The document discusses pig farming and diseases that affect it in Uganda. It notes that pig farming is increasing in Uganda due to government support and its benefits for smallholders. However, free range pig farming leads to high disease risks. It then summarizes the key diseases like African swine fever, porcine cysticercosis and intestinal worms. It also lists risk factors for porcine cysticercosis and details current control practices in Uganda, which have limitations. It concludes by discussing additional control measures used elsewhere like community sanitation programs, public education, pig vaccination and coordinated mass treatment of humans and pigs.

1. “Workshop: In-depth smallholder pig value chain
assessment and preliminary identification of best-
bet interventions, Kampala, 9-11 April 2013”
Diseases of economic and zoonotic importance in pig
farming in Uganda: Control practices, successes, failures
and the way forward
Zachary Nsadha

2. The drives for pig farming;
 Pig farming and consumption of pork is on the
increase (Waiswa et al 2007, Ampaire and Rothchild
2010)
 There is deliberate effort by Govnt, NGO eg Vedeco to
support pig farming as an enterprise (MAAIF policy
2004, www.naads.or.ug)

3. MERITS FOR PIG AS AN ENTERPRISE FOR THE
POOR
 Can multiply very quickly ; capable of 6-10 viable
piglets per furrowing, can have 2 viable furrowing per
year.
 Can grow to market size in a short time; 5-6 months a
pig can be ready for market slaughter
 Can thrive in low-in-put systems; it is omnivorous,
complete scavenger to the extent of being coporophagic
in the rural setting, most of the pigs are kept by
the small holder at free range system

4. DISADVANTAGES OF KEEPING PIGS AT FREE
RANGE PIG
 Pigs are at high risk of acquiring of diseases.
 production limiting, such as the helminths Ascaris suis and
Trichuris suis (Stewart and Hale, 1988, Nansen and
Roepstorff, 1999)
 the highly pathogenic (fatal) virus causing African swine fever
(Bengis et al., 2002),
 have serious public health consequences,
(a) Cysticercosis caused by the zoonotic helminth Taenia solium
(Pondja et al., 2010, Sikasunge et al., 2007
(b) Trichenellosis (Schuppers et al., 2010),
(c) Toxoplasmosis (van der Giessen et al., 2007)

5. IMPORTANT DISEASES TO PIG FARMING IN
UGANDA
 African swine fever: very pathogenic and fatal
causing a lot of mortalities
 Porcine cysticercosis: A zoonotic disease causing
loss of income and devastating disease in the
human (neurocysticercosis)
 Intestinal Worms: cause retarded growth and
poor returns from the pig enterprise.
 Ectoparasites and mange: retarded growth in
young ones

6. PORCINE CYSTICERCOSIS IN
UGANDA
Porcine cysticercosis is a confirmed disease entity in Uganda
 Slaughter slab surveys: in Moyo district;33.5%, 34.1% and
44.9% for Moyo town council, Moyo and Metu sub-counties
respectively (Anyanzo, 1999).
 Wambizi pig abattior 9.4% (Kisakye and Masaba 2002)
 42 % sero-prevalence at Wambizi (unpublished information )
 Field surveys:
 8.9% (Ag ELISA) in Kamuli and Kaliro (Waiswa et al, 2009)
 , 9.4%, 7.7%, 8.2%, 6.9%, 0%, 12.9% and 4.1% (lingual )
Oyam, Apac, amolator, Kaberamaido, Kayunga, Kamuli and
Kaliro (Nsadha et al 2010).
 (AgELISA) 27%, 11%, 14.2% and 15% Arua, Busia, Kibale
and Masaka to be respectively (Nsadha et al, 2011).

7. RISK FACTORS FOR ACQUISITION OF PORCINE
CYSTICERCOSIS
1. PIG HUSBANDRY PRACTICES
 Intensive pig keeping is 2% of pigs in schools and religious
institutions
 The mode of keeping pigs depends on the crop season. In the Lake
Kyoga basin, During planting and growing, there is restriction
during the day and most pigs are tethered on to pastures.
 80% of the pigs are under the intermittence of free range and
tethering. During fallowing almost all pigs are at free range all the
time (Nsadha et al 2010)
 In soroti distrcit 48% of the pigs were under the tethering, 46%
were at free range and only 6% were kept intensively (Ziruntunda
2011)
 Tethering of pigs is done to the bushes where open –air defecation
is carried out by humans thus pigs can feed on infected materials

9. 2. PRACTICES OF THE REGULATORY AUTHORITIES IN
LIVESTOCK MARKETS

10.  Pigs diagnosed positive (lingual cysts) are rejected by the inspector
 sale of such pigs is not allowed in the market
the affected farmers are advised to take back the pigs to their homes
(ochero and awelo livestock markets).
 The farmers whose pigs were rejected were observed to take away
their pigs very quickly before fellow community members can get to
know about the rejection.
Clandestine sale/slaughter is the likely fate of such pigs

11. 3. LACK OF PORK INSPECTION DURING CLANDESTINE
SLAUGHTER.
 90% of the pork sold in the villages is not inspected (Nsadha et al 2010).
Clandestine slaughters in ungazzted places makes it hard for vet. personnel
to follow the slaughters (Dr. Kyokwijuka personal communication).
human taeniosis infections are very much likely
 4. Lack of enforceable legislations for destruction of infected pigs; Sale of
infected pigs with the communities is a common occurence.
the ‘let me not make loss voice’ rides the day in the communities
5. Poor conceptions/perceptions among the communities
 Only 12 % of the respondent knew that pigs get infected by eating human
feaces.
 Only 16 % knew that humans get infected by eating infected pork.
 Because of ignorance, Communities can not practice preventative measures
to limit transmission of infections to pigs/humans.
self evaluation and preventative measures are key to disease prevention in
communities

12. The “sieve” at wambizi is likely to be very porous
6. Poor pork inspection practices at slughter places

13. 7. Improper human feaces disposal
In the rural settings of Uganda, 20% of the households
lack toilet facilities (UBOS Report 2002).
Soroti District 54% of the households do not have latrines
(Zirintunda 2011).
Poor commitment to use latrine is a common occurrence ,
38% in Adumi S/C (Arua) of the latrines were not being used
ie lacked indicators of latrine use
There is a lot of open-air defecation in the rural communities in
Uganda

15. 8. Poor handling of pigs and pork

16. (a) Very unhygienic handling of pigs/pork at slaughter expose to all
sorts of contamination
(b)Poor cooking is determined by some factors;
(i) demand of the day; the higher the demand the less
concentration to cook properly.
(ii)the fuel source available; very poor fuel to give enough heat.
(iii)the state of consciousness of the consumers ; most of the pork
in the rural areas is eaten at drinking points. The seller may release poorly
cooked pork to the drunk customers or those in transit who are in a hurry.
under cooking is common in most of the rural pork joints
and those pork roasting areas along the road side of
international trade routes-transmission to humans

17. 9. SOURCES OF WATER FOR DOMESTIC AND ANIMAL USE.
. In the rural Uganda 44% of the households do not have access to
safe water (UBOS, population and housing census 2002).
. In the Lake Kyoga basin, 60% of the households fetch only
drinking water from boreholes. Most of other water for doemastic
use comes from unsafe sources (Nsadha et al 2010)
.Drainage of feaces into the water bodies is known and the first
rains after a dry spell are called names indicative of washing away
feaces into the water holding bodies (Ogwa-cet -Langi, koth
marapena orwok ceth-Japadhola (personal communications from
Drs. Agwai& Okuni J).
This is a very dangerous route of infection where man can easily get
Taenia egg infections to cause human cysticercosis

18. CONTROL OF PORCINE CYSTICERCOSIS IN UGANDA
1. Lingual inspection; this is the control carried out in livestock
markets eg Ochero, awelo and Karachi (Amolator and
Kaberamaido)
Success; it helps in identifying infected pigs that a removed from
the normal trade chain. It also alerts the Veterinary and public
health personnel about the disease.
Failure;
i) it is just a simple whistle blower on very shallow approach since
very many cysticercotic pigs may be lingual negative.
ii) The rejected pigs are left with the farmers who have no
enforceable obligation to destroy the pigs hence clandestine
slaughter/sale to unsuspecting community members is the
immediate option to the rural poor farmers.
Clandestine slaughters have been observed to help in transmission of
the disease (Praet et al 2010, Zoli et al 2003 Cysticercosis working
group Peru, 1993)

19. 2. Pork inspection;
Success; is a regular activity at only one place in Uganda (Wambizi )pig
slaughter house. Less than 0.1 % of the slaughters are diagnosed have
cysticercosis at meat inspection per year
Failure; the inspection being carried out is very superficial and can not
detect lightly infected pigs
The control measures being used in uganda help only to stop the
transmission from a very small proportion of infection. There is need
to try to prevent transmission from all the known avenues

20. CONTROL MEASURES USED ELSEWHERE OUTSIDE UGANDA
1. Community led total sanitation (CLTS).
(Kamal Kar, Institute of development studies University of Sussex Brighton
UK.)
 The communities are made to under go attitude and behavioral change
towards sanitation .
 Awareness is carried out and the members of the community designs the way
to stop the human fecal disposal
 It is assumed to stimulate the construction and use of latrines in a cascade
mode.
 The community tends to police the activities.
 It is being promoted by international NGO eg Plan international , UNCEF,
WaterAid etc (www.community ledsanitation.org)
It has bee tried;
Kenema district , Sierra leone. has attained ODF status
Tubmanburg, Liberia started and target is ODF by June 2013

21. 2. Public health and pig management” education interventions.
Is where there is aggressive education campain in many of the
communities; markets, schools, workshops etc.
 Educational materials eg videos, leaflets, posters,
booklets and training manuals are given to
communities.
 The training materials are made more of pictorial than
text so that they can lend easily to even the illiterate
members of the communities.
 The leaflets and booklets are distributed to the
household for daily references.

22. The communites are advised to follow/adhere to the eight
cysticercosis fighter principles;
(a)build pig pens and never allow pigs out of the pig pen.
(b)Dig and use an enclosed latrine with a closing door for
all human defecations.
(c)Immediately dispose children’s’ feaces in pit larine.
(d)Thoroughly wash hands after latrine and before eating
anything.
(e)Boil water for domestic use.
(f)Never eat or sell infected pork.
(g)Consult a livestock extension officer whenever signs of
cysticercosis are seen in pork.
(h)Consult medical services if signs of worms or epilepsy
happen in any member of the household.
Note: incentives (pig feeds, compensation for the
cysticercotic pig) are needed if the rural poor
farmers are to comply with the protocols used in this
approach) (Ngowi et al 2008)

23. 3.Chemotherapy to pigs
Oxfenbendazole and albendazole have ability to
kill the cysts of Taenia solium with in the body of
the infected pigs.
This can deter infecting the human.
It can be used to treat (pre-slaughter) infected
pigs before they can be slaughtered for human
consumption.(Pondja et al 2012).

24. 4. Combined mass human and porcine chemotherapy.
Mass chemotherapy (praziquantel) for intestinal Taenia
worms in the humans
 Mass chemotherapy for porcine cystocercosis
(oxfenbendazole) is a possible control strategy.
The mass treatment in the humans is assumed to clear
the humans of the Taenia solium worms which reduces
the environmental contaminations hence less infective
materials for the pigs.
The mass treatment in the pigs is assumed to clear pigs
of the larvae of Taenia solium which reduces infective
materials for the human beings.
 It also has an economic value in that the porcine meat
is cleared of the cysts hence less condemnations of pork
(Garcia et al, 2006)

25.  There is a possibility of mass contamination of the
environment due to the mass expulsion of Taenia from the humans
at the same time, if open-air defecation is carried out
 Inflammatory reactions occur to the cysts in the muscles
which can make the meat unsightly and unsuitable for human
consumption for approximately 6 months (Sikassunge et al 2008).
 Treated pigs remain susceptible and re-infections can
occur and the re-infected pigs can transmit the parasite with in
short time.
 Coordinating the giving the drugs and slaughter before re-
infection can be very problematic and can fail the exercise (Assana
et al 2010).
Disadvantages;

26. 5. Vaccination of pigs
Vaccination was identified as valuable approach for the control of
cysticercosis by preventing transmission of Taenia solium (Lightowlers
1999).
TSOL18 vaccine has been proven effective in trials in Mexico, Peru,
Cameroon and Honduras with 99.3-100% protection against
experimental challenge infections (Flisser et al 2004, Gonzalez et al 2005
Lightowlers 2006). Successful Field trial has been carried in cameroon
Assana et al 2010)

27. Good and effective control program will involve a
multi-disciplinary and multilevel approach due to the
complex epidemiology of Taenia solium. This will
demand full cooperation of medical, public health
workers, veterinarians and the communities . All need
to be working in synergistic approach for proper
control/reduction in the occurrence of Taenia solium
cysticercosis. Laxity of any of the actors will fail any
control program. (Murell and Pawlowski 2005)
General conclusion about control of porcine cysticercosis

28. AFRICAN SWINE FEVER
African swine fever (ASF) is
caused by the African swine
fever virus of the asfivirus.

29. ASF TRANSMISSION
CYCLES
ASF Infected pig infects
in-contact pig
Domestic cycle
pig
pig
pig
Soft
tick
ASF virus Infected soft
infects in-contact pig in
pens
Intermediate cycle
ASF virus circulates
among soft ticks and in-
contact wild pigs
Interface grounds for wild and
domestic pigs
sylvatic cycle
Soft tick
Wild pig

30. BURDEN OF ASF
Date District
•3/02/2006 Adjumani
•10/05/2006 Moyo
•31/06/2006 Wakiso
•24/10/2006 Kiboga
•31/10/2008 Manafa
•12/12/2008 Kapchorwa
•20/04/2009 Nebbi
•26/04/2010 Kasese
•15/06/2010 Moyo
•30/08/2010 Gulu
•21/10/2010 Gulu
•08/04/2011 Masindi
•09/05/2011 Nebbi
•4/05/2011 Kyankwanzi
•15/06/2011 Nakasongola
•16/09/2011 Lwengo
•
 Date District
 17/11/2011 Adjumani
 28/11/2011 Wakiso
 14/12/2011 Kabaale
 20/08/2012 Buikwe
 17/09/2012 kyankwanzi
 24/09/2012 Z o mbo
 20/11/2012 Kabala
 05/06/2012 Kabarole
 10/05/2012 Moyo
 13/11/2012 Kyenjojo
 21/01/2013 Kiboga
 04/02/2013 Nebbi

31. Impact of ASF
It is endemic in Uganda
Many mortalities in any out break (70-100%
A lot of resources wasted in regular surveillance
The depopulate strategy costs framers the investment
Discourages breeding strategy

32. Control of ASF in Uganda
Halt to the movement pigs and products
to and from areas of out break.
Rapid slaughters of all the contact pigs to
the affected flocks

33. Proposed control of ASF
 Improve production systems ; housing, hygiene, avoid uncooked swill
Impose well legislated/ enforceable quarantines
Control of pig trade; health ASF pathogen free pigs are allowed for trade.
Prevent possible interaction domestic pigs with wild suids.
Eradication of ticks in sties before introducing new pigs.
Proper basic bio-security (footbaths, restricted visitation to the farm)
 Sale of bush meat (wild siud) be done in approved safe ASF proof ways.
Continued surveillance, eradication of infected by total slaughter of the
sick and those in contact pigs. This needs some organ eg the state to put
in place compaciatory effort for the farmers to have full compliance and
cooperation.
Total confinement total closed system where influence of pigs/other
animals is minimized should be encouraged

34. Pig holding
area
Bare ground
for daily
sweeping
Most peripheral
perimeterMiddle perimeter
Surface for
tick control
Entry/exist
Disinfectant
Foot bath
Proposed enclosure for ASF control

35. Foot and mouth disease in pigs in Uganda
This is not considered as a threat to the pig
industry. The role of pigs in the cycles of FMD
observed in the country is not known
(Drs. Kyokwojuka and Asimwe A. MAAIF)

36. Intestinal worms in pigs in Uganda
Nematode exist in pigs in Uganda (Nissen et al 2011,
Waiswa et al 2007.
Impact;
Some are zoonotic A. suum, T.suis
Control ; de-worming with antihelmentics
Advice; indigenous Traditional knowledge on worm
control be explored (Prof. Ejobi)

37. Ecto-parasites in pigs in Uganda
Mange lice, fleas, and jiggers are common in pigs in Uganda
Impact; poor growth
Control; acaricides and ivermectin is used