ORCID Profile
0009-0007-9713-0416
Current Organisation
James Cook University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-2007
DOI: 10.1111/J.1751-0813.2007.00126.X
Abstract: A dense population of Pimelea trichostachya plants (Family Thymelaeaceae) in pasture poisoned a horse herd in southern inland Queensland in October-November 2005. Plant density was 2 to 45 g wet weight/m(2) (mean 16 g/m(2)) from 5 to 69 plants/m(2) (mean 38 plants/m(2)) representing 3 to 20% (mean 9%) of the volume of pasture on offer. Ten of 35 mares, fillies and geldings were affected. Clinical signs were loss of body weight, profound lethargy, serous nasal discharge, severe watery diarrhoea and subcutaneous oedema of the intermandibular space, chest and ventral midline. Pathological findings were anaemia, leucocytopenia, hypoproteinaemia, dilatation of the right ventricle of the heart, dilated hepatic portal veins and periportal hepatic sinusoids (peliosis hepatis), alimentary mucosal hyperaemia and oedema of mesenteric lymph nodes. Cattle grazing the same pasture were affected by Pimelea poisoning simultaneously. Removal of the horses to Pimelea-free pasture initiated recovery. The one other incident of this syndrome, previously only recognised in cattle in Australia, occurred in horses, in South Australia in 2002, with access to a dense Pimelea simplex population.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-11-2015
DOI: 10.1111/ZPH.12238
Abstract: Hendra virus (HeV), a potentially fatal zoonotic disease spread by flying foxes, to date has always infected humans via a spillover event from equine HeV infection. In a theoretical case study, we compared the impacts of two different HeV prevention strategies - vaccination and flying fox roost removal - using a recently developed framework that considers different stakeholder group perspectives. The perspectives of the four selected stakeholder groups regarding intangibles were inferred from public discussions and coverage in the media. For all stakeholder groups, the option to vaccinate horses was found to add value to the economic results when the intangible impacts were included in the analysis, while the option for roost removal unanimously detracted from economic analysis value when the intangible impacts were included. Both the mean and median stakeholder-adjusted value ratios (2.25 and 2.12, respectively) for vaccination were inflated when intangible impacts were included, by value-adding to the results of a traditional economic analysis. In the roost removal strategy, these ratios (1.19 and 1.16, respectively) were deflated when intangible impacts were included. Results of this theoretical study suggest that the inclusion of intangible impacts promotes the value of a two-dose initial vaccination protocol using a subunit vaccination considered to offer complete protection for horses, as a strategy to control HeV, whereas roost removal becomes an even more costly strategy. Outcome of the analysis is particularly sensitive to the intangible value placed on human health. Further evaluation - via sociological methods - of values placed on intangibles by various stakeholder groups is warranted.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-2013
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2013
DOI: 10.1016/J.PREVETMED.2013.05.003
Abstract: We present a novel framework for addressing the intangible impacts of emergency animal diseases (EADs). Intangible elements can have great impact on the response, control and prevention strategies that are ultimately used to address these EADs. These intangible elements have value and worth, although these are difficult express in dollar terms. Consequently, these elements are often lost in the scope of traditional economic analysis. Without the inclusion of these intangibles, the bottom-line for decision-making related to animal-health emergencies would be based only on financial measures. This does not reflect the reality of the consultative policy-making process. The framework we present allows a measurement of the trade-offs that stakeholders are willing to accept under different EAD control scenarios. The key attributes of the framework include both the consultative processes involving different stakeholders and the process of identification of intangibles and their personal value to these stakeholders. This consultation will ensure that the resulting analysis includes the full impacts of EADs, rather than only a narrow comparison of financial costs and benefits.
No related grants have been discovered for Sarah-Jane Wilson.