This article is part of our special report One Health approach: Time for implementation.
The COVID-19 crisis has shown there is no way to ensure human and animal health without broader consideration of environmental health, Monique Eloit, Director-General of the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH, formerly OIE), told EURACTIV in an interview.
The One Health approach was initially coined in the context of zoonosis, but now the concept has become much broader. Is this a good thing, or should we take the idea back to its roots?
It’s true that initially, the One Health approach was seen as strictly related to human and animal health and was not so much taking into account environmental health.
One of the lessons of the COVID-19 crisis is that it became evident to a broader group that one sector should not work in isolation but that all sectors involved in health have to work together. This should not be limited to the strategy of a single organisation: this approach also needs to be applied by policymakers and resource partners to fund any action plan.
The environment is not an additional component but an integral component for achieving better global health. We cannot merely involve human and animal health without considering a more holistic approach considering their interdependence with the environment.
Focusing now on antimicrobial resistance (AMR), this is heavily discussed at the international level, but how do you see the debate and action at the national level?
The discussion at the national level on AMR is exactly the same as the one we have at the global level. The difference is that at the national level, countries not only have to discuss AMR strategies but also need to ensure their concrete implementation in the field. However, in many countries, there are additional concerns that we do not experience here in Europe.
Here, our main challenge is how to use better and control medicines, but the regulation related to veterinary or human medicines is well respected. But many countries from other regions face challenges pertaining to the black market, counterfeit products and illegal import and export of medicines.
They also have to address the lack of awareness of farmers, doctors, veterinarians or professionals concerning what AMR is, how we can fight it, and how we can use alternatives to antibiotics, such as vaccines or better biosecurity practices for instance.
As a holistic approach, One health involves many actors from different fields. How can we ensure better coordination between these?
For several years, we have had a Tripartite alliance between the WHO [World Health Organisation], the FAO [Food and Agricultural Organisation of the UN] and WOAH. More recently, UNEP [United Nations Environment Programme] has joined us to form the Quadripartite.
Over the past months, we have developed a joint plan of action, whose first component is strengthening health services. Through this component, we’ll see how we can better develop relationships at the national level between the different departments involving human health, animal health and environmental protection.
The idea is to work together to advocate at the national level, with policymakers and national authorities, to see how they can better coordinate and collaborate in responding to shared health challenges.
Of course, additional factors will also need to be taken into account, notably, investment in human resources, education, awareness, and training for health professionals.
On the human health side of things, there’s a lot of discussion about incentivising research on new antibiotics. Is this also a discussion in the world of animal health?
Of course, indeed, if you look at the strategy of the World Health Organisation (WHO) or the global action plan on AMR. If you look at the one of the World Organisation for Animal Health, you will see that they have more or less the same structure, as they were developed in parallel in the framework of our One Health collaboration.
This is because we share the same objectives and challenges – prudent use of antimicrobials, but we also look at alternatives for the future. How can we better develop new vaccines, new molecules or alternatives to antibiotics?
In this context, collaborating with the pharmaceutical industry is also crucial: pharmaceutical companies are critical partners in researching and developing alternatives to antibiotics.
At the EU level, there is currently a controversy about colistin and the list of antibiotics that are used for human health. What is your take on this situation?
It is true that several antibiotics, including colistin, are considered ‘critical’ for treating human infectious diseases and are vital to preserving their efficacy.
Over the years, we have developed a list of antibiotics that are not recommended to be used in animals. With this list, we aim to guide countries in adopting appropriate practices to preserve the efficacy of antibiotics that are critical to human health.
[Edited by Alice Taylor]