Talk:Foot-and-mouth disease

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veterinary medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Veterinary medicine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veterinary medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicineTemplate:WikiProject Veterinary medicineVeterinary medicine articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Viruses High‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Foot-and-mouth disease.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Foot-and-mouth disease was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
Review: January 7, 2006. (Reviewed version).

Because FMD rarely infects humans but spreads rapidly among animals, it is a much greater threat to the agriculture industry than to human health. Farmers around the world can lose billions of dollars a year during a foot-and-mouth epidemic, when large numbers of animals are destroyed and revenues from milk and meat production go down.

Todo

In many countries, the loss is not so much due to the disease itself. The disease has been stricking here and there for a very long time, and until a few decennies, movements of animals was very limited, so the disease couldnot spread really. When an epidemic occured, farmers just stopped moving animals for a while from one village to another for reproductive and sales issues.

The disease itself is spreading very quickly but usually does not lead to the death of the animal. The biggest issue is that cattle produced in one country is sometimes sold in another. European cattle is sold to the US for example, but the US is requiring the animals to be free from the disease and NOT vaccinated. Consequently, some european prefer to save the market by avoiding vaccination, but take the risk of epidemics. To avoid an epidemic spreading, the only option left, apart from vaccination, is isolation and preventive slaughtering. The money loss comes from the slaughtering due to market pressure, not so much from the disease itself.

Need to put that properly someday. user:anthere

I was quite appalled. I read the ministry's own website at the time, and if you were thorough you pieced together the admission it was all about the money, not health, not even human health. It was like torching a factory with everyone inside because some worker caught the sniffles. 142.177.24.141 17:50, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

We've got a redirect from 'Foo-bar-baz disease' to 'Foo bar baz disease', yet 'Foo-bar-baz' is used throughout the article. Which one are we going with as official? -- Rissa 21:32, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I made some minor edits - added to some stuff I know about vaccination and serotypes. I also took out the line about the vaccine developed in 1981 because it was dated (quite dated).

Please change redirect

This article should be at Foot-and-mouth disease with this entry redirecting there. -- postglock 13:34, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Change/redirects done - worked out how to do it -- postglock 02:32, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted from GA

No refereces appear in article, so I'm delisting it. AndyZ 21:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stolen bio-weapon???

At what point was it confirmed that the 2001 outbreak was the result of a stolen bio-weapon? This is pure speculation on behalf of the Express. I have reworded it as such.

Removed the sentence -- it is non-encyclopedic tabloid newspaper speculation. "The Sunday Express has speculated that the foot and mouth virus was released deliberately out of Porton Down bio-weapons facility and could have possibly been the source of the outbreak two months later [1]." --mervyn 13:30, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of Disease

This article would benefit from having a section about the history of the disease. That is, its history as known to humanity. When was it first identified? How did it start or stop within natural populations of animals before vaccines, etc. The current information in the article is very "present-day" based, with little background beyond the discovery/proving that FMD was a virus in 1897. The disease was around long before that, affecting agriculture, but the article has no real information about that history. QwertyUSA 21:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Animals being slaughtered: Real need fror clarification in the article

It is with dismay I learned (thanks to the contributing Wikipedian) that FMD was not a letahl disease and that most animals were recovering from it. Yet Millions have been slaughtered in the uk for fear of sprteading + there seems to be sopme damage limitation we could apply with cheap vaccination. The reason for slaughtering is commercial as some exporting countries will not accept vaccined cattle. This whole point is not made lear enough in the "Ethical" section. Will somebody please make this clear? If this doesn;t happen within a couple of weeks I will.

--81.170.116.178 12:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that the animals being raised for milk production could recover from the disease and live "normal lives," but anyone familiar with the lives of dairy cows would confirm that their lives are anything but normal. Perhaps this wording could be revised to be a little more objective. 151.191.175.230 18:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Normal - normal for a dairy cow, don't see the problem (its better than the word used a couple of days ago which said fulfilled!). If you are suggesting that dairy cows in the UK typically lead cruel and unusual factory farming lives, then I don't think that view is supported. Your average British cow wanders round a field, wanders up to the milking parlour and gets milked and wanders off again. Sits down, stands up, stares at passing walker, destroys ozone layer with flatulance. Eventually gets too old, gets slaughtered. The slaughtered herd in this case were for beef, would not live passed 30 months due to the BSE rules. Spenny 18:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Globalize tag

Gnevin has put a {{Globalize/UK}} tag on the article. Apart from references to the UK outbreaks there is nothing that strikes me in the article as being UK only. The UK outbreaks appear to be the only notable and significant outbreaks of foot and mouth, so it would be appropriate that they are mentioned. Does anyone else feel the article shows an inappropriate imbalance toward the UK? SilkTork 13:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the outbreak section is unbalanced, though I would have said that the outbreaks are to a certain extent globally notable: they are definitely notable in the EU due to trade restrictions. My understanding is that F&M is endemic in some areas, therefore it is unbalanced to highlight UK issues, but again the response is notable. It is hard to tell from a UK perspective if any other countries have had problems to the extent of the UK, and if not what is it about the UK (size, style of agriculture etc.) that makes these events esp. 1967 and 2001, so notable? So probably could be fixed, but not sure it is worth a tag - you could tag most of Wikipedia. Spenny 15:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS Can't google anything up to help Spenny 15:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

International des Epizooties (the WHO equivalent for non-human animals) monitors world wide outbreaks. [2] I'm too tired to do any anything with the link right now. The info on it may help to expanded the article beyond the UK.--Aspro 21:18, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is recent information (2005 till present). There is a link here that gives a good overview: [3]. However, this is primary source stuff, and aside from the confirmation that there are incidents worldwide, probably need a better general discussion on the worldwide spread of the disease. Thinks, DEFRA may have something. Spenny 21:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now the hard work of finding such a source has been done, all the article is waiting for now, is for Gnevin to come back 'globalize' it to his satisfaction. As nobody else it taking any notice of the tag I might as well take it off, since it is an eyesore, which servers no purpose, other than to clutter up WP. --Aspro 13:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re adding , it not for you to remove it because you feel its an eyesore i dont have enough knowledge to globalize this article but it still need to be done Gnevin 15:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just have a question about the animals being slaughtered because I am in Egypt where this disease is currently a problem. If the animals being slaughtered are used for beef and not milk, does this mean that there is a problem with eating the beef from a diseased animal, but not with drinking the milk from a diseased animal? ...... Aisha Rashwan

Is EV71 known as Foot and mouth disease?

Enterovirus is known as EV71 and it is common known as foot and mouth diease.[4] Why was the previous entry removed in the article? Can someone find evidence that it it is not related to foot and mouth disease? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.64.10.13 (talk) 03:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It was me that deleted it :-) The reason was given in the edit comment which is visible in "history" which is found by clicking the "history" pane at the top of the article. But not everyone know about this feature.

I deleted it after checking the enterovirus article to see that foot and mouth and enterovirus are not closely related. They'r of the same family but not the same genus. The confusion is probably due to enterovirus 71 being said to cause "hand, foot, and mouth disease". As the heading of the Foot and mouth disease states, this is an similar-sounding but unrelated illness. You'll find the chinese outbreak covered briefly in the enterovirus article, but it could do with more in-depth coverage and updating as the epidemic proceeds.EverGreg (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lead in Rewrite

It seems to me that while the lead in is very comprehensive it introduces material that is not expanded upon later in the article - I think that some of the material could be summarized and moved into seperate headings to improve readability. I view leadins sort of like abstracts that summarize the article and points are expanded below. It may shorten the lead in but its current readability is poor. (in my opionion) I think we should tag {{intro-rewrite}} or rewrite it ( i dont feel qualified to do so) Comments? benjicharlton (talk) 23:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoof and foot

With regard to a recent edit, I'm all for calling this disease hoof and mouth disease to clear up misunderstandings. This fits well with its name in norwegian, but can you guys confirm that "hoof and mouth disease" really is a common term for it in english-speaking countries? EverGreg (talk) 17:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain what your misunderstandings are...? The disease is not called anything other than foot-and-mouth (the current title) in the British Isles. I believe hoof-and-mouth is the usual American term – I don't know about Australia, NZ, South Africa, India or other English-speaking places. Whatever the article is called, the lead para needs to include all the alternatives, and which of these is used as the article title is really quite arbitrary – we'd need a good reason to change it from the present title. (I've tidied the lead para a little.) Richard New Forest (talk) 19:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By misunderstanding, I meant that there's been questions on the talk pages and erroneous edits indicating that people mix this disease and the human hand, foot and mouth disease even though both articles clearly warn about this mixup in the lead-text. I didn't know there was a UK/US divide on the name. EverGreg (talk) 22:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoof and Mouth My grandfather Thomas /Childs/ VS, BV.Sc. DVM Dr. Veterinary Medicine was largely responsible for the irradication of the disease in Canada. He was Veterinary General for Canada at that time. I have letters and official reports and papers and newspaper articles which I will upload. Curlycate (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Foot-and-mouth disease. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:58, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Foot-and-mouth disease. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

shad outbreak

should we include a section on the shad outbreak in 2018? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1970:4FA6:F700:B444:6908:A670:E587 (talk) 19:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NBAF at Kansas State University

This might be an interesting addition to this Article: "The NRC said there is nearly a 70 percent chance over the 50-year lifetime of the facility that a release of foot-and-mouth disease could result in an infection outside the laboratory, impacting the economy by $9 billion to $50 billion." https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/hand-foot-and-mouth-disease-is-making-its-way-across-kansas-and-missouri Charles Juvon (talk) 21:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Foot and mouth disease (Disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Foot and mouth disease (Disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24#Foot and mouth disease (Disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 08:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those last couple paragraphs

Really need a review, ideally from someone sane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:4500:E7C0:B9EF:CA84:1BEF:66F5 (talk) 04:15, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]