About 10 years ago, an industry study was completed that showed the cost of PRRS to the US swine industry was about $664 million. An updated study by Dr. Derald Holtkamp was presented in June at the International Pig Veterinary Society Congress in Germany revealing the cost has jumped to an astonishing $1.2 billion.

Dr. Paul Yeske, a veterinarian with Swine Vet Center based in Minnesota, USA, recently spoke to The Pig Site’s Sarah Mikesell at Iowa State University just following the James D. McKean Swine Disease Conference about what this means for the industry.

Dr. Yeske, tell us what caused this jump in losses.

One thing to note, just to keep this in context, is that the data was cut off in 2020. So it was really before we saw some of these more severe PRRS strains hit the industry such as the L1C.5 strains formerly known as the 144 strains. Those were just starting in 2020. So, the numbers are probably a little bit higher than today, just because it does not have that information, but the numbers doubled. When you think about that $1.2 billion number, that means while we were standing here today, producers lost $3.3 million.

The cost of the disease is very relevant. They did calculate the breakdown of the disease, and it is difficult to get these costs, but they must do some estimations. They have a good methodology for this calculation.

Most of the $1.2 billion cost of the disease was coming out of the grow-finish phase of production. What we have seen historically would have been more on the sow side, and today, we are seeing more on the grow-finish side. As these viruses have evolved over time, we have seen more clinical signs on the grow-finish side, so it makes sense that the cost would go up on the grow-finish side.

As we look at these costs moving forward, they are probably going to be even higher when we look at the 2020 to 2025 numbers. Unfortunately, it puts the question back to the industry to say, “what can we do?” As we look at the Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Projects, we see an increased number of herds staying in Category One where they have active virus moving in the herd.

One of the things we can do is continue to work on having less of those herds and reduce the number of herds that are in that Category One shedding virus. We know there are still going to be positive herds until there is a more formal program, but at least reducing those numbers can help us as we go forward. It can reduce the opportunity for the recombinations of the viruses and some of those headaches that come along with that over time.

If you look at the costs that we spoke about earlier, there is an economic benefit for the producers to try and get those field strains out of their herds and try and put the biosecurity pieces into place to try and keep those strains from coming back.

In the sow farms, there has been a lot of movement toward filtration and the complete biosecurity package to protect those farms. But we also need to move to the grow-finish side and improve our biosecurity. So, we are not carrying it through grow-finish and increasing that cost more than it necessarily must be.

Has there been progress in grow-finish biosecurity?

Absolutely, there is progress being made. I would say not everybody is moving at the same pace, but there is a much higher level of awareness today, and there are more people taking proactive steps.

There are some things you can do that don’t cost a lot that can help with biosecurity. Improving biosecurity can be as simple as cleaning benches and boot changes. Making sure we are not wearing the same boots and coveralls between multiple sites where we are doing chores, which is just one simple thing.

I would say producers are looking at what they can do within the constraints of their barns. A lot of these older barns are not as easy to retrofit for a biosecurity system as newer barns. But we are making progress, but there is still room for improvement.

Bigger picture, what would it take from an industry-wide standpoint to really make a dent in the cost of PRRS?

Gene editing is still in the process of being approved through the FDA. Gene edit offers an incredible opportunity. Again, that must have consumer acceptance and all those things that go along with it, but the science behind the program is exceptionally good. It looks like - and we saw some of the data at the meetings here - those pigs just do not get infected. With that technology, it could be very promising for us, but it is not going to be the whole answer.

Even if that technology were here tomorrow, we still need good biosecurity and biocontainment - the forgotten piece of biosecurity. If we have positive sites, we must make sure that we are being careful not to move it down the road. We cannot forget biocontainment. Oftentimes that is the easy one to forget when you have an outbreak, and it is important that we try and keep the virus confined to that site.

The gene editing option may not be a silver bullet, and when approval happens, it’s not immediate, right?

Not, it's going to take time. It is a double recessive gene, so it’s going to take some time to get it through the production system. Even if we went at the fastest pace, the predictions are somewhere between seven to 10 years to get it through the entire production system. That would require everyone to be coordinated and move as quickly as possible. It is going to take some time, so it’s good to have all these different tools available.

Is a vaccine that could better prevent and shedding a possibility?

Yes, and vaccines have helped us along the way. They are just not perfect, but they have helped to reduce some of the shedding. They have also aided in reducing some of the clinical signs. But today, we probably need a breakthrough on the vaccine technology side before we can say we are going to see a lot of different changes from what we're encountering today.

I think we can use the tools that we have today, and they are valuable. I do not want to underestimate the value of the biosecurity tools. There is value in all those, but for the long term for the vaccine to be the full answer, we need a breakthrough in technology, something different.