|
|
|
|
|
¾ß»ýµ¿¹°ÀÇÇÐ ¼Ò½Ä ¹× ÀÚ·á |
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
¿î¿µÀÚ |
2005-02-15 13:27:23 | Hit : 12064 | Vote : 5044 |
|
|
|
|
Subject |
|
[ÀÚ·á] ³ì»ö ¼öÀÇ»ç |
|
|
|
|
Á¦¸ñ : "Should the Vet, and Not Just the Wellies, be Green?"
The paper by Marc Artois and colleagues in this issue of The Veterinary Journal (Artois et al., 2001) lays down a challenge to veterinarians individually and as a profession. That infections of wildlife can have
consequences for public and/or livestock health is a matter of fact. That infectious diseases of wildlife can have conservation consequences is equally obvious. Furthermore, these are issues of great public interest – badgers and bovine TB and the role of
wildlife in FMD transmission are both politically charged issues in the UK as we write. Yet the scientific effort to understand infections in wildlife is (with a few exceptions, of course) often small-scale,
reactive and devoid of veterinary input. Worse still, when veterinary input is there, it is often perceived as being biased towards support of the animal industries rather than independent and science-based.
Àüü ¹®¼ º¸±â : ¹Ù·Î°¡±â |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
151-742 ¼¿ïƯº°½Ã °ü¾Ç±¸ ½Å¸²9µ¿ »ê56-1 ¼¿ï´ëÇб³ ¼öÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ 85µ¿ 802È£
Tel 02-888-2744, Fax 02-888-2754, E-mail cgrb@cgrb.org
Copyright © 2002-2004 CGRB All Rights Reserved |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|