Many thanks Susan for your good comments. In advocating for One Health approaches in the blog, the point made is exactly that: to reinforce the need to transcend "purely" medical approaches, both conceptual and operational, since sustained interconnection with other sectors, including community involvement and mobilization coupled with communication strategies, do help prevent avoidable outbreaks of disease of animal origin whenever possible, detect threats early, and respond rapidly and effectively as shown under the Avian Influenza effort in countries such as Vietnam, Indonesia, and Turkey, or more recently with Bird Flu in China. And as you suggested, work at the community level is critical. I fully agree with it, but it should not be seen only for outbreak control and management, but for organizing and delivery health services as part of a care continium. Existing platforms such as Integrated Community Case Management (iCCM), do help to understand the context, inform and communicate, support social mobilization and involvement of the community, train and supervise health workers, adopt quality assurance measures, and increase access to treatment when required to those beyond the reach of health facilities. The challenge as I argued before, is how to institutionalize community based approaches to ensure that they are fully incorporated into national priorities, policies, and programs, with corresponding funding and capacities to sustain it. But once an outbreak occurs, medical countermeasures need to be adopted, including the prevention of "medical malpractices" that may contribute to the spread viruses or antimicrobial drug resistant organisms.