世界动物卫生组织国际标准共29页文档
OIE 国际动物卫生标准-孙淑芳解析
Other concerns 4%
其它关注的问题
Stanton, WTO - 2005
Plant health 29%
植物卫生
4
贸易标准 (法典) 生物学标准 (手册)
OIE 国际标准
陆生动物卫生法典-哺乳动物、鸟和蜜蜂
水生动物卫生法典-鱼、软体动物和甲壳类 动物 陆生动物诊断试验和疫苗手册
水生动物诊断试验手册
15
BES 风险状态
依据这些标准和监测结果
第3条: 可忽略BSE风险 第4条: 可控制的BSE风险 第5条: 不确定BSE风险
口蹄疫：免疫无疫国 非免疫无疫国 免疫无疫区 非免疫无疫区
16
BSE风险状态标准
第 2款
1. 风险评估成果
a) 释放评估 b) 暴露评估
2. 正在实施的宣传计划 3. 强制通报和调查 4. 按照手册标准进行检查
A. 介绍 当前有关BSE知识 B. 诊断技术
a. 样品制备 b. 组织学检查 c. 检测疫病特异的PrP蛋白 Immunohistochemical methods免疫组织学方法, Western blot免疫印 迹 , Rapid tests快速检测) 对于BSE没有指定试验/也没有替代试验 C. 无疫苗/诊断试剂
包括诊断试验和疫苗
诊断试验
“指定” –陆生法典中有关国际贸易方面要求的 试验– 蓝色印刷
不是每个所列疫病都有一个“指定的”试验
“替代” –适用双边协定后的进口/出口
22
OIE手册中关于BSE的章节
1992年与陆生法典有关BSE的章节一起被采用） 2007年被大范围修订 (见 2008 版)
OIE 国际动物卫生标准
OIE 国际动物卫生标准 ppt课件
法典和 手册
讨论的议题
背景 OIE陆生动物卫生法典介绍 OIE陆生动物诊断试验和疫苗手册 法典和手册的应用
OIE 目标
➢保证全球动物卫生状况的透明 ➢收集、分析和发布科学的兽医信息 ➢在动物疫病控制方面,提供专家意见并鼓励国家
间的合作
➢在WTO/SPS框架下，通过出版动物卫生标准
由适当委员会提出
使用工作组和承担特定任务的特别工作组，如 动物福利、BSE、流行员
COMMITTEE, COMMISSIONS,
DELEGATES
问题
专业委员会
讨论
评论
专家或其他专业委员会的建议
草案文本 1
2
DELEGATES 代表
委员会
OIE国际标准
BSE风险状态标准
第2款
1. 风险评估成果
a) 释放评估 b) 暴露评估
2. 正在实施的宣传计划
3. 强制通报和调查
4. 按照手册标准进行检查
BSE监测历史
1998年采用的BSE监测/检测体系附录
由于科学的信息快速获得而不断更新
2005年5月依据欧盟积累的经验和采取的统 计检验而进行全面的修订
使用OIE标准
从法典、手册和OIE中可以获得什 么信息？
贸易条件
风险分析指 南
无疫标准
减少风险保证 产品安全
疫病监测
诊断试验 标准
出口证书格式
口蹄疫
畜体处置程序 疫苗生产标准
人道屠宰动物指南
区域区划和生物安全隔离区 化标准
OIE科学和技术评 论
在法典和手册中的何处我可以获得FMD信息？
贸易条件和降低风险措施 FMD监测和区域区划及无疫标准） 诊断试验和疫苗生产标准
世界动物卫生组织制订的疯牛病国际标准
世界动物卫生组织制订的疯牛病国际标准
郭明勋
【期刊名称】《《明胶科学与技术》》
【年(卷),期】2002(022)003
【摘要】世界动物卫生组织(OIE)已经制定了关于疯牛病(BSE)的国际标准，这就是OIE的《动物卫生法典》中第2．3．13节。
【总页数】2页(P125-126)
【作者】郭明勋
【作者单位】河南省焦作金箭实业总公司河南省焦作市丰收中路 454001
【正文语种】中文
【中图分类】R1
【相关文献】
1.世界动物卫生组织制订的疯牛病国际标准 [J], 郭明勋
2.我国获得世界动物卫生组织(OIE)疯牛病风险可忽略认证 [J], 本刊辑
3.我国获得世界动物卫生组织(OIE)疯牛病风险可忽略认证 [J],
4.美国农业部认可世界动物卫生组织确定的疯牛病风险地区名单 [J], 本刊辑
5.世界动物卫生组织宣布乌拉圭为无疯牛病国家 [J],
因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。
动物检疫标准体系
2.
国内研究进展
我国现行的动物检疫标准体系可具体划分为：产地检疫、屠宰检疫和运输检疫。需要指出的是，新修订的 《动物防疫法》已正式施行，其中对动物检疫制度作了较大的调整，强调动物检疫工作要体现过程监管、风险控 制、区域化管理和可追溯性相结合的基本原则。也就是说，现行的动物检疫制度也必须随之进行改革，以适应 《动物防疫法》目录
01 定义
03 国外研究进展
02 国际标准 04 国内研究进展
动物检疫标准体系是为了预防、控制动物疫病，防止动物疫病的传播、扩散和流行，保护养殖业生产以及人 类和动物的健康，由法定的机构、法定的人员，依照法定的措施、标准和方法，对动物、动物产品进行隔离、检 查、定性和处理的体系。
谢谢观看
OIE制定并出版的《国际动物卫生法典》不但是动物及动物产品国际贸易中世界各国应当遵循的动物卫生标 准，也是整个动物疫病防治的国际标准。《国际动物卫生法典》既是 OIE多年工作的成果，也是各成员国最高兽 医卫生行政当局一致意见的体现。加之 WTO将 OIE的标准、准则和建议列为 SPS协定的标准、准则和建议，因此， 《国际动物卫生法典》在全世界范围内具有权威性。
国外研究进展
从美国、加拿大等畜牧业发达国家的动物检疫标准体系来看，他们都存在着如下几个显著的特点，即“严进 宽出”的进出境检疫、风险评估制度、将国家监测计划的监测结果作为检疫出证的条件及区域化管理。
1.“严进宽出”的进出境检疫
无论美国、加拿大，还是欧盟成员国，对边境检疫的要求都是非常高的。如对边境检查站的严格审批程序、 要求出口国的严格出征制度、到港后的严格报关制度、严格检验程序、长时间的隔离检疫等。在这方面，美国的 进出境制度尤其值得深思。
世界动物卫生组织简介
Working Group on Food Safety
4.10 Regional Representations
Africa Americas Asia and Pacific Eastern Europe Middle East Regional Co-ordination Unit of the South-East Asia Foot and Mouth Disease Campaign (RCU-SEAFMD)
8.3 关于食品安全
The 3rd OIE Strategic Plan for 2001-2005 recommended that "OIE should be more active in the area of public health and consumer protection," and noted that this should include "zoonoses and diseases transmissible to humans through food, whether or not animals are affected by such diseases",
•New Emerging Diseases 澳大利亚
•Training of Official Veterinarians 法国
•Information on Aquatic Animal Diseases英国
4.6 Collaborating Centres
Diagnosis and Control of Animal Diseases in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Transcaucasia俄罗斯 Animal Disease Surveillance Systems and Risk Analysis美国 Surveillance and Control of Animal Diseases in Africa 南非 Diagnosis, Epidemiology and Control of Animal Diseases in Tropical Regions法国 ELISA and Molecular Techniques in Animal Disease Diagnosis法国 Veterinary Medicinal Products 法国 Food Safety, Diagnosis and Control of Animal Diseases in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Transcaucasia俄罗斯
世界动物卫生组织运作模式
世界动物卫生组织运作模式概述：世界动物卫生组织（World Organisation for Animal Health，简称OIE）是一个国际性的组织，致力于促进动物健康和动物产品贸易的可持续发展。
它是一个由会员国组成的机构，拥有194个成员国，其运作模式包括标准制定、信息收集与分享、技术合作和危机管理等方面。
本文将从这几个方面对世界动物卫生组织的运作模式进行介绍。
一、标准制定世界动物卫生组织通过制定国际标准来规范动物卫生和动物产品贸易。
这些标准主要包括动物疫病的预防、控制和监测，以及动物产品的质量与安全要求等。
标准的制定过程严格遵循科学原则和透明度要求，通过广泛征求成员国的意见和专家的参与，确保标准的科学性和可操作性。
标准起到了统一国际贸易规则、促进动物健康和提高动物产品质量的重要作用。
二、信息收集与分享世界动物卫生组织通过建立全球动物卫生信息系统（World Animal Health Information System，简称WAHIS）来收集、分析和分享有关动物疫病的信息。
成员国有义务向该系统报告动物疫病的发生情况，并提供相关数据和信息。
组织将这些信息进行汇总和分析，及时发布动物疫病的警报和报告，以便成员国采取相应的措施。
信息的收集与分享使世界各国能够及时了解动物疫病的传播情况，采取有效的措施进行防控，从而减少疫病的传播和影响。
三、技术合作世界动物卫生组织通过开展技术合作，提供培训和技术支持，帮助成员国提高动物卫生和动物产品贸易的能力。
组织与成员国合作，共同开展疫苗研发、诊断方法改进、动物疫病监测等项目，为成员国提供相关技术和知识。
此外，组织还组织培训班和研讨会，促进成员国之间的经验交流和合作。
技术合作使得成员国能够更好地应对动物疫病的挑战，提高动物卫生水平和动物产品贸易的竞争力。
四、危机管理世界动物卫生组织在动物疫病爆发或其他突发事件发生时，扮演着危机管理的角色。
组织通过制定应急计划和指南，支持成员国进行疫情应对和危机处置。
世界动物卫生组织动物福利标准
世界动物卫生组织动物福利标准
李克杰
【期刊名称】《中国畜牧业》
【年(卷),期】2005(000)017
【摘要】2005年5月22～27日,世界动物卫生组织（OIE）在其总部巴黎召开国际委员会（OIE最高决策机构,由全体成员代表组成）第73次全会,讨论并通过了动物福利标准（此次全会议程之一）.
【总页数】2页(P70-71)
【作者】李克杰
【作者单位】无
【正文语种】中文
【中图分类】S851.9
【相关文献】
1.世界动物卫生组织指出:动物福利不容忽视 [J],
2.关于提升我国兽医体系效能的几点建议r——以世界动物卫生组织(OIE)标准规则为视角 [J], 葛林;孙研
3.试论我国建立"高卫生"状态马匹群体的策略选择r——世界动物卫生组织标准视角下的马匹卫生促进工作 [J], 葛林;杨莉;王勤;曹院章;孙研
4.世界动物卫生组织（OIE）开始关注动物福利 [J], 刘建;王洪海
5.世界动物卫生组织指出动物福利不容忽视 [J],
因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。
世界动物卫生组织的福利政策
世界动物卫生组织的福利政策一、思想背景咱们常听见的所谓动物福利（animal welfare）、动物权（animal right）、动物爱惜（animal protection）、及动物伦理（animal ethics）等各样名词很多，但事实上其核心（core）是同质的，只是切入角度的不同。
动物福利强调人类与动物相处时应提供动物应有的待遇；动物权是从动物的角度动身，强调动物天赋所具有的权利，引申出人类对动物应有之尊重（与待遇）；动物爱惜是强调目前人类社会中的动物已经处在受虐状态，因这人类应该警觉并应予以爱惜，也是强调应给予动物应有的待遇；动物伦理是指人类对动物行为的道德判定，其最终之结论仍是人类应给予动物应有的待遇。
目前全世界对动物福利的范围与程度，会因动物权认定观点之不同而有不同，也造成社会对公共政策之道德批判，政府尽管有动物爱惜法作为法律依据，但道德上仍无所适从。
最近几年来，有关动物福利有二篇重要的论文，一篇是《圣经与基督教思想对动物价值的冲突The Status of Animals in Biblical and Christian Thought: A Study in Colliding Values》（Journal of Human-Animal Studies Vol. 8, p.245-263, 2000）；另一篇是《基督教、人文与慈善的统合：十九世纪英格兰的基督教传统与动物防虐A Union of Christianity, Humanity, and Philanthropy: The Christian Tradition and the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals in Nineteenth-Century England》（Journal of Human-Animal Studies Vol. 8, p.265-285, 2000）。
(优选)BSL实验室生物安全管理体系文件
理体系要求的责任。
7.4.2.3 应规定涉及的安全要求和操作规程应以国家主管部门和世界卫生组
织、世界动物卫生组织、国际标准化组织等机构或行业权威机构发 布的指南或标准等为依据，并符合国家相关法规和标准的要求；任 何新技术在使用前应经过充分验证，适用时，应得到国家相关主管 部门的批准。
➢ 禁止细菌（生物）及毒素武器的发展生产及储存以及销毁这类武器
的公约1975.03 ➢ 生物两用品及相关设备和技术出口管制清单2006.09 ➢ 中华人民共和国生物两用品及相关设备和技术出口管制条例
2002.12 ➢ 两用物项和技术进出口许可证管理办法2006.01
第九页，共85页。
我国生物安全法规（新颁）
11. 安全负责人备案表
12. 人员一览表 13. 仪器设备一览表
14. 参考文献
15.附录
生物安全防护水平分级
实验室设计原则及基本要求 实验室设施设备要求
生物安全管理手册实例
第0章 目录
修订页 编制说明 定义和术语
实验室生物安全防护水平分级
第1章 概述
第2章 安全管理体系
第3章 生物安全管理方针、目标和承诺 第4章 生物安全手册的管理 第5章 文件控制
1991～1994 军事医学科学院六所，硕士，药剂学
1994～1997 沈阳药科大学，博士，药剂学
1997～2000 军事医学科学院八所，博士后，药剂学
2000～ 军事医学科学院八所，药剂学
2003 ～ 军事医学科学院八所，生物安全
第二页，共85页。
实验室生物安全管理模式
➢ 政府管理
－－法规、标准、规定
国际动物卫生法律制
病危害程度紧急或定期通过网站、E-mail和
“Disease Information” 、“ World Animal
Health”等刊物将信息转发给其他成员国，以便
及时采取预防措施。
OIE的主要目标（2）
2.收集、分析和通报兽医科技信息：收集和分析动物
第二部分 世界动物卫生组织及其法规
J1动物卫生主要国际组织简介
一 世界动物卫生组织（OIE） 二联合国粮农组织(FAO) 三国际食品法典委员会(CAC)
OIE的创建
• 各国兽医管理部门了解世界各地动物疫情流行动 态的需求越来越高 • 1872年，欧洲大面积暴发牛瘟，奥地利召集比、 法、德、英、意、俄、土、塞尔维亚、瑞士和罗 马尼亚等国在维也纳召开国际会议，协商应采取 统一行动来控制牛瘟。
成，任期三年。负责帮助鉴定防制动物疾病的最
佳策略和措施，并审查期望成为无特定疾病国家 的动物卫生状况。
3.专业委员会
（3）生物标准委员会：简称实验室委员会，1949
年创建，国际委员会选举的3名专家成员组成，任 期三年。负责建立或通过哺乳动物、禽和蜜蜂疾 病诊断方法和生物制品的试验方法，监督《陆生 动物诊断试验和疫苗手册》的颁布，选举陆生动
疾病控制最新信息，整理后出版著作和刊物 “Scientific & Technical Review”通报成员国，帮 助提高控制和根除疾病的能力。
OIE的主要目标（3）
3.为动物疾病控制提供专业知识和鼓励国际协作： 向动物疾病控制和根除方面需要帮助的成员国 提供技术支持。OIE与许多国际性地区和国家 金融组织建立了永久性联系，以保证他们能够 更多地为控制动物疾病和人兽共患病提供资金 支持。
兽疫国际办公室动物健康国际组织(ppt 36页)
162个成员国（2002年5月）
49
12
28
47
26
美洲: 28 非洲: 47 欧洲: 49 中东: 12 亚洲: 26
目标
1. 确保全世界动物健康状况的透明度; 2. 收集、分析及传播科学的兽医医学信息; 3. 在动物疾病防治方面，提供专业知识，促进国际
第四部分－示范国际兽医医学证明
新工作规划
动物保障 动物性食品安全 所有章节的定期更新 交互式咨询
委员会及代表
问题
专家委员会
更新国际标准
审查 专家及其它专家委员会提议
评论
草案 1
2
代表
委员会
OIE国际标准
通过
国际贸易及国家动物健康规则
参考: WTO关于卫生及植物检疫措施实施的协定 基础: OIE标准、准则及提议 国际认可条件: 透明度－与OIE标准一致（或科学 论证及危险分析） 遇到纷争时 : OIE纷争解决办公室，若未能解决， 依照WTO程序
OIE委员会及小组：与Codex互惠范围
国际动物健康法
口蹄疫及其它家畜传染病委员会
标准委员会 生物技术工作小组 食品安全工作小组
杀菌剂抗药性特别小组
兽药特别小组
诊断试验及疫苗标准手册
合作中心及授权实验室
全世界１５６个合作中心及授权实验室 同业主题 授权实验室负责诊断、控制、研究及培训
OIE授权实验室
怎样增强？
OIE预警系统基于其成员国的官方报告 积极查证非官方信息 提高数据质量，使其达到行业水准 OIE全球信息系统
OIE预警系统
OIE全球信息系统
国际动物健康法－哺乳动物、鸟类及蜂类
8、国际动物卫生法
国际动物卫生法典8.1 国际动物卫生法典 8.1.1 法典简介 国际动物卫生法典》 简称《 《国际动物卫生法典》International animal Health Code Commission (简称《法典》)规定 简称 法典》 规定 了与动物及动物产品国际贸易有关的卫生规则和建议。 法典》 了与动物及动物产品国际贸易有关的卫生规则和建议。《法典》规定了动物及动物产品贸易时 最基本的卫生要求，以避免动物和人类病原微生物的国际间传播， 最基本的卫生要求，以避免动物和人类病原微生物的国际间传播，从而确保动物及动物产品进 行国际贸易时的卫生安全。 行国际贸易时的卫生安全。 OIE的国际动物卫生法典委员会具体负责《法典》的制定工作，《法典》最后要由 的国际动物卫生法典委员会具体负责《 的国际动物卫生法典委员会具体负责 法典》的制定工作， 法典》最后要由OIE国际委 国际委 员会讨论通过并公布。法典委员会在制定、修改《法典》 员会讨论通过并公布。法典委员会在制定、修改《法典》时，注意征求动物疫病的国际知名专 家和所有成员国兽医机构的意见和建议。 家和所有成员国兽医机构的意见和建议。 1992年，OIE以英、法和西班牙文字发行了新版《法典》，1993年到 以英、 年到1997年期间进行了两次 年 以英 法和西班牙文字发行了新版《法典》 年到 年期间进行了两次 更新，1998年以后，因每年都有大量的修改性意见和建议，《法典》改为每年一版。同时，增 更新， 年以后，因每年都有大量的修改性意见和建议， 法典》 改为每年一版。同时， 年以后 发了俄语版本。 发了俄语版本。 8.1.2 术语定义 1999年的《法典》规定了 个术语的定义，它的意义在于为 年的《 个术语的定义， 年的 法典》规定了62个术语的定义 它的意义在于为OIE成员国制定动物卫生法律规范 成员国制定动物卫生法律规范 和技术标准时，提供了统一、规范、科学的术语定义。 和技术标准时，提供了统一、规范、科学的术语定义。 8.1.2.1 涉及兽医机构的术语 1、有关 、有关OIE的术语 的术语 （1）中央局 ）中央局(Central bureau)。指国际动物卫生组织的常设秘书处。 。指国际动物卫生组织的常设秘书处。 （2）法典 ）法典(Code)。指OIE《国际动物卫生法典》 。 《国际动物卫生法典》 （3）手册 ）手册(Manual)。指OIE《诊断试验和疫苗标准手册》。 。 《诊断试验和疫苗标准手册》
兽医法规课件：OIE国际动物卫生
生物安全标准委员会（实验室委员会）
➢ 该委员会始创于1949年，由3名专家组成。成员由国际委 员会选举产生，任期3年。
➢ 生物安全标准委员会的主要任务是建立和批准用于哺乳动 物、鸟类和蜂疫病诊断的方法以及用于疫病控制的疫苗等 生物制品的检测方法。
➢每一个成员国设一个代表，由其政府指定。 该代表通常为国内在动物卫生方面的首席公 务员，并应为负责该国动物卫生事务的资深 兽医。
8.1.4 国际动物卫生法典
• 根据WTO关于《实施动植物卫生检疫措施 协议》（WTO-SPS协议）的授权，OIE制 定了一系列相关标准文件，其中最为重要 的有《国际陆生动物卫生法典》和《国际 水生动物卫生法典》。
• 风险分析应透明，要给出口国一个清楚的 书面决定，说明进口或拒绝进口的条件。
• 风险分析包括危害确认、风险评估、风险 管理和风险交流。
8.4.2 风险分析准则
➢进口风险分析首先应了解拟进口的商品及 可能的年贸易量，以进行风险估计。
➢ 该委员会编写的《陆生动物诊断试验和疫苗标准手册》被 WTO-SPS协议视为国际标准。
➢ 该委员会还负责筛选OIE陆生动物疫病参考实验室，同时 促进诊断试验标准试剂的准备和分发。
水生动物卫生标准委员会（水生动物委员会） ➢ 该委员会始创于1960年，由5名专家组成。成员由国际委
员会选举产生，任期3年。 ➢ 委员会的任务是收集所有鱼、软体动物和甲壳类动物疫病
管理部门的人员传送证书或通告进口许可 要求时，须将文件副本寄送给兽医行政管 理部门。通知一般是兽医行政管理部门的 责任。然而，如协商同意，颁发证书不必 得到兽医行政管理部门的批准，也可以由 动物原产地兽医当局负责。
(世卫动物组织)最新动物保护规范
The animal experimentation debate: a brief reviewBy Amelia Cornish (The World Society for the Protection of Animals)April 2012AbstractFor decades the many moral, ethical and welfare concerns of animal experimentation have been heavily debated. These concerns raise questions to what extent can we subject animals to experiments causing pain and distress in the name of bettering human knowledge and human medical therapies? Animals are used in a range of experiments from military defence weapon testing to human medical testing. The focus of this paper is on animal testing for scientific and medical purposes. To truly understand animal experimentation one must weigh up the benefits to humans against the cost to animals, taking into account any alternatives that may be available. The costs involve adverse effects to the animals such as pain, distress and possible death. The benefits include the acquisition of new knowledge, new medical therapies and potential benefits for human health and welfare. Undertaking this cost-benefit analysis should provide guidance and supporting information on whether animal experimentation is warranted, however much uncertainty remains. This paper aims to shed some light on the issue by exploring the animal welfare implications of animal experimentation, what current legislation governs animal experimentation and whether this falls short of what many would see as our obligation to protect and to ensure the welfare of animals. The validity concerns of the animal model and the available alternative models are also discussed. In conclusion, a focus on alternative models is suggested, as it is seemingly possible to invest in alternative models without negatively affecting scientific enhancement and improvements to human health.Animal experimentation in an animal welfare contextThe debate regarding the ethical, welfare and scientific validity of animal experimentation is not a straightforward debate and much uncertainty still remains. The costs to the animals can be discussed in an animal welfare context, as animal welfare underpins these arguments. Human concern for animals is not new, nor dwindling. The first specific laws on animal welfare were in the UK and were the 1822 Act to Prevent the Cruel and Improper Treatment of Cattle (Rickards, 1822) and the succeeding 1876 UK Cruelty to Animals Act. Current animal welfare and animal sentience studies have proven animals are capable of suffering and worthy of protection (Duncan, 2006). Animal welfare also now concerns an animal’s qualit y of life. Quality of life is a positive approach to how animals engage with their environment and live their lives (Wemelsfelder, 2007). It concerns the promotion of a positive welfare state for animals, not the mere alleviation of pain and suffering (Wemelsfelder, 2007).In 1959, “The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique” (Russell & Burch, 1959) was published. In this publication the authors advocated that all experiments using animals should ensure every effort is made to replace them with non-sentient alternatives, to reduce the number of animals used to the minimum, and to refine animal experiments so that they cause minimal pain and distress to the animals (Flecknell, 2002). This is what has become known as The Three R’s; Replacement, Refinement and Reduction, which have been instrumental in the development of muchnew legislation worldwide. The EU Directive 2010/63/EU which refers directly to the Three R’s is but one example of their global implementation. The implementation of the Three R’s ai ms to ensure a high level of animal welfare is achieved in all scientific research involving animals, although they cannot achieve this in isolation and many other means are also needed to ensure adequate animal welfare is achieved.The Three R’s concept considers replacement as the use of non-sentient beings instead of sentient animals in experiments (Flecknell, 2002). This is thought to minimise suffering, as it is only sentient animals that are thought capable of suffering pain and distress. However this raises concerns regarding animal sentience and what criteria we use to define sentient and non-sentient beings. One major concern is that in one country it would be sufficient to replace a rat with an invertebrate, as legislation does not deem that invertebrate to be sentient. As our knowledge of animal sentience increases, more animals are found to be sentient and capable of suffering, including many invertebrates (Mather, 2011). As scientific knowledge of sentience increases, it will become clear that many more animals are suffering in laboratories. It will also mean sentience knowledge is out-dating legislation. Given the time lags in the implementation of new legislation this could have huge animal welfare implications. Reduction involves reducing the number of animals involved in experiments (Flecknell, 2002). It can be achieved by experimental design, by reusing animals, or by collaborating more within the scientific community and ensuring full publication of experimental procedures and results (Flecknell, 2002). Collaboration between colleagues could ensure experiments are not needlessly repeated and full publication could ensure lessons-learned are shared within the scientific community.Finally the refinement component of the Three R’s purpose i s to lessen the severity of the adverse effects on the animal and to ensure reliable and valid data is gathered through the refinement of the scientific procedure (Flecknell, 2002). The refinement consideration should always involve an assessment of whether a less severe procedure could be used to still obtain scientifically valid data.The United Kingdom Animal Procedures Committee (2002) reviewed the use of primates in scientific procedures from 1990 to 2000 and gave recommendations to reduce primate use. The committee emphasises the use of primates in scientific procedures as a complex issue, however the committee states that the industry could be improved. They advocate for the development and implementation of non-animal alternatives to replace animals in scientific procedures in the future.The effects on laboratory animalsThere are a number of welfare concerns regarding the laboratory animals used in scientific experiments, beginning from where the animals come from, to how their life is ended. There has been much public attention to the use of wild-caught animals in scientific experiments and Article 9 of the EU Directive 2010/63/EU stated that wild-caught animals will not be used in procedures, however there are clear exemptions also stated in the Directive. Wild-caught animals are often captured and transported to breeding centres or laboratories in distant countries, requiring lengthy transportation periods, which are extremely stressful and can lead to injuries (Knight, 2011). Another concern, which is less frequently discussed, is the effect of isolation and removal from a family or social grouping (Knight, 2011). This can cause additional stress to the wild-caught animal and results in increased susceptibility to disease and other physiological effects (Broom, 1993). Both of which can affect the scientific validity of the results.The housing environment and the routine procedures in the laboratory are also of concern. Animal welfare incorporates an animal’s physical and mental wellbeing but also an animal’s ability to engage in natural behaviours, such as nest building for mice (Knight, 2011). The cage environment can often inhibit natural behaviours and leave an animal isolated from con-specifics, with minimal environmental enrichment. Most often the laboratory environment does not satisfy the needs of an animal and usually results in behaviours such as stereotypies (Broom, 1993). Mason & Latham (2004) analysed stereotypies in zoo and laboratory animals and found they were linked with poor welfare. Mason (1991) found stereotypes represent poor past or present welfare due to chronic under-stimulation.Most laboratory animals experience routine procedures such as human handling, cage movements, cage cleaning, injections, blood sampling and weighing (Knight, 2011). A study by Balcombe, et al. (2004) reported routine human handling of laboratory animals causes severe stress. Balcombe et al. (2004) also found laboratory animals did not habituate to these routine procedures.Finally in terms of the welfare concerns for laboratory animals, the one that gains the most public attention and concern is the use of invasive procedures on animals during experimentation and testing (Knight, 2011). Animal sentience studies, and the presence of sensory systems and nerves in many animals (Boyle, 2009), confirm that animals are capable of suffering from the invasive procedures and experiments they are subjected to in the laboratory. A study by Richardson & Flecknell (2005) reviewed how commonly analgesics were administered to laboratory rodents, and assessed the anaesthesia procedures used. The study found from 1992 to 2002 there was an increase in the reported prevalence of analgesic administration to laboratory rodents from 2.7 per cent to 19.8 per cent, although the use of post-operative pain relief for laboratory rodents was quite low.A brief look at current European legislation governing animal experimentationLegislation governing animal experimentation aims to focus on the control of adverse effects such as pain and distress induced during the scientific use of animals. The greatest concern with legislation involves effective enforcement and monitoring.A brief history of legislation governing animal use for experimental or scientific purpose includes the November 24, 1986 Directive 86/609/EEC that was introduced to eliminate disparities between existing laws and regulations of the Members States regarding required animal welfare and protection. However, further disparities between Member States seemed to emerge. Certain States within the EU used the Directive to improve animal welfare and enact high standards, while others applied the minimum requirements of the legislation, and therefore animal welfare remained fairly poor. These disparities between Members States had an effect on the trade within the EU of certain products and substances that involved animal testing. It became quite apparent that the Directive needed clarification to ensure efficient and effective internal trade. The legislation that now governs animals used for experimental or other scientific purpose within the European Union (EU) involves the EU Directive 2010/63/EU that came into effect 22 September 2010. This Directive now includes cyclostomes such ashagfishes, and cephalopods such as squids and octopuses. Invertebrates are now being recognised as sentient beings, based on scientific evidence proving that they are able to suffer. Governments are taking the scientific evidence of sentience in cephalopods seriously, and the UK (UK Home Office, 1993) and New Zealand (New Zealand Government, 1999)Directive 76/768/EEC governs animal testing for cosmetics. In 2004 a testing ban on finished cosmetic products was applied with the testing ban on ingredients or combination of ingredients to come into effect March 2009. In addition, the marketing ban was also applied in 2009 with the exception of repeated-dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity and toxicokinetics. These were omitted as it was thought they would take longer to be replaced with non-animal alternatives. For these specific tests the marketing ban will apply step by step. However the cut-off date is March 2013, where no cosmetic product containing an ingredient that has been tested for the purposes of the Directive using animals will be allowed for sale in Europe, irrespective of whether or not an alternative test is available.Furthermore animal testing for household products has been banned in the UK since 2011, as outlined in the EU Directive 2010/63/EU law. However this ban applies to‘finished products’ and not the chemical ingredients within the product (Home Office, 2011), hence the ban can easily be circumvented.Legislation and appropriate enforcements is the key to ensuring animal welfare improves within the realms of experiments and toxicity testing involving animals. However if legislation becomes too stringent in the EU or UK one real concern is it will simply move these experiments to countries with less stringent, or worse, no legislation governing animal welfare and inadvertently make things worse for animals. The key must be collaboration between legislators and enforces and the corporates, such as Pharmaceuticals and research bodies, such as Medical research institutes, that rely on animals for experimental purpose, to work together for a better outcome for animals, not to the detriment of scientific advancements or worse, human health.A brief look at legislation governing animal experimentation outside of the European UnionMany countries have legislation, regulations or have established animal ethics committees to govern the use of animals in scientific procedures (Baumans, 2004), however effective enforcement is the biggest concern. For example, the USA has the Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, 2004) and the Animal Welfare Act (Crawford, 2012), which governs animals used in experimentation. While in 1968 the Canadian Council of Medical Research established the Canadian Council on Animal Care that aims to provide guidelines for animal experimentation (Canadian Council on Animal Care, 1993). New Zealand has a National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC) that was established in 1984 under the Animal Welfare Act to provide independent advice to the Minister for Primary Industries about issues regarding animal research, teaching and testing. There is also the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animal in Research and Teaching (ANZCCART), which aims to govern and provide guidance for those involves in the use of animals in research, teaching and testing (Dandie, 2007). Additionally in Australia the use of animals in experimentation is governed by the Codes of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purpose (Australia Environment Act, 2000) and also many institutional Animals Ethics Committees.Species difference: a critical look at the validity of the animal model Evolutionary theories state that we all share a common ancestor and evolutionary pressures have lead to subtle but significant changes between species (Darwin, 1859). Due to the differences between animals, species selection is critical in animal experimentation for both ethical and scientific reasons. The scientific validity and effectiveness of animal testing for human drugs and diseases is constantly under question, often regarding the effectiveness of the animal model for human health and diseases. Harding (2004) found attrition rate of drugs entering human clinical trials after passing animal testing to be 92 per cent. A study by Lazarou, et al (1998) found the incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalised patients in the US was 6.7 per cent, this meant it was “between the fourth and sixth leading cause of death” (Lazarou, et al., 1998, p.1200) for US hospitalised patients. Similarly a UK based study by Pirmohamed, et al. (2004) stated that adverse drug reactions are a huge burden on the UK National Health Service (NHS) and account for a large proportion of morbidity, mortality and extra costs, which could be avoided.There are many drug examples that have lead to the 92 per cent attrition rate of drugs at human clinical trial. These drugs not only fail upon human clinical trials but also sometimes cause severe health risks and even human deaths. One well-publicised example is the arthritic drug Vioxx, which was successful in animal trials and made it to human clinical trials and onto the US market, but was withdrawn in 2004 after causing 140,000 heart attacks and strokes, and estimated 27,000–60,000 patient deaths between 2000 and 2004 (Lyon, 2007).There is overwhelming evidence that many anomalies seen in animal experiments are due to the differing biology of the species being experimented on (Perel, et al, 2007) and the stress of constant human handling and the environment that the laboratory provides (Balcombe et al., 2004). The stress of human handling, confinement and isolation has been known to alter an animal’s physiology and to increase an animal’s susceptibility to infectious diseases (Balcombe, et al., 2004). It could be argued that animal experimentation lacks efficiency, as it is merely the behaviour of stressed animals, how they process drugs and how they interact with one another that is being tested.Perel et al., (2007) reviewed the treatment effects between clinical trials and animal experiments. They reviewed six interventions for which there were treatment effects in clinical trials, and then they reviewed the corresponding animal experimentation results. The six areas reviewed were: corticosteroids in traumatic head injury, antifibrinolytics in haemorrhage, thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke, tirilazad in acute ischaemic stroke, antenatal corticosteroids to prevent neonatal respiratory distress syndrome, and bisphosphonates to prevent and treat osteoporosis. Among the six interventions three had similar outcomes between clinical trials and animal studies and three did not. Perel et al., (2007) stated many animal studies showed very poor methodology and the “lack of concordance between animal experime nts and clinical trials may be due to bias, random error, or the failure of animal models to adequately represent human disease” (Perel, et al., 2007, p. 5).Non-human primates used in animal experimentationWhile there is a wide range of animals used for experimentation and testing purposes, non-human primates deserve particular attention due to the controversy their use hasgenerated throughout animal testing history, which mainly arose due to their genetic closeness to humans. Non-human primates make up a very small fraction of the animals used in experimentation. According to a European Union commissioned report in 2010 (as cited in Knight, 2011) non-human primates account for 0.08 per cent of laboratory animals used in the 27 EU Member States in 2008.A study by Carlsson, et al (2004) reported nonhuman primates were primarily used in research areas in which they appear to be the most appropriate models for humans. The most common areas of research were microbiology (including HIV/AIDS (26%)), neuroscience (19%), and biochemistry/chemistry (12%) (Carlsson, et al., 2004). Carlsson et al., (2004) also found the majority of publications using primates during 2001 were conducted in North America, Europe, and Japan.It is commonly argued in scientific literature, that non-human primates shouldn’t be used not on ethical grounds but on the basis of validity concerns. There are many physiological differences between human and non-human primate species (Bailey, 2005). They suffer from different diseases and respond in different ways to infectious agents (Bailey, 2005). Anzai, et al., (2003) studied human and chimpanzee responses to HIV and SIV (the ‘related’ simian immunodeficiency virus) and found the chimpanzee’s immune system detects and responds to HIV and SIV viruses very differently to humans. Anzai, et al., (2003) also found species-specific effects of other viral infection such as hepatitis B and C. In 2007 decades of AIDS vaccine research suffered disappointment when clinical trials of the new vaccine V520, involving 3000 people in 15 cities, failed to prevent or even suppress current viral loads (Watkins, et al., 2008). Furthermore, a study by Cáceres, et al. (2003) compared the human gene expression for the cerebral cortex to chimpanzees and rhesus macaques, and found many differences, mainly that the human brain involved up-regulation, which means genes were much more highly expressed in humans.Recently in 2011, the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council published in their report titled ‘Chimpanzees in Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Assessing the Necessity’ (p.16), that “recent advances in alternate research tools have rendered chimpanzees largely unnecessary as research subjects”. Bailey (2005) argues the validity of the animal model to test human concerns is increasingly coming under question. Such statements and reports such as the one from the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, if taken seriously by the scientific community will be a much needed driving force for change away from the use of animals, especially non-human primates in research, and towards alternatives.A brief discussion of the alternative to animal modelsAs the validity of animal models continues to come under question, there needs to be a positive shift in focus towards alternative methods, such as in vitro, computer software, and attention to existing databases. Research facilities and organisations, such as the Johns Hopkins Centre for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) in the U.S. and Europe, and the Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments (FRAME) in the UK, are just some of the key organisations that are dedicated to finding more alternatives to animal testing on a global scale.Some of the alternatives being explored include in-vitro, epidemiological studies, clinical intervention trials, astute clinical observation aided by laboratory testing, humantissue and cell cultures, autopsy studies, endoscopic examinations and biopsy, as well as new imaging methods.In-vitro testing, which uses whole, living animals, is often employed for toxicology testing to determine the hazardous nature of a product (Murthy, 2007). In-vitro, which uses components of a whole animal such as cells, provides a positive alternative to in-vivo and highly invasive testing (Murthy, 2007).Piersma (2006) reports that there are currently three validated alternatives in developmental toxicology testing. The embryonic stem cell test, the limb bud micromass, and the rat post implantation whole embryo culture (Piersma, 2006). Piersma (2006) states these three tests are validated however their application is still under discussion.Furthermore, Computer Models can be used to simulate diseases and to help scientists understand different substances and their effects. The models are based on existing information and data, and can help researchers with information specifically relating to humans. Rosenkranz (1988) reports on Computer-Automated Structure Evaluation System (CASE) and states CASE can correctly predict carcinogenicity. Attention has also been given to the consideration of existing data and how such data can be better utilised and shared to avoid unnecessary future experimentations. It is often found that pharmaceutical and chemical compani es’ exclude from the public domain their data from experiments as a means of market competitiveness. Exclusion of such data leads to repetition of animal experiments and slower product development.In 2006 the EU finalised new legislation on the control of hazardous chemicals. The new regulation termed REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) is the new system for controlling chemicals in Europe, which became law in the UK on 1 June 2007. It aims to better protect people and animals from dangerous chemicals (Health and Safety Executive, 2010). The regulation includes mandatory sharing of animal test data, which means companies registering the same chemicals are obliged to share their data, and if animal testing is required by REACH, only one of the registrants will be allowed to conduct such experiments. In addition the regulation heavily promotes the use of alternatives to animal models.Summary and conclusionThere remain many unanswered questions regarding the ethics and validity of animal experimentation. The welfare implications are clear and we know animals are suffering in laboratories, however we do not know if this is justified by the scientific findings. Animal sentience confirms an animal’s ability to suffer. However anima l sentience is poorly understood across the taxa.Currently only unequivocal scientific acceptance of sentience exists for vertebrate species and some invertebrates.Directive 2010/63/EU protects the welfare of animals used for experimental or other scientific purpose within the European Union, and this Directive includes cyclostomes and cephalopods, which is a great advancement for animal welfare. However as discussed previously we need to ensure legislation remains within working limits for the research bodies and scientific organisations reliant on animals for experimental purpose, as the risk of overly stringent legislation can do more harm than good. Ifdeemed unworkable it may simply mean these experiments are moved to countries with less stringent, or worse, no legislation governing animal welfare inadvertently making conditions worse for animals.Scientific evidence is demonstrating poor validity of the animal models and reports such as the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council 2011 report which questions the validity of the primate model for testing, corroborates this. As the validity continues to be questioned, there needs to be a positive shift in focus towards alternative methods, some of which were briefly discussed above. In conclusion it is seemingly possible for a future of scientific advancement and improvements to human heath and welfare, without compromising animal welfare.ReferencesAnzai, T., Shiina, T., Kimura, N., Yanagiya, K., Kohara, S., Shigenari, A.,… Inoko, H. (2003). Comparative sequencing of human and chimpanzee MHC class I regions unveils insertions/deletions as the major path to genomic divergence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100, 7708–7713.Animal Procedures Committee (2002). The use of primates under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (1986). Analysis of current trends with particular reference to regulatory toxicology.Australia Environment Act (2000). Codes of practice: General Principles for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes. Retrieved 18th April, 2012, from.act.auBailey, J. (2005). Non-human primates in medical research and drug development: a critical review. Biogenic Amines, 19, 235-255.Balcombe, J., Barnard, N., & Sandusky, C. (2004). Laboratory Routines Cause Animal Stress. Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, 43, 42-51. Baumans, V. (2004). Use of animals in experimental research: an ethical dilemma? Gene Therapy, 11, 64-66.Boyle, E. (2009). Neuroscience and Animal Sentience. Neuroscience, (March), 1-12. Retrieved March 13, 2012 from/includes/documents/cm_docs/2009/b/boyle_2009_neuros cience_and_animal_sentience.pdfBroom, D.M., & Johnson, K. (1993). Stress and animal welfare. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Cáceres, M., Lachuer, J., Zapala, M., & Redmondt, J. (2003). Elevated gene expression levels distinguish human from non-human primate brains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 100, 13030-13035. Canadian Council on Animal Care (1993). Guide to the care and Use of Experimental Animals. Retrieved April 18, 2012, fromac.ca/Documents/Standards/Guidelines/Experimental_Animals_Vol 1.pdfCarlsson, H., Schapiro, S., Farah, I., & Hau, J. (2004). Use of primates in research: A global overview. American Journal of Primatology, 63(4), 225-237.Crawford, R. L. (2012). Animal Welfare Act Quick Reference Guides. Retrieved April 18, 2012, from /awic/pubs/Legislat/awabrief.shtml Dandie, G. W. (2007). ANZCCART and our strategies for sharing information. AATEX, 14, Special Issue, 299-301.Darwin, C. R. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.。
世界动物卫生组织(OIE)简介.
世界动物卫生组织(法语：Office International Des Epizooties，OIE)世界动物卫生组织是一个政府间组织，它是由28个国家于1924年签署的一项国际协议产生的。
到1999年12月份，OIE成员国已经达到155个。
世界动物卫生组织的职能世界动物卫生组织的职能主要包括以下3方面:-向各国政府通告全世界范围内发生的动物疫情以及疫情的起因，并通告控制这些疾病的方法。
-在全球范围内，就动物疾病的监测和控制进行国际研究。
-协调各成员国在动物和动物产品贸易方面的法规和标准。
世界动物卫生组织发布的国际标准·动物卫生法典Animal Health Code -- 哺乳动物、鸟类及蜜蜂的国际动物卫生法典·诊断与预防接种Diagnostics & vaccines -- 诊断检验及预防接种标准手册，1996年第三版·水生动物法典Aquatic code -- 国际水生动物法典·水生动物手册Aquatic manual -- 水生动物疾病诊断手册·试剂Reagents -- 国际参考标准试剂世界动物卫生组织成员名单(155个)世界动物卫生组织(OIE)动物疾病名单(截止2000年8月30日)A类动物疾病(List A)A类动物疾病是具有极为迅速的扩散潜力、且扩散与国家边界无关，在动物和动物产品的国际贸易中十分重要的，其传播将造成严重的社会和生态危害的可传播动物疾病。
按照国际动物卫生法典1.1.3.2款and 1.1.3.3款，各成员需向国际动物卫生组织(OIE)通报其境内A类动物疾病的情况。
口蹄疫Foot and mouth disease水泡性口腔炎Vesicular stomatitis猪水泡病Swine vesicular disease牛瘟Rinderpest小反刍兽瘟Peste des petits ruminants牛传染性胸膜肺炎Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia结节性疹Lumpy skin disease裂谷热Rift Valley fever蓝舌病Bluetongue绵羊痘及山羊痘Sheep pox and goat pox非洲马疫African horse sickness非洲猪瘟African swine fever古典猪瘟Classical swine fever高致病性禽类流感Highly pathogenic avian influenza鸡新城病Newcastle diseaseB类动物疾病(List B)B类动物疾病是在动物和动物产品的国际贸易中重要的，其传播将造成社会和生态危害的可传播动物疾病。
国际动物卫生信息.doc
第53期中国动物卫生与流行病学中心国际兽医事务处 2 0 15年4月13日本期概要> 4月9日，越南南部芹苴市()丰田县()的1个村庄又发生1起H5N1亚型咼致病性禽流感疫情z65 0只家禽感染,399只家禽死亡，501只家禽被销毁.自2 014年1 2月至今, 越南已在6个地区发生8起H 5N1亚型高致病性禽流感疫情。
> 4月1 0日，蒙古中央省()的一个养猪场发生1起古典猪瘟疫情,53头猪感染死亡，638头猪被销毁。
4月10日，克罗地亚杜布罗夫斯克-内雷特瓦县()又发生8起1型蓝舌病疫情,2 8只山羊、1只绵羊和8头牛感染.自2014年12月至今，克罗地亚已在2个县发生9起1型蓝舌病疫情。
A 4月10日，克罗地亚杜布罗夫斯克一内雷特瓦县()拉斯托沃岛()的一家农场又发生1起4型蓝舌病疫情,3只山羊感染。
克罗地亚于2014年1 0月复发蓝舌病至今，已在4个县发生7 7起4型蓝舌病疫情。
咼致病性禽流感疫情/ 6 5 0只家禽感染z 3 9 9只家禽死越南继续发生H5N1亚型高致病性禽流感疫情2 0 15年4月9日，越南农业与农村部向后续通报,越南南部芹苴市（）丰田县（）1个村庄又发生1起H5N1亚型亡,5 0 1只家禽被销毁。
2014年1 2月12日至今，越南已在芹苴市（）、永隆省（）、茶荣省（）、广义省（）、金瓯省（）和朔庄省（）等6个地区发生8起H5N1亚型高致病性禽流感疫情・信息源：蒙古发生古典猪瘟疫情2015年4月10日，蒙古与农业部向后续通报,中央省i养猪场发生1起古典猪瘟疫情,53头猪感染死亡,638头猪被销毁。
信息源：克罗地亚继续发生1型蓝舌病疫情2015年4月10日，克罗地亚XX兽医局向通报，杜布罗夫斯克■内雷特瓦县（）又发生8起1型蓝舌病疫情，28只山羊、］.只绵羊和8头牛感染，传染源尚不确走。
目前当地政府已将病死绵羊销毁，对发病区域及易感动物进行了消毒,并控制该区域家畜调运。
世界动物卫生组织（OIE）动物卫生信息的接受与共享方式
世界动物卫生组织（OIE）动物卫生信息的接受与共享方式世界动物卫生组织（OIE）在90年代初将“互联网”运用于国际动物卫生信息，在积极尝鲜的背后，体现着OIE对“透明度”的追求和对新技术作用的敏锐认知。
OIE获得动物卫生信息的主要分为被动接收和主动抓取两种方式。
被动接收。
被动接收即由OIE成员主动提交的通报信息，是OIE 最主要的信息获取方式。
主要由成员通过全球动物卫生信息填报系统（WAHIS）填报，涉及信息包括水生、陆生、野生动物疫情，陆生、水产养殖量，兽医人员队伍、实验室信息、兽用生物制品产量等多个方面。
具体报告方式分两类：对于突发疫情等早期预警类信息，成员需在确诊24小时内向OIE作紧急通报，此后每周做后续通报，直至最终报告（疫情被扑灭或变为地方流行）。
除需紧急通报以外的其他信息属常规监视内容，以半年报或年报形式上报。
如果某成员未按以上规定完成通报，OIE信息部会发信督促其履行义务。
主动抓取。
尽管OIE采取了多种措施促进成员通报，但并不是所有成员都能积极通报，也并不总能及时通报，使OIE处于信息缺失或滞后的境地。
为改变这一状况，OIE建立了动物卫生信息主动抓取机制，并于2002年开发出非官方信息抓取系统。
该系统主要用于发现未经成员官方通报的突发动物卫生事件。
OIE在多方获取动物卫生信息的同时，也通过各种方式分享所掌握的信息。
主要包括以下几种方式。
网站发布。
全球动物卫生信息查询系统（WAHID）是OIE发布动物卫生信息的最主要渠道。
该系统信息均为经各成员代表确认的官方信息。
WAHID免费开放，并提供多种查询统计方式，部分信息还可生成统计分析图、地理分布图和方位示意图。
目前，WAHID可向全球用户提供自2005年以后的全部信息，涵盖180个成员的119种动物疫病。
定向推送。
OIE在收到成员紧急通报且经核实后，会将该信息及时编制成预警信息，通过既定邮件系统直接送达各成员。
相关信息分为两类，一类是风险提示信息，发向与该成员接壤或有贸易关联的成员，另一类为通报信息，发往其他OIE成员。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
谢谢
11、越是没有本领的就越加自命不凡。——邓拓 12、越是无能的人，越喜欢挑剔别人的错儿。——爱尔兰 13、知人者智，自知者明。胜人者有力，自胜者强。——老子 14、意志坚强的人能把世界放在手中像泥块一样任意揉捏。——歌德 15、最具挑战性的挑战莫过于提升自我。——迈克尔·F·斯特利
世界动物卫生组织国际标准
1、合法而稳定的权力在使用得当时很 少遇到 抵抗。 ——塞 ·约翰 逊 2、权力会使人渐渐失去温厚善良的美 德。— —伯克
3、最大限度地行使权力、权力会奴化一切。——塔西佗
5、虽然权力是一头固执的熊，可是金 子可以 拉着它 的鼻子 走。— —莎士 比