[sci.med] HICN232 News Part 2/5

ATW1H%ASUACAD.BITNET@oac.ucla.edu (Dr David Dodell) (09/05/89)

--- begin part 2 of 5 cut here ---
to-door vaccination  teams  in  high-risk  communities  have  administered  an
additional  2000  doses of vaccine.  Hospital emergency department vaccination
clinics have been set up in four locations.

Reported by:  RM Krieg,  PhD,  RW Biek,  MD,  CR Catania,  JW Masterson,  MPH,
Chicago Dept of Health;  R March, Immunization Program, RJ Martin, DVM, Div of
Infectious Diseases,  Illinois Dept of Public  Health.  Div  of  Immunization,
Center for Prevention Svcs, CDC.

Editorial   Note:   This  outbreak  is  similar  to  others  among  inner-city
populations in the United States in that it  involves  primarily  unvaccinated
black  and  Hispanic preschool-aged children (1-3).  The Chicago Department of
Health has implemented aggressive outbreak strategies directed toward reaching
the highest-risk  group,  i.e.,  unvaccinated  preschool-aged  children.  Such
children are also likely to be a reservoir for transmitting virus to other age
groups.  As part of the extensive outbreak-control efforts, children are being
vaccinated  in  emergency  departments.  Provision  of  vaccine  to inner-city
children who use these facilities for their  primary  source  of  health  care
should  help  to  increase vaccination levels in patients who receive sporadic
health care and may reduce the transmission of measles in emergency department
settings.

References

1. CDC. Measles--Dade County, Florida. MMWR 1987;36:45-8.

2. CDC. Measles--Los Angeles County, California, 1988. MMWR 1989;38:49-52,57.

3. Markowitz LE, Preblud SR, Orenstein WA, et al.  Patterns of transmission in
measles outbreaks in the United States,  1985-1986.  N Engl J Med 1989;320:75-
85.

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 11
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

                                Current Trends
     National Mortality Followback Survey: Characteristics of Persons Who
            Died from Diseases of the Heart -- United States, 1986

    The National Mortality Followback  Survey  (NMFS)  is  a  periodic  survey
conducted  by  CDC's  National Center for Health Statistics and is designed to
collect detailed information not otherwise available on a sample of decedents.
This report describes the health and financial status of persons who died from
heart disease in 1986 and illustrates the usefulness of the NMFS in addressing
public health issues such as the financial burden of chronic disease.
    The 1986 NMFS is a stratified random sample of 18,733  (approximately  1%)
deaths from all causes among U.S.  residents greater than or equal to 25 years
of age (1). Of these, 6665 were reported as dying from heart disease.  Next of
kin  or  others  familiar  with the decedent's lifestyle were asked to provide
information concerning use of medical and other care facilities  in  the  last
year of the decedent's life;  sources of payment of medical care;  impairments
in daily activities;  medical  conditions;  health  practices  and  behaviors;
social and economic characteristics; and the identity of all health facilities
in which the decedent stayed during the last year of life.
    Diseases  of  the  heart (International Classification of Diseases,  Ninth
Revision 390-398,  402,  404-429) are the most common cause of  death  in  the
United  States.  In  1986,  765,490  deaths  (36%  of all deaths in the United
States) were reported to have resulted from heart disease (1),  compared  with
an estimated 759,431 deaths based on the above sample.

                               Financial Status

    At  death,  based on estimates from the NMFS,  67,650 (18%) men and 13,240
(5%) women who died from heart disease were employed (Table 1).  In  the  last
year  of life,  women were more likely than men to have had low family income:
53% of women with less than $9000 compared with 35% of men,  and 16% of  women
with greater than or equal to $25,000 compared with 21% of men.
    Reported  family  income reflects the combined resources of all members of
the family unit.  Therefore, decedent living arrangements had a direct bearing
on  family  income.  Thirty-two  percent  of women who died from heart disease
reportedly lived alone or with unrelated persons in the last year of life.  An
additional  22%  had lived in a nursing home,  other health-care facility,  or
institution during this time. By contrast, less than 20% of men lived alone or
with unrelated persons, and 8% lived in institutional settings before death.
    One measure of decedents' financial status was the total  value  of  their
assets  (e.g.,   home,  cash,  stocks,  bonds,  cars,  jewelry,  and  business
interests) at death.  Women were more likely to  have  had  assets  less  than
$5000; 23% of women had no assets (Table 1). Women (24%) were less likely than
men (35%) to have had assets greater than or equal to $50,000 at death.

                                 Health Status

    In  addition  to  heart  disease,  many decedents had other serious health
problems, including high blood pressure,  stroke,  angina pectoris,  diabetes,
cancer,  asthma,  and  other  lung  conditions  (Table  2).  Except for angina
pectoris and other lung conditions,  women were more likely to have had  these
health problems.
    More  women  (45%) than men (27%) were reported to have received help from
others or used special equipment in  performing  activities  of  daily  living
(e.g.,  walking,  eating,  bathing,  dressing, or using the toilet) (Table 2).

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 12
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

Forty-five percent of women and 33%  of  men  also  received  help  with  home
medical care (e.g.,  taking medicines or pills,  receiving injections,  having
bandages changed, and receiving nursing care).  Health-Care Use and Sources of
Payment
    The 1986 NMFS assessed whether the decedent had been an overnight  patient
in  a  health  facility  during the last year of life.  A larger proportion of
women than men used hospitals or nursing homes,  other health-care facilities,
and home hospice care.
    Medicare was reported as the major health payment source for approximately
half  the  decedents (Table 2).  For women,  the next most frequently reported
payment source was self/family (14%) or private  insurance/health  maintenance
organizations (HMOs) (14%).  In comparison, 12% of men used their own or their
family's funds and 23% used private insurance/HMOs.  An estimated 42% of women
and  46% of men spent less than $500 for their medical care.  Eighteen percent
of women and 11% of men spent greater than or equal  to  $5000  of  their  own
money.

Reported  by:  Office of Vital and Health Statistics Systems,  National Center
for Health Statistics, CDC.

Editorial Note: Mortality followback surveys collect information not typically
available from death certificates and therefore enable investigators to  learn
more  about  the  characteristics  of decedents and the circumstances of their
death.  The 1986 NMFS is the fifth mortality followback  survey  conducted  by
NCHS;  the previous four, conducted in the 1960s, were less comprehensive than
the 1986 survey.
    At least two caveats apply  to  interpretation  of  the  1986  NMFS  data.
First,  because  these  data  are national estimates based on a sample survey,
they are subject to respondent and sampling errors.  Second,  although 82%  of
the  respondents  who  com  pleted the NMFS questionnaire were close relatives
(e.g., spouse, parent, sibling, or adult child) of the decedent,  insufficient
recall  or knowledge about details of the decedent's life may have reduced the
accuracy of the replies to certain questions.
    The finding that women were more likely to be  in  "poor  health,"  living
without family support, or with fewer financial resources reflects in part the
differences  in age and marital status at death among persons dying from heart
disease. Approximately 70% of women (in contrast to less than 50% of men) were
aged greater than or equal to 75 years when they died;  moreover,  three times
more women than men were widowed.
    These  findings  can aid in addressing the health-care needs of those with
chronic disease. Other NMFS survey data can be used in addressing other public
health issues.

Reference

1. NCHS. Vital statistics of the United States, 1986. Vol II--Mortality, pt A.
Hyattsville,  Maryland:  US Department of Health and  Human  Services,  Public
Health Service, 1988; DHHS publication no.  (PHS)88-1122.

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 13
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

                    Rabies Surveillance,United States, 1988

                 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
                             Public Health Service
                          Centers For Disease Control
                            Atlanta, Georgia 30333

The  MMWR  series  of  publications  is  published by the Epidemiology Program
Office, Centers for Disease Control,  Public Health Service,  U.S.  Department
of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia 30333.

SUGGESTED CITATIONS

General:  Centers for Disease Control. CDC Surveillance Summaries,
August 1989. MMWR 1989;38(No. SS-1).

Specific:  Centers for Disease Control. Rabies Surveillance, United
States, 1988. In: CDC Surveillance Summaries, August 1989. MMWR 1989;38
(No. SS-1):(inclusive page numbers).

Centers for Disease Control        Walter R. Dowdle, Ph.D.
                                       Acting Director
Center for Infectious Diseases         Frederick A. Murphy, D.V.M., Ph.D.
                                       Director
Division of Viral Diseases             Brian Mahy, Ph.D., Sc.D.
                                       Director
Viral and Rickettsial Zoonoses Branch  Kenneth L. Herrmann, M.D.
                                       Acting Chief
                                       George M. Baer, D.V.M.
                                       Pamela A. Yager
                                       Jean S. Smith, M.S.

    The   production  of  this  report  as  an  MMWR  serial  publication  was
coordinated in:

Epidemiology Program Office            Stephen B. Thacker, M.D., M.Sc.
                                       Director
                                       Richard A. Goodman, M.D., M.P.H.
                                       Editor, MMWR Series
Editorial Services                     R. Elliott Churchill, M.A.
                                       Chief
                                       Ann Penner Usey
                                       Writer-Editor
                                       Mary T. Vaughan
                                       Visual Information Specialist
                                       Ruth C. Greenberg
                                       Editorial Assistant

Copies can be purchased from  Superintendent  of  Documents,  U.S.  Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402-9371. Telephone: (202) 783-3238.

                   Rabies Surveillance, United States, 1988
                         Thomas R. Eng, V.M.D., M.P.H.

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 14
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

                            Tedd A. Hamaker, D.V.M.
                            James G. Dobbins, Ph.D.
                              Tony C. Tong, M.S.
                                Joyce H. Bryson
                            Paul F. Pinsky, M.P.H.
           Division of Viral Diseases Center for Infectious Diseases

                                    Summary

The  primary  purpose of the annual report on rabies surveillance is to assist
local and state public health officials in  the  planning  of  rabies  control
programs  and  to guide health professionals in evaluating the need for rabies
postexposure prophylaxis in patients who are exposed to animals  that  may  be
rabid.  In  1988,  a total of 4,724 cases of animal rabies were reported by 47
states,  the District of Columbia,  and Puerto  Rico,  similar  to  the  total
(4,729) for 1987. No human cases of rabies were reported.
    The  South  Atlantic,  South Central,  North Central,  and Middle Atlantic
states reported 81% of the cases.  Pennsylvania, Texas, California,  Maryland,
and  Virginia each reported over 300 rabid animals.  Delaware (61 cases),  New
Mexico (15),  Alaska (34),  Connecticut (8),  and South  Carolina  (127)  each
reported  an  increase in animal rabies cases greater than or equal to 100% in
1988 compared with 1987.  Smaller but significant increases also were reported
from Florida (66% increase), Pennsylvania (68%), and Georgia (40%).
    Eighty-eight percent of rabies cases were in wild animals, and 12% were in
domestic animals.  Skunks,  raccoons,  and bats accounted for 82% of all rabid
animals. Cats became the most commonly reported domestic species for the first
time since reporting to CDC began in 1960.
    The most effective methods of reducing the number  of  people  exposed  to
rabies are to educate the public to avoid unfamiliar, especially wild, animals
and to vaccinate susceptible pets against rabies.  Rabies vaccination programs
should target cats as well as  dogs.  Two  cases  of  imported  canine  rabies
emphasized  the  need  to  educate  travelers  of the risk of canine rabies in
developing countries. Caution should be used when pets are imported from these
countries.

                                 INTRODUCTION

    Since the 1950s, canine vaccination and programs on stray-dog control have
dramatically decreased rabies in domestic animals (Figure 1) and  people.  For
example,  in the 1950s, an average of 11 persons (range:  4-20) died of rabies
every year in the United States,  and all were exposed to  rabies  by  contact
with  native  animals  (Figure  2).  In contrast,  from 1980 through 1988,  an
average of one person (range:  0-3) per year acquired rabies, and 73% of these
persons  were  exposed  to  rabies  by contact with animals outside the United
States.
    The number of rabid wild animals exceeded that of domestic species in 1960
and increased dramatically during the late 1970s and early 1980s  (Figure  1).
Whether  the  case  count  represented  an actual increase in the incidence of
rabies in wildlife or an increased testing of wildlife is unclear; however, at
least four major epizootics in wild animals have been documented. The increase
in the late 1970s was a result of two epizootics  of  rabies  in  skunks,  one
centered in the North Central and one in South Central states (Figure 3).  Two
separate epizootics occurred in raccoons in West Virginia  and  Virginia.  One
began in Florida,  Georgia,  Alabama, and South Carolina, and the other, which
began in 1977,  eventually spread to several other Middle Atlantic  and  South

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 15
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

Atlantic states (1). Since 1980, the most commonly reported rabid wild animals
have been skunks, raccoons, bats, and foxes.
    An  increase  in rabies in domestic animals was also observed in the early
1980s,  probably as a result of the increase in  rabid  wildlife  (Figure  4).
Since 1980,  the most commonly reported rabid domestic animals have been cats,
cattle, and dogs.
    On the basis of reaction patterns to  a  panel  of  monoclonal  antibodies
against  the  rabies  virus,  virus isolates from rabid animals can be grouped
into ecotypes (2).  Accordingly,  five major distinct ecotypes of  the  rabies
virus  exist  in  animals  in  the United States (Figure 5).  In each of these
areas,  the virus ecotype circulates in the main reservoir  of  the  area  but
occasionally extends to other species.
    Because  of Canada and Mexico's proximity to the United States,  data from
these countries are included in a separate section of this report.

                                    METHODS

    All cases of animal rabies reported to CDC had been diagnosed by state  or
territorial  health  department  laboratories.  Suspected  rabid  animals were
submitted for a variety of reasons to health department laboratories by  local
health  officials,  veterinarians,  animal-control  officers,  and the public.
Almost all diagnoses of animal rabies were  based  on  a  positive  result  on
direct fluorescent-antibody testing of brain tissue. Rabies virus isolation in
mice  or  in tissue culture (e.g.,  neuroblastoma cells) was sometimes used to
confirm  fluorescent-antibody  tests.   In  addition,   virus  isolates   were
occasionally  sent  to  CDC  for  ecotype  analysis with the use of monoclonal
antibody techniques (2).
    Most state and territorial health departments  reported  cases  of  animal
rabies  by sending a monthly summary of cases stratified by species and county
of origin.  Some states  submitted  these  data  as  part  of  the  Electronic
Surveillance  Project  (ESP),  a  CDC  computerized surveillance network.  The
accuracy of all data was confirmed.
    Data were stratified by species and by the state in which the  animal  was
captured.  Data  from 1988 were compared with surveillance data from 1987 (3).
For the geographic distribution of  cases,  states  were  grouped  into  eight
divisions.
    Data  from Canada were obtained from the Animal Health Division,  Canadian
Department of Agriculture.  Data from Mexico were obtained from the  Direccion
General de Medicina Preventiva, Secretaria de Salud.  Interpretation of Data
    Surveillance  data  should  be  interpreted  with  an understanding of the
general  and  area-specific  limitations  of  the  surveillance  system.   All
laboratory-confirmed  cases of animal rabies are reported to CDC,  but not all
rabid animals are submitted  to  state  health  departments.  Incidence  rates
cannot  be  calculated  from  rabies  surveillance  data  because  the  animal
populations are unknown.  Therefore,  the number of reported cases  should  be
considered  only  a  crude estimate of the risk of rabies in an animal species
from a particular area.
    Decisions on the management of  patients  or  animals  exposed  to  rabies
should  be  made  in  consultation  with  appropriate  local  and state health
officials. The decision of whether to use rabies postexposure prophylaxis in a
patient exposed to rabies by contact with a suspected  rabid  animal  that  is
unavailable for testing depends on 1) the circumstances of the exposure and 2)
the species-specific risk of rabies in that area (4).
    Detecting  the  true  distribution  of  rabies  in  an area depends on the
sensitivity of the surveillance  system.  The  sensitivity  of  animal  rabies

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 16
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

surveillance  varies among states because state health department laboratories
have different criteria for accepting a specimen  for  testing.  For  example,
many  laboratories  will  test only those animals to which persons or domestic
animals have been exposed.  Many rabid  animals,  especially  wildlife,  never
expose a human being or domestic animal and, therefore, remain undetected.  In
addition,  the sensitivity of the surveillance system may vary within a state.
For  example,  the  number  of examinations of animals may vary among counties
because of availability of local animal-control services and transportation to
state laboratories.  Finally,  the proportion of reported cases by species may
not reflect the true distribution of rabies in animals,  since certain animals
are more likely to be captured for testing.  For example, dogs are more likely
to be captured and tested than wild animals such as bats.

                                    RESULTS

                Rabies in the United States and Its Territories

    In  1988,  a  total  of  4,724  cases of animal rabies were reported by 47
states, the District of Columbia,  and Puerto Rico (Figure 6,  Table 1).  This
total  is  essentially  the same as in 1987 (4,729).  No human cases of rabies
were reported.
    The South Atlantic,  South Central,  North Central,  and  Middle  Atlantic
states reported 81% of the cases (Figure 7).  Pennsylvania, Texas, California,
Maryland,  and Virginia reported the most cases,  each reporting at least  300
rabid animals (Table 1).  Delaware (61 cases),  New Mexico (15),  Alaska (34),
Connecticut (8),  and South Carolina (127) each reported an increase in animal
rabies  cases  greater than or equal to 100% in 1988 compared with 1987 (Table
1).  Smaller  increases  also  were  reported  from  Florida  (66%  increase),
Pennsylvania  (68%),  and Georgia (40%).  Rhode Island (no cases) was the only
state to report greater than or equal to 100% decrease in rabid animals.
    Rabies was  relatively  rare  in  New  England  and  absent  in  the  U.S.
territories except for Puerto Rico. Although Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Vermont
did  not  report any cases in 1988,  Hawaii is the only state considered to be
free of rabies.  Puerto Rico reported 73 cases of animal rabies in  1988;  71%
were rabid mongooses.  The other U.S. territories of Guam, the Virgin Islands,
American Samoa,  and the Commonwealth of  the  Northern  Mariana  Islands  are
rabies-free areas (5).
    The  distribution of rabid animals by species was similar to that in 1987.
Eighty-eight percent of cases were in wild animals,  and 12% were in  domestic
animals (Figure 8).  Skunks, raccoons, and bats accounted for 82% of all rabid
animals.  The only notable increase was in rabid foxes.  In domestic  animals,
the  most  notable  change from the previous year was that the number of rabid
cats exceeded that of rabid cattle  and  became  the  most  commonly  reported
domestic species for the first time since reporting to CDC began in 1960.
    Although rabid animals were reported throughout the year,  several species
appeared to have seasonal peaks.  Distinct peaks of activity in  rabid  skunks
and  cattle  occurred  in  March and April,  with the increase in rabid skunks
preceding that of rabid cattle by approximately 1 month (Figures 9, 10).  Most
rabid  bats  and  cats  were  reported during the summer and fall months.  The
number of rabid raccoons peaked in the spring and fall.

                            Rabies in Wild Animals

    As in 1987,  wild animals accounted for 88% of all rabid  animals.  Skunks
were  the  most  frequently  reported  rabid  species  in  the  United States,

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 17
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

accounting for 38% of all rabid animals,  followed  by  raccoons  (31%),  bats
(14%), and foxes (4%) (Figure 8). Rabies in wildlife species was reported from
all states except Hawaii and several states in New England (Table 1).  Skunks.
    Skunks were the most commonly reported rabid animal,  although there was a
12% decrease in cases compared with 1987 and a 25% decrease compared with 1986
(3).  The distribution of cases (Figure 11) was similar to that of  1987  with
the South Central states,  North Central states,  and California reporting 73%
of cases. Delaware (7 cases), New Mexico (6), South Carolina (10), and Indiana
(26) reported greater than or equal to 100% increase in rabid skunks  compared
with 1987 (3).  Raccoons.
    Reports  of  rabid  raccoons  increased  12%  in  1988 compared with 1987;
raccoons were the second most commonly reported rabid animal.  Of 1,465 cases,
99%  were  reported  from states involved in one of the two raccoon epizootics
(Figure 12,  Table 1).  The "mid-Atlantic"  epizootic,  involving  the  Middle
Atlantic  and  South  Atlantic  states  of Delaware,  Maryland,  Pennsylvania,
Virginia,  West Virginia,  and the District of Columbia,  reported 65% of  all
rabid  raccoons,  and the other "southeastern" epizootic,  involving the South
Central and South Atlantic states of  Alabama,  Florida,  Georgia,  and  South
Carolina  (hereafter referred to as the "southeastern states"),  reported 34%.
The 498 cases reported in the southeastern states  represent  a  50%  increase
from  1987.  There  was  virtually  no  change in the number of rabid raccoons
reported from the mid-Atlantic epizootic.  Although all  of  the  southeastern
states  reported  an increase in rabid raccoons,  Florida and Georgia reported
the greatest  increase  (79%  and  43%,  respectively).  In  the  mid-Atlantic
epizootic,  cases  occurred  predominantly  in  southeastern  Pennsylvania and
northern Delaware (Figure 13).  In addition,  the outbreak spread  south  into
southeastern Virginia.

                                     Bats.

    Bats were the third most commonly reported species,  accounting for 14% of
all rabid animals (Table 1).  There was only a 1% increase compared with 1987.
Bats were the most widespread rabid animal,  and rabies from bats was reported
from 42 states (Figure 14). Ten states did not report any rabid animals except
for bats. Eighty-eight percent of rabid animals from New England were bats.

                                    Foxes.

    Although the proportion of rabies in foxes (4%) was low compared with that
in other wild animals,  foxes accounted for one of the largest increases (53%)
in wildlife species in 1988 (Table 1).  This increase was mainly a result of a
357% increase in rabid foxes in Alaska.  The distribution of rabid  foxes  was
otherwise  similar  to  that  of  rabid  skunks (Figures 15,  11).  Other wild
animals.
    Mongooses accounted  for  most  of  the  other  wild  animals,  and  their
distribution was limited to Puerto Rico.  Although the number of rabid rodents
doubled in 1988,  rodents accounted for less than 1% of all rabid animals.  Of
the  22  rabid groundhogs reported,  all were from states involved in the mid-
Atlantic epizootic.

                          Rabies in Domestic Animals

    There were 550 cases of rabies in domestic animals in 1988,  a 2% decrease
from 1987 (Table 1). Rabies in domestic animals was usually reported only from
states with large numbers of rabid terrestrial wild animals.  For example, the

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 18
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

North Central and South Central states accounted for 62% of rabies in domestic
animals (Table 1).  The most commonly reported  rabid  domestic  animals  were
cats, cattle, and dogs.  Cats.
    Cats  accounted  for  the  greatest proportion (35%) of rabies in domestic
animals for the first time. The 192 rabid cats represented a 16% increase from
1987.  States that experienced an increase in cases greater than or  equal  to
100% compared with 1987 included Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  South Carolina, and
Florida (3).  The distribution of rabid cats was  similar  to  that  of  rabid
skunks and raccoons (Figures 11,  12, 16).  The South Atlantic, North Central,
South Central, and Middle Atlantic states accounted for 90% of all cases.

                                    Cattle.

    Thirty-one percent of rabid domestic animals were cattle.  The  number  of
cases  reported in 1988 (171) was similar to that reported in 1987.  The North
Central, South Central,  and Middle Atlantic states reported 88% of all cases.
Except for the absence of cases in the South Atlantic states, the distribution
of rabid cattle was similar to that of rabid cats (Figures 16, 17).

                                     Dogs.

    Dogs accounted for 23% of all rabid domestic animals. There were 128 cases
of rabies in dogs reported in 1988,  a 25% decrease from 1987.  No substantial
increases occurred in any state.  The distribution  of  rabid  dogs  was  also
similar  to  that  of  the  other domestic animals (Figures 16-18).  The South
Central, North Central, and South Atlantic states reported 84% of all cases.
    In 1988,  an outbreak of rabies in dogs and coyotes occurred in two  Texas
counties  in  the  Lower  Rio Grande Valley that had been free of rabies since
1970 (6).  Monoclonal antibody studies  indicated  that  the  epizootic  virus
ecotype was identical to that found in Mexican dogs.  Imported canine rabies.
    In 1988,  two dogs adopted in Mexico as pets were imported into the United
States and subsequently developed rabies within several weeks of arrival.  The
first  incident involved a young New Hampshire girl who adopted an unimmunized
puppy while visiting Mexico (7). This adoption resulted in the treatment of 17
exposed persons.  The second dog, a puppy that was too young for immunization,
was brought into the United States by a family in Texas.

                            Other domestic animals.

    Other domestic species,  such as horses,  mules,  sheep, goats, and swine,
collectively accounted  for  11%  of  rabid  domestic  animals.  Seventy-three
percent were horses or mules.  Although there was more than a twofold increase
in rabid swine,  only seven rabid swine were reported.  Rabies in  Canada  and
Mexico
    Canada  reported  2,284  laboratory-confirmed and 129 clinically diagnosed
cases of animal rabies in 1988,  an 18% decrease from 1987.  The most commonly
reported  rabid  animals were foxes (45% of all cases),  skunks (28%),  cattle
(14%), cats (4%), and dogs (3%); 76% of cases were reported from Ontario.
    Mexico reported 74 human rabies deaths in 1988,  a 21% increase from 1987.
Ninety-two percent of the decedents had been bitten by rabid dogs.  A total of
8,468  cases  in  animals  were diagnosed clinically,  and an additional 4,834
cases were diagnosed by laboratory testing.  Dogs accounted for 93%  of  rabid
animals;  cats,  for  2%;  and bats,  for 2%;  2% of the animals were of other
species. Rabid animals were found in all areas in the country.

Health InfoCom Network News                                             Page 19
Volume  2, Number 32                                      September  4, 1989

                                  DISCUSSION

    The most effective methods of reducing the number  of  people  exposed  to
rabies are to educate the public to avoid unfamiliar, especially wild, animals
and  to  vaccinate susceptible pets against rabies.  Although domestic animals
account for only 12% of all  rabid  animals,  they  account  for  64%  of  all
exposures  requiring  rabies  treatment (8).  Given that cats are now the most
--- end part 2 of 5 cut here ---