Which statement about the Uruguay 2001 vaccination is true?

• A. Vaccination stopped after all cattle received two doses
• B. Cattle, sheep, and swine vaccinated
• C. The vaccination campaign greatly reduced slaughter numbers
• D. Vaccination was more costly than the slaughter approach used in the UK

Answer: (C)

Vaccination during an FMD outbreak is a tool to limit spread and reduce the need for mass slaughter. In Uruguay’s 2001 outbreak, emergency vaccination helped slow transmission and protect herds around the outbreak, which led to fewer animals being culled overall. This is why the statement about a greatly reduced slaughter number is the true takeaway from that campaign.

The other options don’t match what happened: vaccination was not simply stopped after two doses for all cattle, vaccination did not blanket all species in the same way (the program focused mainly on cattle around outbreak zones, with different strategies for other species), and the issue wasn’t presented as a straightforward cost comparison with the UK approach, but rather the impact on slaughter numbers.