US EditionRural Acha, Pico, Castex, Toay and Other Areas Rejected Changes in Vaccination Against Foot-and-Mouth Disease
This story is only covered by news sources that have yet to be evaluated by the independent media monitoring agencies we use to assess the quality and reliability of news outlets on our platform. Learn more here.3 Articles
3 Articles
Seven rural associations in La Pampa questioned the decision of the national government to allow the free choice of veterinarians for vaccination against foot-and-mouth disease and bovine brucellosis. The entities issued a statement expressing their concern about the “gravity” of the change in the health scheme and argued that the measure was adopted without consensus with the productive sector. Thus, they departed from the La Pampa Livestock Ag…
The rejection of Resolution 201/2026 of the SENASA, which substantially modifies the vaccination scheme against foot-and-mouth disease, found in Confederaciones Rurales Argentinas (CRA) one of its strongest expressions. The entity, which nucleates a large part of livestock farmers in the interior, disseminated a statement in which it questions the technical and economic criterion of the measure, considering that it disarms a health system that w…
Confederations Rurales Argentinas (CRA) rose this Friday as a new voice against resolution 201/2026 issued a week ago by the National Service of Health and Agrofood Quality (Sennasa) and that imposes a historic change in the anti-aftosa vaccination scheme. Punctually, what the health agency did was to enable the producers to comply with the annual inoculation through a private veterinarian, so that they no longer have to depend on a health agenc…
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- There is no tracked Bias information for the sources covering this story.
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
