The research tested the potential of participatory workshops as a dissemination activity or new way of transferring knowledge in ethnoveterinary medicine. The International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR) developed the workshop method and it is said to have two major advantages: it reduces the total amount of time needed to develop information materials (a user-friendly manual) and it profits from the expertise and resources of a wide range of participants and their organizations. The remedies chosen for inclusion in the manual are those that can be recommended for use by the general public and farmers to alleviate minor diseases and problems. The produced manual can provide a sustainable long-term solution to animal health problems. The workshop method allows participants to pool resources, abilities and information thus multiplying the likelihood of obtaining useful solutions and minimizing the risk of failure.
Ethnoveterinary data for British Columbia was collected over a six-month period in 2003. All available literature about livestock farmers and the secondary literature on ethnomedicinal plants, folk medicine and related fields in British Columbia was reviewed prior to and during the research [5-12]. The research area in British Columbia consisted of the Lower Mainland, the Thompson/Okanagan region and south Vancouver Island.
A purposive sample of livestock farmers was created to target key informants with the knowledge sought. The sample size was 60. The sample was obtained from membership lists of organic farmers, other specialists in alternative medicine and holistic veterinarians.
Seven of the participants with ruminants had goats and a few had cows; these provided the majority of the information recorded in this paper. Other information came from holistic practitioners, herbalists, holistic veterinarians and participants with horses and pets.
Two visits were made to each farm or respondent. All of the interviews at the initial stage were open-ended and unstructured. A draft outline of the respondents' ethnoveterinary remedies was delivered and discussed at the second visit in order to confirm the information provided at the first interview. Medicinal plant voucher specimens were collected where possible and were identified and deposited in the University of Victoria Herbarium.
The plant-based remedies were evaluated for safety and efficacy with a non-experimental method, prior to including them in the draft outline. Published sources such as journal articles and books and databases on pharmacology and ethnomedicine available on the Internet were searched to identify the plants' chemical compounds and clinically tested physiological effects. This data was incorporated with data on the reported folk uses, and their preparation and administration in North America and Europe. For each species or genus the ethnomedicinal uses in other countries are given; followed by a summary of chemical constituents, in addition to active compounds if known. This type of ethnopharmacological review and evaluation is based on previous work and the use of these methods in the same research study has been published [4]. The non-experimental validation of the plants is presented in the discussion section of the paper.
Validation workshop
Ten participants with experience in traditional human and ethnoveterinary medicine took part in a participatory five-day-long workshop at the University of Victoria (BC), in October, 2003. In the workshop the facilitator asked participants very specific questions in a supportive environment about the medicinal plants used. Each animal/livestock species was covered in a morning or afternoon session, other than the core group, different participants came to different sessions [4]. At the ruminant session the four participants (herbalists and ruminant owners) introduced themselves and their work and were instructed on the participatory workshop method. The participants discussed the previously produced ruminant section of the data. There were two editorial assistants/facilitators in attendance. After the discussions, the ruminant section was edited.
Non-experimental validation of ethnoveterinary remedies
The researcher and the ethnoveterinary consultant completed the non-experimental validation of the remedies in advance of the workshop. A low-cost, non-experimental method was used to evaluate the potential efficacy of the ethnoveterinary remedies [4]. This method consisted of:
• obtaining an accurate botanical identification of the herbal remedies reported;
• searching the pharmaceutical/pharmacological literature for the plant's identified chemical constituents in order to determine the known physiological effects of either the crude plant drug, related species, or isolated chemical compounds that the plant is known to contain. This information was then used to assess whether the plant use is based on empirically verifiable principles.
Supporting ethnobotanical data and pharmacological information was matched with the recorded folk use of the plant species [5-12], to determine degrees of confidence about its effectiveness. Four levels of confidence were established:
1. Minimal level: If no information supports the use it indicates that the plant may be inactive.
2. Low level: A plant (or closely related species of the same genus), which is used in distinct areas in the treatment of similar illnesses (humans or preferably animals), attains the lowest level of validity, if no further phytochemical or pharmacological information validates the popular use. Use in other areas increases the likelihood that the plant is efficacious.
3. Mid level: If in addition to the ethnobotanical data, available phytochemical or pharmacological information is consistent with the use, this indicates a higher level of confidence that the plant may exert a physiological action on the patient.
4. High level: If both ethnobotanical and pharmacological data are consistent with the folk use of the plant, its use is classed in the highest level of validity and is considered efficacious.
Answers to all your Biology Questions
