Providing basic sanitation and safe drinking water and food is the key for controlling the disease. In developed countries, enteric fever rates decreased in the past when treatment of municipal water was introduced, human feces were excluded from food production, and pasteurization of dairy products began. In addition, children and adults should be carefully educated about personal hygiene. This would include careful handwashing after defecation and sexual contact, before preparing or eating food, and especially the sanitary disposal of feces. Food handlers should be educated in personal hygiene prior to handling food or utensils and equipment. Infected individuals should be advised to avoid food preparation. Sexually active people should be educated about the risks of sexual practices that permit fecal-oral contact.

Those who travel to countries with poor sanitation should receive a live attenuated typhoid vaccine—Ty21a (Vivotif), which, in addition to the protection against typhoid fever, and may provide some protection against paratyphoid fever caused by the "S. enterica" serotypes A and B. In particular, a reanalysis of data from a trial conducted in Chile showed the Ty21a vaccine was 49% effective (95% CI: 8–73%) in preventing paratyphoid fever caused by the serotype B. Evidence from a study of international travelers in Israel also indicates the vaccine may prevent a fraction of infections by the serotype A, although no trial confirms this. This cross-protection by a typhoid vaccine is most likely due to O antigens shared between different "S. enterica" serotypes.

Exclusion from work and social activities should be considered for symptomatic, and asymptomatic, people who are food handlers, healthcare/daycare staff who are involved in patient care and/or child care, children attending unsanitary daycare centers, and older children who are unable to implement good standards of personal hygiene. The exclusion applies until two consecutive stool specimens are taken from the infected patient and are reported negative.

Diagnosis is made by any blood, bone marrow or stool cultures and with the Widal test (demonstration of antibodies against "Salmonella" antigens O-somatic and H-flagellar). In epidemics and less wealthy countries, after excluding malaria, dysentery, or pneumonia, a therapeutic trial time with chloramphenicol is generally undertaken while awaiting the results of the Widal test and cultures of the blood and stool.

The Widal test is time-consuming, and prone to significant false positive results. The test may be also falsely negative in the early course of illness. However, unlike Typhidot test Widal test quantifies the specimen with titres.

Typhidot is a medical test consisting of a dot ELISA kit that detects IgM and IgG antibodies against the outer membrane protein (OMP) of the Salmonella typhi. The typhidot test becomes positive within 2–3 days of infection and separately identifies IgM and IgG antibodies. The test is based on the presence of specific IgM and IgG antibodies to a specific 50Kd OMP antigen, which is impregnated on nitrocellulose strips. IgM shows recent infection whereas IgG signifies remote infection. The most important limitation of this test is that it is not quantitative and result is only positive or negative.

The term 'enteric fever' is a collective term that refers to severe typhoid and paratyphoid.

Those diagnosed with Type A of the bacterial strain rarely die from it except in rare cases of severe intestinal complications. With proper testing and diagnosis, the mortality rate falls to less than 1%. Antibiotics such as azithromycin are particularly effective in treating the bacteria.

In endemic areas, diagnosis is generally made on clinical grounds alone. However, overshadowing of the diagnosis is quite often as the clinical symptoms overlap with other infectious diseases such as dengue fever, paratyphoid, and pyrexia of unknown origin (PUO). If the eschar can be identified, it is quite diagnostic of scrub typhus, but this is very unreliable in the native population who have dark skin, and moreover, the site of eschar which is usually where the mite bites is often located in covered areas. Unless it is actively searched for, the eschar most likely would be missed. History of mite bite is often absent since the bite does not inflict pain and the mites are almost too small to be seen by the naked eye. Usually, scrub typhus is often labelled as PUO in remote endemic areas, since blood culture is often negative, yet it can be treated effectively with chloramphenicol. Where doubt exists, the diagnosis may be confirmed by a laboratory test such as serology. Again, this is often unavailable in most endemic areas, since the serological test involved is not included in the routine screening tests for PUO, especially in Burma (Myanmar).

The choice of laboratory test is not straightforward, and all currently available tests have their limitations. The cheapest and most easily available serological test is the Weil-Felix test, but this is notoriously unreliable. The gold standard is indirect immunofluorescence, but the main limitation of this method is the availability of fluorescent microscopes, which are not often available in resource-poor settings where scrub typhus is endemic. Indirect immunoperoxidase, a modification of the standard IFA method, can be used with a light microscope, and the results of these tests are comparable to those from IFA. Rapid bedside kits have been described that produce a result within one hour, but the availability of these tests is severely limited by their cost. Serological methods are most reliable when a four-fold rise in antibody titre is found. If the patient is from a nonendemic area, then diagnosis can be made from a single acute serum sample. In patients from endemic areas, this is not possible because antibodies may be found in up to 18% of healthy individuals.

Other methods include culture and polymerase chain reaction, but these are not routinely available and the results do not always correlate with serological testing, and are affected by prior antibiotic treatment. The currently available diagnostic methods have been summarised.

Two typhoid vaccines are licensed for use for the prevention of typhoid: the live, oral Ty21a vaccine (sold as Vivotif by Crucell Switzerland AG) and the injectable typhoid polysaccharide vaccine (sold as Typhim Vi by Sanofi Pasteur and 'Typherix by GlaxoSmithKline). Both are efficacious and recommended for travellers to areas where typhoid is endemic. Boosters are recommended every five years for the oral vaccine and every two years for the injectable form. An older, killed-whole-cell vaccine is still used in countries where the newer preparations are not available, but this vaccine is no longer recommended for use because it has a higher rate of side effects (mainly pain and inflammation at the site of the injection).

To help decrease rates of typhoid fever in developing nations, the World Health Organization (WHO) endorsed the use of a vaccination program starting in 1999. Vaccinations have proven to be a great way at controlling outbreaks in high incidence areas. Just as important, it is also very cost-effective. Vaccination prices are normally low, less than US $1 per dose. Because the price is low, poverty-stricken communities are more willing to take advantage of the vaccinations. Although vaccination programs for typhoid have proven to be effective, they alone cannot eliminate typhoid fever. Combining the use of vaccines along with increasing public health efforts is the only proven way to control this disease.

Since the 1990s there have been two typhoid fever vaccines recommended by the World Health Organization. The ViPS vaccine is given via injection, while the Ty21a is taken through capsules. It is recommended only people 2 years or older be vaccinated with the ViPS vaccine and requires a revaccination after 2–3 years with a 55–72% vaccine efficacy. The alternative Ty21a vaccine is recommended for people 5 years or older, and has a 5-7-year duration with a 51–67% vaccine efficacy. The two different vaccines have been proven as a safe and effective treatment for epidemic disease control in multiple regions.

A version combined with hepatitis A is also available.

The FDA has published guidelines to help reduce the chance of food-borne salmonellosis. Food must be cooked to 68–72 °C (145–160 °F), and liquids such as soups or gravies must be boiled. Freezing kills some "Salmonella", but it is not sufficient to reliably reduce them below infectious levels. While "Salmonella" is usually heat-sensitive, it does acquire heat resistance in high-fat environments such as peanut butter.

Antibodies against nontyphoidal "Salmonella" were first found in Malawi children in research published in 2008. The Malawian researchers have identified an antibody that protects children against bacterial infections of the blood caused by nontyphoidal "Salmonella". A study at Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Blantyre found that children up to two years old develop antibodies that aid in killing the bacteria. This could lead to a possible "Salmonella" vaccine for humans.

A recent study has tested a vaccine on chickens which offered efficient protection against salmonellosis.

Vaccination of chickens against "Salmonella" essentially wiped out the disease in the United Kingdom. A similar approach has been considered in the United States, but the Food and Drug Administration decided not to mandate vaccination of hens.

The CDC recommends real-time PCR as the method of choice for diagnosing H1N1. The oral or nasal fluid collection and RNA virus preserving filter paper card is commercially available. This method allows a specific diagnosis of novel influenza (H1N1) as opposed to seasonal influenza. Near-patient point-of-care tests are in development.

Without treatment, the disease is often fatal. Since the use of antibiotics, case fatalities have decreased from 4–40% to less than 2%.

The drug most commonly used is doxycycline or tetracycline, but chloramphenicol is an alternative. Strains that are resistant to doxycycline and chloramphenicol have been reported in northern Thailand. Rifampicin and azithromycin are alternatives. Azithromycin is an alternative in children and pregnant women with scrub typhus, and when doxycycline resistance is suspected. Ciprofloxacin cannot be used safely in pregnancy and is associated with stillbirths and miscarriage.

Combination therapy with doxycycline and rifampicin is not recommended due to possible antagonism.

Prevention of swine influenza has three components: prevention in pigs, prevention of transmission to humans, and prevention of its spread among humans.

The most efficient treatment in breeding flocks or laying hens is individual intramuscular injections of a long-acting tetracycline, with the same antibiotic in drinking water, simultaneously. The mortality and clinical signs will stop within one week, but the bacteria might remain present in the flock.

The influenza vaccine is recommended by the World Health Organization and United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for high-risk groups, such as children, the elderly, health care workers, and people who have chronic illnesses such as asthma, diabetes, heart disease, or are immuno-compromised among others. In healthy adults it is modestly effective in decreasing the amount of influenza-like symptoms in a population. Evidence is supportive of a decreased rate of influenza in children over the age of two. In those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease vaccination reduces exacerbations, it is not clear if it reduces asthma exacerbations. Evidence supports a lower rate of influenza-like illness in many groups who are immunocompromised such as those with: HIV/AIDS, cancer, and post organ transplant. In those at high risk immunization may reduce the risk of heart disease. Whether immunizing health care workers affects patient outcomes is controversial with some reviews finding insufficient evidence and others finding tentative evidence.

Due to the high mutation rate of the virus, a particular influenza vaccine usually confers protection for no more than a few years. Every year, the World Health Organization predicts which strains of the virus are most likely to be circulating in the next year (see Historical annual reformulations of the influenza vaccine), allowing pharmaceutical companies to develop vaccines that will provide the best immunity against these strains. The vaccine is reformulated each season for a few specific flu strains but does not include all the strains active in the world during that season. It takes about six months for the manufacturers to formulate and produce the millions of doses required to deal with the seasonal epidemics; occasionally, a new or overlooked strain becomes prominent during that time. It is also possible to get infected just before vaccination and get sick with the strain that the vaccine is supposed to prevent, as the vaccine takes about two weeks to become effective.

Vaccines can cause the immune system to react as if the body were actually being infected, and general infection symptoms (many cold and flu symptoms are just general infection symptoms) can appear, though these symptoms are usually not as severe or long-lasting as influenza. The most dangerous adverse effect is a severe allergic reaction to either the virus material itself or residues from the hen eggs used to grow the influenza; however, these reactions are extremely rare.

The cost-effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccination has been widely evaluated for different groups and in different settings. It has generally been found to be a cost-effective intervention, especially in children and the elderly, however the results of economic evaluations of influenza vaccination have often been found to be dependent on key assumptions.

Antibody (Ig) ELISAs are used to detect historical BVDV infection; these tests have been validated in serum, milk and bulk milk samples. Ig ELISAs do not diagnose active infection but detect the presence of antibodies produced by the animal in response to viral infection. Vaccination also induces an antibody response, which can result in false positive results, therefore it is important to know the vaccination status of the herd or individual when interpreting results. A standard test to assess whether virus has been circulating recently is to perform an Ig ELISA on blood from 5–10 young stock that have not been vaccinated, aged between 9 and 18 months. A positive result indicates exposure to BVDV, but also that any positive animals are very unlikely to be PI animals themselves. A positive result in a pregnant female indicates that she has previously been either vaccinated or infected with BVDV and could possibly be carrying a PI fetus, so antigen testing of the newborn is vital to rule this out. A negative antibody result, at the discretion of the responsible veterinarian, may require further confirmation that the animal is not in fact a PI.

At a herd level, a positive Ig result suggests that BVD virus has been circulating or the herd is vaccinated. Negative results suggest that a PI is unlikely however this naïve herd is in danger of severe consequences should an infected animal be introduced. Antibodies from wild infection or vaccination persist for several years therefore Ig ELISA testing is more valuable when used as a surveillance tool in seronegative herds.

Initial diagnosis may be via symptoms, but is usually confirmed via an antigen and antibody test. A PCR-based test is also available. Although any of these tests can confirm psittacosis, false negatives are possible and so a combination of clinical and lab tests is recommended before giving the bird a clean bill of health. It may die within three weeks.

"Campylobacter" organisms can be detected by performing a Gram stain of a stool sample with high specificity and a sensitivity of ~60%, but are most often diagnosed by stool culture. Fecal leukocytes should be present and indicate the diarrhea to be inflammatory in nature. Methods currently being developed to detect the presence of campylobacter organisms include antigen testing via an EIA or PCR.

Reasonably effective ways to reduce the transmission of influenza include good personal health and hygiene habits such as: not touching your eyes, nose or mouth; frequent hand washing (with soap and water, or with alcohol-based hand rubs); covering coughs and sneezes; avoiding close contact with sick people; and staying home yourself if you are sick. Avoiding spitting is also recommended. Although face masks might help prevent transmission when caring for the sick, there is mixed evidence on beneficial effects in the community. Smoking raises the risk of contracting influenza, as well as producing more severe disease symptoms.

Since influenza spreads through both aerosols and contact with contaminated surfaces, surface sanitizing may help prevent some infections. Alcohol is an effective sanitizer against influenza viruses, while quaternary ammonium compounds can be used with alcohol so that the sanitizing effect lasts for longer. In hospitals, quaternary ammonium compounds and bleach are used to sanitize rooms or equipment that have been occupied by patients with influenza symptoms. At home, this can be done effectively with a diluted chlorine bleach.

Social distancing strategies used during past pandemics, such as closing schools, churches and theaters, slowed the spread of the virus but did not have a large effect on the overall death rate. It is uncertain if reducing public gatherings, by for example closing schools and workplaces, will reduce transmission since people with influenza may just be moved from one area to another; such measures would also be difficult to enforce and might be unpopular. When small numbers of people are infected, isolating the sick might reduce the risk of transmission.

Antigen ELISA and rtPCR are currently the most frequently performed tests to detect virus or viral antigen. Individual testing of ear tissue tag samples or serum samples is performed. It is vital that repeat testing is performed on positive samples to distinguish between acute, transiently infected cattle and PIs. A second positive result, acquired at least three weeks after the primary result, indicates a PI animal. rtPCR can also be used on bulk tank milk (BTM) samples to detect any PI cows contributing to the tank. It is reported that the maximum number of contributing cows from which a PI can be detected is 300.

Blood analysis shows leukopenia, thrombocytopenia and moderately elevated liver enzymes. Differential diagnosis must be made with typhus, typhoid and atypical pneumonia by Mycoplasma, Legionella or Q fever. Exposure history is paramount to diagnosis.

Diagnosis involves microbiological cultures from respiratory secretions of patients or serologically with a fourfold or greater increase in antibody titers against "C. psittaci" in blood samples combined with the probable course of the disease. Typical inclusions called "Leventhal-Cole-Lillie bodies" can be seen within macrophages in BAL (bronchoalveolar lavage) fluid. Culture of "C. psittaci" is hazardous and should only be carried out in biosafety laboratories.

Fowl cholera is also called avian cholera, avian pasteurellosis, avian hemorrhagic septicemia.

It is the most common pasteurellosis of poultry. As the causative agent is "Pasteurella multocida", it is considered as a zoonosis.

Adult birds and old chickens are more susceptible. In parental flocks, cocks are far more susceptible than hens.

Besides chickens, the disease also concerns turkeys, ducks, geese, raptors, and canaries. Turkeys are particularly sensitive, with mortality ranging to 65%.

The recognition of this pathological condition is of ever increasing importance for differential diagnosis with avian influenza.

The World Health Organization recommends the following:

- Food should be properly cooked and hot when served.

- Consume only pasteurized or boiled milk and milk products, never raw milk products.

- Make sure that ice is from safe water.

- If you are not sure of the safety of drinking water, boil it, or disinfect it with chemical disinfectant.

- Wash hands thoroughly and frequently with soap, especially after using the toilet and after contact with pets and farm animals.

- Wash fruits and vegetables thoroughly, especially if they are to be eaten raw. Peel fruits and vegetables whenever possible.

- Food handlers, professionals and at home, should observe hygienic rules during food preparation.

- Professional food handlers should immediately report to their employer any fever, diarrhea, vomiting or visible infected skin lesions.

Cats can be protected from H5N1 if they are given a vaccination, as mentioned above. However, it was also found that cats can still shed some of the virus but in low numbers.

If a cat is exhibiting symptoms, they should be put into isolation and kept indoors. Then they should be taken to a vet to get tested for the presence of H5N1. If there is a possibility that the cat has Avian Influenza, then there should be extra care when handling the cat. Some of the precautions include avoiding all direct contact with the cat by wearing gloves, masks, and goggles. Whatever surfaces the cat comes in contact with should be disinfected with standard household cleaners.

They have given tigers an antiviral treatment of Oseltamivir with a dose of 75 mg/60 kg two times a day. The specific dosage was extrapolated from human data, but there hasn't been any data to suggest protection. As with many antiviral treatments, the dosage depends on the species.

Intestinal infectious diseases include a large number of infections of the bowels including: cholera, typhoid fever, paratyphoid fever, other types of salmonella infections, shigellosis, botulism, gastroenteritis, and amoebiasis among others.

Typhoid and paratyphoid resulted in 221,000 deaths in 2013 down from 259,000 deaths in 1990. Other diseases which result in diarrhea caused another 1.3 million additional deaths in 2013 down from 2.6 million deaths in 1990.

Prevention and control programs must take into account local understandings of people-poultry relations. In the past, programs that have focused on singular, place-based understandings of disease transmission have been ineffective. In the case of Northern Vietnam, health workers saw poultry as commodities with an environment that was under the control of people. Poultry existed in the context of farms, markets, slaughterhouses, and roads while humans were indirectly the primary transmitters of avian flu, placing the burden of disease control on people. However, farmers saw their free ranging poultry in an environment dominated by nonhuman forces that they could not exert control over. There were a host of nonhuman actors such as wild birds and weather patterns whose relationships with the poultry fostered the disease and absolved farmers of complete responsibility for disease control.

Attempts at singular, place-based controls sought to teach farmers to identify areas where their behavior could change without looking at poultry behaviors. Behavior recommendations by Vietnam's National Steering Committee for Avian Influenza Control and Prevention (NSCAI) were drawn from the FAO Principles of Biosecurity. These included restrictions from entering areas where poultry are kept by erecting barriers to segregate poultry from non-human contact, limits on human movement of poultry and poultry-related products ideally to transporters, and recommendations for farmers to wash hands and footwear before and after contact with poultry. Farmers, pointed to wind and environmental pollution as reasons poultry would get sick. NSCAI recommendations also would disrupt longstanding livestock production practices as gates impede sales by restricting assessment of birds by appearance and offend customers by limiting outside human contact. Instead of incorporating local knowledge into recommendations, cultural barriers were used as scapegoats for failed interventions. Prevention and control methods have been more effective when also considering the social, political, and ecological agents in play.

Initial response to H5N1, a one size fits all recommendation was used for all poultry production systems, though measures for intensively raised birds were not necessarily appropriate for extensively raised birds. When looking at village poultry, it was first assumed that the household was the unit and that flocks did not make contact with other flocks, though more effective measures came into use when the epidemiological unit was the village.

Recommendations also involve restructuring commercial markets to improve biosecurity against avian influenza. Poultry production zoning is used to limit poultry farming to specific areas outside of urban environments while live poultry markets improve biosecurity by limiting the number of traders holding licenses and subjecting producers and traders to more stringent inspections. These recommendations in combination with requirements to fence and house all poultry, and limit free ranging flocks will eventually lead to fewer small commercial producers and backyard producers, costing livelihoods as they are unable to meet the conditions needed to participate.

A summary of reports to the World Organisation for Animal Health in 2005 and 2010 suggest that surveillance and under-reporting in developed and developing countries is still a challenge. Often, donor support can focus on HPAI control alone, while similar diseases such as Newcastle disease, acute fowl cholera, infectious laryngotracheitis, and infectious bursal disease still affect poultry populations. When HPAI tests come back negative, a lack of funded testing for differential diagnoses can leave farmers wondering what killed their birds.

Since traditional production systems require little investment and serve as a safety net for lower income households, prevention and treatment can be seen as less cost effective than letting a few birds die. Effective control not only requires prior agreements to be made with relevant government agencies, such as seen with Indonesia, they must also not unduly threaten food security.

For botulism in babies, diagnosis should be made on signs and symptoms. Confirmation of the diagnosis is made by testing of a stool or enema specimen with the mouse bioassay.

Physicians may consider diagnosing botulism if the patient's history and physical examination suggest botulism. However, these clues are often not enough to allow a diagnosis. Other diseases such as Guillain–Barré syndrome, stroke, and myasthenia gravis can appear similar to botulism, and special tests may be needed to exclude these other conditions. These tests may include a brain scan, cerebrospinal fluid examination, nerve conduction test (electromyography, or EMG), and an edrophonium chloride (Tensilon) test for myasthenia gravis. A definite diagnosis can be made if botulinum toxin is identified in the food, stomach or intestinal contents, vomit or feces. The toxin is occasionally found in the blood in peracute cases. Botulinum toxin can be detected by a variety of techniques, including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), electrochemiluminescent (ECL) tests and mouse inoculation or feeding trials. The toxins can be typed with neutralization tests in mice. In toxicoinfectious botulism, the organism can be cultured from tissues. On egg yolk medium, toxin-producing colonies usually display surface iridescence that extends beyond the colony.