RESUMO
This study attempts to quantify the animal health, veterinary public health, and economic impact of fascioliasis in Jamaica. A coprologic survey conducted for this purpose in late 1979 and early 1980 revealed an overall fascioliasis prevalence of at least 22.2 percent (n=520) in cattle and 17.2 percent (n=514) in goats. In general the prevalence of the disease was found to be directly correlated with rainfall and inversely correlated with altitude. Four ecological zones of endemicity were identified and related to the epidemiology of the intermediate host, Fossaria cubensis. The economic cost of the disease was estimated from production statistics and a questionnaire survey. Losses were categorised as either direct (due mainly to liver condemnation and suboptimal dairy or beef production) or indirect (due mainly to treatment costs). The estimate did not include the less quantifiable costs associated with mortality, provision of veterinary services, and lost opportunities for development. The total economic cost of fascioliasis in Jamaica, as indicated by the above data, appears to be on the order of J$2.4 million (J$1.78=US1.00); and if anticipated improvements in Jamaica's livestock industry are allowed for, this total rises to J$3.2 million. It is noteworthy that a significant share of this cost would be in scarce foreign exchange spent on drugs and on imported substitutes for local meat and dairy products. It should also be recalled that fascioliasis is a zoonosis producing significant numbers of human cases in the Greater Antilles, and that inappropriate changes in vegetable cultivation practices could cause it to become a significant health problem in Jamaica. Finally, there is a very real danger that proposed increases in Jamaica's cattle and sheep herds could enormously increase the prevalence of the disease, as has happened elsewhere. It is therefore recommended that development of the country's livestock industry be paralled by development of an appropriate fascioliasis control strategy. Such a planned approach to fascioliasis control, which tends to be relatively cost-effective, confines treatment to the periods and localities at greatest risk and uses animal management techniques to reduce the incidence of infection (Summary)
