Q fever in dairy cattle has been investigated in Latvia since 2012. In 2015, 10.7% of farms tested positive for the DNA of C. burnetii, its aetiological agent, in bulk tank milk. The presence of C. burnetii DNA and infectious bacteria in dairy products has been assessed in several countries, and because Latvian milk may contain them, parallel assessment in this country is recommended. Accordingly, the present study tested shop and farm retail dairy products from Latvia and included foreign products for comparison. Investigation was carried out of 187 samples of a diverse range of dairy products from 41 Latvian milk producers. Twenty-six comparable samples pooled from Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain were also included. The all-countries total number of fermented milk products was 160. Special attention was paid to products that could be more attractive to children because of their added chocolate, cacao, berry and fruit content. DNA was extracted and amplification of C. burnetii IS1111 was performed using a commercial PCR kit. Overall positivity was 60.56%. Domestic products were positive more often (60.96%) than foreign ones (57.69%). Only 26.67% of unpasteurised Latvian cow’s milk samples were positive whereas 76.47% of pasteurised equivalents and 63.13% of fermented milk products were. Sweetened and fruit-containing samples were 71.43% positive. The shedding of C. burnetii via milk should be monitored and only milk from healthy animals allowed for sale for direct human consumption without pasteurisation. Raw milk quality and the effectiveness of industrial heat treatment and pasteurisation methods in Latvia and other countries should be carefully assessed to ensure adequate consumer health protection.

A research project is underway aiming to develop a field diagnostic tool for six important viruses of the pig sector, namely: African swine fever virus (ASFV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), swine influenza virus (SIV), porcine parvovirus (PPV), porcine circovirus (PCV2), and classical swine fever virus (CSFV). To obtain a preliminary sounding of the interest in this type of instrument among its potential operators, a questionnaire was drawn up and submitted to three categories of stakeholders: farmers, veterinarians, and others (including scientific and technical staff working on animal farms). Four countries participated: Italy, Greece, Hungary, and Poland. In total, 83 replies were collected and analysed in a breakdown by stakeholder type and pertinence, where the areas were the importance of the main diseases within the different countries, diagnostic tool operational issues, and economic issues. The main end-users of this kind of instrument are expected to be private veterinarians and pig producers. The infectious agents seeming to be most interesting to diagnose with the instrument are PRRSV, SIV, PPV, and PCV2. The most decisive parameters which have been selected by the stakeholders are sensitivity, cost, simplicity, and time required to obtain results. The economic issue analysis showed that the majority of those who would prefer to buy rather than rent the device are willing to pay up to €3,000 for a diagnostic field tool.