder dairy production in Dagoretti Division, Nairobi, Kenya.". 2007. Abstract

To estimate the prevalence of Aflatoxin M1 and Total Aflatoxin B1 in milk and animal feeds. Cross sectional household study. Urban and peri-urban area of Dagoretti Division, Nairobi, Kenya. Two hundred fifty seven dairy farming households and 134 non-dairy neighbouring households. The prevalence of AFM1 in milk was found to be 45.5% (178/391). The farmer prevalence was 43.5% (112/257), while that of non-farmer was 49.2% (66/ 134). There was however no statistical significant difference between the two categories. Of the 178 positive milk samples, 49% had aflatoxin levels exceeding 0.05 microg Kg(-1). The prevalence of AFB1 in the feed was found to be 98.6% (69/70) with 83% of the samples having aflatoxin B1 levels exceeding 10 microg Kg(-1). Only one feed sample had no traces of AFB1. This study points to an underlying problem that requires the action by policy makers, considering the number of samples with aflatoxin M1 [49%] and aflatoxin B1 [83%] exceeding the WHO/FAO tolerance limits for milk and feeds destined for dairy animals.

UoN Websites Search