Critical Links Between Human and Animal Health

Prof. Kang’ethe holds a Bachelor of Veterinary Medicine (BVM) from University of Nairobi, MSc in Meat Science from University of Bristol and PhD from University of Nairobi. He is employed by the University of Nairobi and hold the position of Professor of Public Health (Food Safety). Prof. Kang’ethe has participated in a number of research projects in collaboration with a transdiciplinary team of scientists.

Currently, Prof. Kang’ethe is country coordinator of a project funded by Government of Finland (Ministry of foreign Affairs) on capacity building to improve safety in Dairy – feed chain with special focus on health risks associated with biological Contaminants (SFSD Project www.safefood.uonbi.ac.ke) . The project in addition to building capacity among the staff of the collaborating Kenyan institutions (Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) and Egerton University) seeks to provide baseline data on the prevalence of aflatoxin and Fumonisins in Maize, milk, food and feed in the six study sites in Nandi and Makueni counties of Kenya and isolate and characterize the Aspergillus and Fusarium species responsible for production of aflatoxin and fumonisins. A paper presented in this symposium (households’ exposure to aflatoxin in Nandi and Makueni counties: knowledge, attitudes and practices) is part of our preliminary results from this study.

Prof. Kang’ethe is collaborating with two CGIAR centers (ILRI and IFPRI) on a project FoodAfrica funded by Ministry of Foreign Affairs Finland on aflatoxin control; a consortium of institutes on a project on tracking urban zoonoses led by University of Edinburg and with ILRI on a project funded by GIZ to promote food safety in informal markets. Capacity building in all these studies takes centre stage in order to create a critical mass of scientists to promote food safety.

It started with the cover of a romance novel.  

A friend’s Facebook link caught my eye — a picture of a romance novel and a reference to aid workers.  The link led me to Stuff Expat Aid Workers Like, a satire site about the humanitarian aid industry.  

But SEAWL (EAWs love acronyms) also led me to a host of blogs with serious critiques of international development approaches.  By now, most people who use Facebook are aware of the Kony2012 phenomenon and its backlash.  This is only one controversy among many.

As we approach the Global Development Symposium (only a month away — don’t forget to register!), it’s worth taking a look at the critiques of global development efforts.  Here are a few I found interesting:

• Don’t Try This Abroad
• What Makes Good Aid *Good Aid*?
• Poverty: Is there an app for that?
• What causes badvocacy?
• Militaries, Mamdani, and Magical Thinking
• Whites in Shining Armor

As Dave Algoso points out in Foreign Policy, however: “We all start as amateurs. The difference is whether we seek to learn more or assume that we can just start doing something, muddling through as we go.”  Agree or disagree with these blog posts, each illuminates an area in which we can seek to learn more.  ^EAF  

Take a look at the outline Carol Zavaleta, one of our speakers for GDS 2012, sent us about her project in Peru. “Like” if you’ll be checking this one out!

The Indigenous Adaptation to Climate Change (IHACC) program is an international and multidisciplinary effort to assess the health vulnerability and adaptation of indigenous people to the effects of Climate Change in three countries: Canada, Peru and Uganda.

In Peru we are working in four remote indigenous communities represented by two ethnic groups, the Shawis and the Shipibos. During the first year of the program, our purpose is to involve indigenous organizations, minister of health personnel and community members in identifying and develop a framework to understand the implications of climate change on indigenous health system. Qualitative participative methodology is being used to identify the main health problems, An epidemiological survey was conducted in order to determine the initial prevalence of vector borne disease, food insecurity and gastrointestinal disease. This phase included the development of a framework for good practice to carry out the investigation; we introduced cell phones technology to conduct the interviews in remotes sites and we trained communities’ members to support the research assistants. In the second year we will work with municipalities to implement interventions to improve the water quality and monitoring the effects on health. These is a good example of an international multi-institutional effort incorporating the work of academia , ministries of health and indigenous organizations that, we expect, will contribute on these communities’ preparedness and adaptation to climate change.

I was fortunate to have the opportunity to attend a workshop entitled “Engaging Intergovernmental Organizations”. In short, this workshop brought together like-minded individuals from a variety of backgrounds in an effort to expose the audience to the work of the IGOs (World Health Organization, World Trade Organization, the World Organisation for Animal Health, Food and Agricultural Organization). We received lectures, tours, and completed a variety of exercises to help broaden our perspectives how about these groups work to promote and protect health in humans and animals. This world-wind trip took us to Geneva, Paris, and Rome in a little over a week.

We were encouraged to provide feedback about how these groups could work more closely together to achieve their mandates and foster collaborative links between, not only each other, but all stakeholders. What struck me from this experience is the need to identify the opportunities for vertical development within these groups.

It would be an interesting exercise to determine how many community based charities, causes, etc are familiar with the work being done at this higher scale. We have passionate individuals spread all over the globe working on achieving similar goals. Is there work in line with the priorities of these IGOs? Do they recognize how to access their resources and expertise? 

There is an opportunity here to connect. These connections help fill in the gaps that the IGOs already know exist. Their focus is at the international and national levels so they are dependent on existing infrastructure to help facilitate their work. The larger scale priorities of these IGOs also present an opportunity for more local initiatives to align with issues deemed to be high priority. How to achieve this level of collaboration, I do not know However, with so many groups working towards similar goals, we better start looking.

This photo came across my Facebook wall recently. I laughed, of course – but then I started thinking about the power of scientists and scientific approaches to global development challenges.

Those of us who work on the “DIY” side of global development are often frustrated with donors’ demands for evidence. While donors understandably want proof of impact, the costs of obtaining definitive proof can be prohibitive for small organizations.

This challenge presents an opportunity, however. Where the scientific community is prepared to step in and work with NGOs to evaluate impact, we can identify solutions that work and learn from those that don’t.

As my friend Nina Dudnick, scientist extraordinaire and founder of Seeding Labs, says, “If I’m trying to eradicate malaria in village B, and you tried and failed to eradicate malaria in village A, I sure as heck want to know what you did so I don’t repeat it!” (Or something to that effect. Any misquotes or paraphrases are my own.)

A global development NGO’s survival often depends upon obtaining specific outcomes that have been defined as success. Failure means loss of funding, so failures are hidden rather than shared.

In contrast, the scientific approach sees proving or disproving a hypothesis as equally valid. If you try strategy X to eradicate malaria in village A, you’ve learned something – which means others don’t have to repeat your mistakes.

I don’t have a perfect answer to the question: How do we engage scientists and utilize scientific approaches in evaluating development methods? But I think opportunities like the Global Development Symposium to put scientists and global development professionals (and people who are both) together in the same room are critically important.

Local, provincial, national, international health – it is all relative. Your ‘local’ is someone else’s international. The Global Development Symposium is all about improving the health of people, animals and the environment. If your daughter’s pneumonia is resistant to antibiotic treatment, does it matter if you live in Canada or Uganda? If climate change reduces your food security, does it matter if you live in Peru or Nunavut? If your son has HIV, does it matter if you belong to the Kikuyu tribe in Africa or a minority population in Canada? The Global Development Symposium welcomes researchers, students, and citizens from all walks of life who have done or hope to do something to address these concerns locally, provincially, nationally and internationally.

As a veterinary epidemiologist, I use one set of research tools but just think of how much more could be accomplished if I collaborated with engineers, anthropologists, plant scientists, medical doctors, geographers, sociologists, statisticians, crop specialists, economists, nutritionists, public health experts, nurses, and experts in business, policy, education, and many others. Solving complex problems such as food security, poverty, infectious disease, gender inequality, climate change, illness due to nutrient deficiencies, and market integration requires a cross disciplinary approach using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Enabling people to participate in the solution to their own problems of food security, poverty, illiteracy, and health is essential. How do we include the voice of the people, enhance the opportunities for learning and sharing, weave the local people into our projects so it becomes their project not that of the academic? At the beginning of the project, have we gathered sufficient information so that at the end of the project we can monitor and evaluate the change? These are key issues that will be illustrated, discussed and debated at the Global Development Symposium. Everyone has something to offer. Submit a research abstract or a Pitch for Progress or simply come to offer your ideas to the debate. Together we can envision a better future and working together it will happen.

Through my limited exposure to development work, I have been able to appreciate the importance of education to achieving sustainable change. One cannot hope to meet a particular goal if the stakeholders are on completely different pages. Historically, the knee jerk reaction is to provide a group of people with what they are missing. No running water? Build a well. Poor production? Give the family a new cow. While people may have the best intentions, this does not always generate long term success. Wells break, animals die, and, ultimately, the individual tangible items prove to be insufficient to improving livelihoods of the individuals you are working with.

We learned this the hard way in Tanzania when we realized that the chickens that we had been providing to the farmers had been dying off in rapid numbers. The reason? We had not ensured that the farmers knew enough about basic nutrition, husbandry and health practices to ensure success. We are on completely different pages and it become apparent rather quickly. We have since refocused our efforts on addressing those basic components which in turn as generated a much more sincere commitment on the part of the farmers. This isn’t a handout; it’s a partnership which requires the combined effort of everyone.

However, this is not what the donor community wants to hear. People like knowing that their donation went toward item X.  It’s a tagline that has become commonplace in the development community and it’s not realistic. That item, animal, etc. is only as good as the foundation supporting it.

Education is sexy. Sponsor a future. 

In Malaga Tanzania, I had a very interesting conversation with a farmer named Samson. I was trying to find out what his survival rate was with his free roaming chickens. I had grand ideas of applying this information to our project in Ilima. I was sure the information I would garner from this obviously successful farmer could be applied to the small holder farmers in Ilima. 

I was doing a small survey based on a few hens. Now, you have to realise that Samson was a cattle man and didn’t really have a lot of interest in raising chickens. He had about 30 head of cattle and about the same number of goats. 

Here’s how the conversation went and you have to remember that this was with the help of my colleague Dr Gimbi doing the translation in Kiswahili…

I was looking at a hen that had four 8 week old chicks with her scratching in the manure pile. 

Roger: “Dr. Gimbi, ask Samson how many eggs that hen brooded on?” 

Gimbi: “Samson says she sat on 10 eggs.” 

Roger: “ That’s a good number. Ask Samson how many eggs hatched?” 

Gimbi: “ Samson says ,9 of the 10 eggs produced baby chicks” 

Now, I’m thinking that Samson knows a lot more about raising chickens than he would like to let on to the mzungu from Canada; 

Roger: “ Ok ,so if she hatched 9 of 10 eggs, ask Samson what happened to the other 5 if she only has 4 eight week old chicks with her at now.” 

Gimbi: “Samson says the hawks got them!!” 

At this point, I am getting ready to end my mini survey but I have one more question. 

Roger: “ Ask Samson of the 4 eight week old chicks that are with the mother hen, how many will become adults in the flock?” 

Gimbi finishes the translation with Samson and turns to me with this funny grin on his face. 

Roger: “What’s so funny Gimbi?” 

Gimbi: “ Samson says- IT DEPENDS HOW MANY THE HAWKS GET!!!!” 

This is what I call storytelling at the village level and in this case it is probably pretty accurate even if there are not enough birds in my study to have P<.05. 

- Dr. Roger Thompson 

Small animal or large animal? This is probably the most common question that veterinary students face when speaking to family, friends, and society about their future careers. Veterinarians are puppy vaccines, strip malls, trucks, and dairy cows. We are a profession based on stereotypes. This is not to say that these are “bad” things, nor is the point of this post to debate where these stereotypes are accurate. What I am merely suggesting is that, it can be often challenging for veterinary students to break out of them. However, there is a world out there with emerging opportunities for veterinarians to break out of this traditional mold. It crosses different species, disciplines, and continents and presents an engaging, and impactful career path.

Over the next few months, we are going to highlight those unique fields that veterinarians are now becoming permanent fixtures in. We will feature projects, ideas, and personal stories about how veterinarians are integrating themselves into development, food security, and public health. I encourage people to share, comment, question, and discuss what they read in this blog.

Veterinarians are at the junction of human and animal health.  We are an essential piece of the solution to tackling global disease and hunger. It’s time to embrace these opportunities and share our experience to help make this world a better planet.