An 8-year-old female, German Shepherd dog was presented with history of dyspnea and seizure. One Year Previously a lumpectomy had been performed for surgical resection of mammary mass. In serum chemistry, severe hypoglycemia and elevation of aspartate aminitransferase and creatine kinase were shown. In thoracic radiography, there were variable sized nodules in the overall lung field. On computed tomography examination, the mass was shown in left longissimus lumborum muscle. Histopathological examination revealed adenocarcinoma derived from the mammary gland. Muscular metastasis of mammary gland tumor is uncommon. This is a rare observation and could easily be overlooked or misinterpreted.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of cryopreservation at approximately -196 ºC in liquid nitrogen (N) and freezing at approximately -20 ºC in a freezer, on the viability and survival of eight different mastitogenic bacteria inoculated in milk. Bacteria were frozen at approximately -20 ºC in a freezer and cryopreserved at approximately -196 ºC in liquid nitrogen. An effective preservation method was needed for follow-up samples from cows identified in the South African National Milk Recording Scheme (NMRS) with somatic cell counts above 250 000 cells/mL milk. The organisation responsible for sample collection of the NMRS milk samples also provides producers with liquid nitrogen for their semen flasks at the collection sites. This existing mode of storage and transport could therefore be utilised. Ten samples of each organism were thawed and cultured bi-weekly until week 18 for both temperature treatments. An additional sampling was performed at week 30 for samples frozen at approximately -20 ºC. Freezing and cryopreservation did not impair subsequent isolation of Streptococcus dysgalactiae, Streptococcus uberis, Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus (STH) (phage type lytic group III) or Sta. aureus (STA) (phage typed, other than lytic group III). Survival was indicated by the isolation of bacteria from samples, and viability by the strength of growth of the bacteria isolated. The survival of Streptococcus agalactiae decreased after week 12 and Escherichia coli after week 16 of freezing, but both organisms survived under cryogenic preservation until week 18. Coagulase-negative staphylococci survived until week 18 for both freezing and cryogenic preservation. Both storage methods could thus contribute to the improvement of a pro-active approach towards udder health management in South African dairy herds.

We first review historic and conceptual background to integrative thinking in medicine. Lacking a general theory of 'One Health', we provide an operational definition of 'One Health' and its leverage as: any added value in terms of human and animal health, financial savings or environmental benefit from closer cooperation of human and animal health sectors at all levels of organisation. Examples of such added value of 'One Health' are given from the fields of health systems, nutrition and zoonoses control in Africa and Asia. 'One Health' must become main-stream rather than a new discipline or new association; it should just become normal that practitioners and professionals in the health, animal and environment sectors work together as closely as possible. Current and future challenges in financing clean energy, migration flows, food security and global trade further warrant rethinking of human and animal health services. A conceptual outlook relates health as an outcome of human-environment systems called 'health in social-ecological systems'. The paper ends with an outlook on the operationalisation of 'One Health' and its future potential, specifically also in industrialised countries.

One Health concepts and ideas are some of the oldest in the health discipline, yet they have not become main stream. Recent discussions of the need for One Health approaches require some reflection on how to present a case for greater investments. The paper approaches this problem from the perspective of the control and management of resources for health in general. It poses the following questions, (1) where do we need extra resources for One Health, (2) where can we save resources through a One Health approach and (3) who has control of the resources that do exist for One Health? In answering these questions three broad areas are explored, (1) The management and resources allocated for diseases, (2) The isolation of parts of the society that require human and animal health services and (3) The use of resources and skills that are easily transferable between human and animal health. The paper concludes that One Health approaches are applicable in many scenarios. However, the costs of getting people from different disciplines to work together in order to achieve a true One Health approach can be large. To generate tangible benefits requires careful management of specialist skills, knowledge and equipment, which can only be achieved by a greater openness of the human and animal health disciplines. Without this openness, policy makers will continue to doubt the real value of One Health. In summary the future success of One Health is about people working in the research, education and provision of health systems around the world embracing and managing change more effectively.