The virtual reliance on anthelmintic drugs alone to control internal parasites of livestock is inappropriate and ultimately unsustainable. In the tropics and subtropics, widespread and high levels of anthelmintic resistance, particularly in nematode parasites of small ruminants, is rife. But more to the point, many farmers in these regions of the world are resource poor and cannot afford, or are reluctant to purchase drugs that may also be of dubious quality. As it is with any intervention, the benefits must outweigh the costs. This is not only in terms of conventional parameters such as reduced mortality and increasing productivity (meat, milk, fibre and traction power) of livestock, but also within the broad framework of helminths of veterinary/human importance, the aim should be a positive impact on reducing the threat of helminth zoonoses. However, understanding the issues involved and education of the end-users (farmers) is of fundamental importance, before any internal parasite control program should be promoted. Within the above context, we provide examples of how the "basket of options" approach could be adopted for the control of three quite disparate helminth problems in the tropics and subtropics, viz.: strongyle nematode infections of donkeys, the Taenia solium cysticercosis/taeniosis problem of pig and man and Haemonchus contortus infections in small ruminants. The "best practice" approaches can be defined as those "basket of options" that are practical, affordable, available and appropriate, whether to the commercial producer, or to the resource-poor farmer. Constraints that may restrict applying such options are accessibility to, and affordability of, suitable remedies and above all, the availability of information needed to make informed decisions in this regard. © 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
