HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - Field Dressing Deer/elk CWD/TSEs aka MAD COW DISEASE
Old 12-12-2003, 11:15 AM
  #1  
MADCOW
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow/index.html
Posts: 23
Default Field Dressing Deer/elk CWD/TSEs aka MAD COW DISEASE

Field Dressing Deer/elk CWD/TSEs aka MAD COW DISEASE

Greetings,

I wish to submit some new and old data for the
ones interested in reading about CWD and CJD.
This study and others should warrant strict safety
guidelines while field dressing your kill. I am not
kidding you, inoculation is the most effective mode
of transmission (route). A simple cut and or scratch
while field dressing a kill (if infected with CWD/TSE),
could very well transmit the agent to a human, and a
pair of those cheap rubber gloves will not protect you
very well. AND if you are exposed to the agent, you
will never know it until years later, by that time, how
many have you exposed through various other routes
(dental, surgery, just to name a few)?

I am not trying to scare anyone, just to enlighten
you on TSEs (all of them), and to simply warn
you of the potential for transmission from various
routes and sources.

Recently a study came out and I posted
the abstract, but over the weekend I
received the full text, and I think every
hunter out there should have the
opportunity to read it. Whether you do
or not is your business;


Occupational risk factors for the sporadic form of
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (FULL TEXT

snip...

Among occupations and industries, for which
previous reports suggested potential exposure to a transmissible
spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) agent, the OR for CJD was
significantly increased among butchers (OR=6.8, 95% C.I. 1.5,
30.1, based on 4 cases and 3 controls), and persons working in
offices of physicians (OR=4.6, 95% C.I. 1.2, 17.6 based on 5
cases and 4 controls).

snip...

http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow...ges/91447.html

some old data to reference too;

ANOTHER FARMER KILLED BY CJD !!!

snip...

20 year old died from sCJD in USA in 1980 and a 16 year
old in 1981. A 19 year old died from sCJD in
France in 1985. There is no evidence of an iatrogenic
cause for those cases....

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...0/04004001.pdf

cover-up of 4th farm worker ???

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...0/23006001.pdf

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...0/20006001.pdf

CONFIRMATION OF CJD IN FOURTH FARMER

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...1/03008001.pdf

now story changes from;

SEAC concluded that, if the fourth case were confirmed, it would be
worrying, especially as all four farmers with CJD would have had BSE
cases on their farms.

to;

This is not unexpected...

was another farmer expected?

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...1/13010001.pdf

4th farmer, and 1st teenager

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...2/27003001.pdf

2. snip...
Over a 5 year period, which is the time period on which the advice
from Professor Smith and Dr. Gore was based, and assuming a
population of 120,000 dairy farm workers, and an annual incidence
of 1 per million cases of CJD in the general population, a
DAIRY FARM WORKER IS 5 TIMES MORE LIKELY THAN
an individual in the general population to develop CJD. Using the
actual current annual incidence of CJD in the UK of 0.7 per
million, this figure becomes 7.5 TIMES.

3. You will recall that the advice provided by Professor Smith in
1993 and by Dr. Gore this month used the sub-population of dairy
farm workers who had had a case of BSE on their farms -
63,000, which is approximately half the number of dairy farm
workers - as a denominator. If the above sums are repeated using
this denominator population, taking an annual incidence in the general
population of 1 per million the observed rate in this sub-population
is 10 TIMES, and taking an annual incidence of 0.7 per million,
IT IS 15 TIMES (THE ''WORST CASE'' SCENARIO) than
that in the general population...

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/y...1/31004001.pdf

snip...

http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow...s/9912501.html

http://www.vegsource.com/talk/madcow...ges/91448.html


THOSE HEALTHY LOOKING DEER/ELK ''SUB-CLINICAL'' INFECTION


DEAD DEER WALKING


Issued: Monday, 28 August 2000 NEW EVIDENCE OF SUB-CLINICAL PRION

INFECTION: IMPORTANT RESEARCH FINDINGS RELEVANT TO CJD AND BSE


A team of researchers led by Professor John Collinge at the Medical

Research Council Prion Unit1 report today in the Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences, on new evidence for the existence of a

'sub-clinical' form of BSE in mice which was unknown until now.

The scientists took a closer look at what is known as the 'species

barrier' - the main protective factor which limits the ability of

prions2 to jump from one species to infect another. They found the mice

had a 'sub-clinical' form of disease where they carried high levels of

infectivity but did not develop the clinical disease during their normal

lifespan. The idea that individuals can carry a disease and show no

clinical symptoms is not new. It is commonly seen in conventional

infectious diseases.

Researchers tried to infect laboratory mice with hamster prions3 called

Sc237 and found that the mice showed no apparent signs of disease.

However, on closer inspection they found that the mice had high levels

of mouse prions in their brains. This was surprising because it has

always been assumed that hamster prions could not cause the disease in

mice, even when injected directly into the brain.

In addition the researchers showed that this new sub-clinical infection

could be easily passed on when injected into healthy mice and hamsters.

The height of the species barrier varies widely between different

combinations of animals and also varies with the type or strain of

prions. While some barriers are quite small (for instance BSE easily

infects mice), other combinations of strain and species show a seemingly

impenetrable barrier. Traditionally, the particular barrier studied here

was assumed to be robust.

Professor John Collinge said: "These results have a number of important

implications. They suggest that we should re-think how we measure

species barriers in the laboratory, and that we should not assume that

just because one species appears resistant to a strain of prions they

have been exposed to, that they do not silently carry the infection.

This research raises the possibility, which has been mentioned before,

that apparently healthy cattle could harbour, but never show signs of, BSE.

"This is a timely and unexpected result, increasing what we know about

prion disease. These new findings have important implications for those

researching prion disease, those responsible for preventing infected

material getting into the food chain and for those considering how best

to safeguard health and reduce the risk that theoretically, prion

disease could be contracted through medical and surgical procedures."


ISSUED FRIDAY 25 AUGUST UNDER EMBARGO. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE EMBARGO IS

SET BY THE JOURNAL.

http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index/public_in...-mrc-43-00.htm

OPINION OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON MEDICINAL PRODUCTS AND MEDICAL

DEVICES ON “THE PROTECTION OFFERED BY NATURAL RUBBER LATEX MEDICAL DEVICES

(MEDICAL GLOVES AND CONDOMS) AGAINST TRANSMISSIBLE DISEASES”

Adopted by the SCMPMD during the 24th plenary meeting

of 16 October 2003


snip...


1. Introduction to the problem

The changing characteristics of the risk of infection by blood borne

pathogens with respect to clinical

procedures has resulted in a number of discussions about the

effectiveness of protective equipment and

materials, including natural rubber latex products such as medical

gloves, designed to have this barrier

function (Anonymous 1987, CDC 1988, Fay and Dooher1992, Fay 1996, FDA

1999, Gerberding et al

1995, Rabussay and Korniewicz 1997, Stringer et al 2001). In addition,

the low quality of some surgical

and examination gloves, considering the importance of the barrier

effectiveness, has been a concern in

the past (Fay and Dooher 1992). This was particularly so in the 1980’s

when the increased use of

gloves placed an increased demand on industry, resulting in some low

quality gloves on the market (Fay

and Dooher1992). The perception of additional risks of infectivity with

respect to the Transmissible

Spongiform Encephalopathies (TSE) such as Bovine Spongiform

Encephalopathy (BSE) and variant

Creutzfeld-Jacob-Disease (vCJD) have also raised the level of concern.

In addition, a series of

alternative materials have been made available to clinicians, arising

from the apparent increased levels

of allergies to latex products. Similar concerns exist for these

alternatives, leading to a greater degree of

uncertainty over barrier effectiveness from one product to another.

snip...

7. Risk assessment including populations at risk

The risk of health care workers for blood borne exposure and infection

is highest in operating room

settings, the most likely means of transmission being percutaneous

injuries (Fay and Dooher 1992,

Stringer et al 2001, Wright et al 1991). Prevention is mainly provided

by the use of the so-called

universal precautions (CDC 1988). Glove use should reduce the incidence

of contamination of hands,

but they cannot prevent penetrating injuries due to needle or other

sharp instruments. It should be noted

that there is an increase in glove leakage during surgical and dental

procedures (Albin et al 1992,

Douglas et al 1997, Driever et al 2001, Fay and Dooher 1992, Fiehn and

Westergaard 1989, Korniewicz

et al 1990, Kotilainen et al 1989, Rego and Roley 1999). For example

Driever et al (2001) found during

an examination of 953 gloves worn during cardiac surgery, 26% of those

worn by the operator were

punctured, as were 38 % of those worn by the theatre nurses. Limiting

the time of the surgical

procedure reduces glove barrier failure, as glove failure increases in

time (Fay and Dooher 1992,

Gerberding et al 1990, Quebbeman et al 1991).

The use of the double glove method in surgery gives an additional level

of protection against blood

borne infections and greatly reduces the risk of glove penetration, as

discussed by Gerberding et al

(1990) and Quebbeman et al (1992) a number of years ago. Recently there

have been a number of

studies published that strongly support and advocate the use of double

gloving as the major risk

management factor in the control of the transmission of disease in a

clinical setting. In gynaecological

surgery, Murta et al (2003) found that 10.4 % of single gloves

perforated during use, as did 9.8 % of the

outer double gloves whereas there was no perforation of any inner double

glove. In general surgery

Laine and Aarnio (2001) found a 6.2 % incidence of puncture of the inner

of a double glove compared to

an overall 18.3% of total operations resulting in perforation. In open

lung surgery, Hollaus et al (1999)

reported a 78 % incidence of perforation of gloves, but the inner glove

only perforated in 1.1%, double

gloving effectively protecting against cutaneous blood contact. It is

recognised that double gloving may

not always bring benefits (Avery et al 1999), that many surgeons are not

in favour of it (St Germaine et

al, 2003) and that care has to be taken not to reduce manual dexterity

and increase discomfort (Alrawi

et al, 2002), but a recent major systematic review of the evidence

(Tanner and Parkinson 2002) makes

it very clear that wearing two pairs of latex gloves significantly

reduces the number of perforations of the

glove in contact with the skin and reduces the risk of surgical cross

infection.

Although the risk for infection with TSE is largely unknown, certain

assumptions for the possibility of

infection can be established. The United Kingdom (UK) is at this moment

the only country with a major

infected population. Up to August 2003, 133 people have died of definite

or probable vCJD in the UK,

the total number of patients diagnosed being 137. In France 6 people

were diagnosed with vCJD, while

in some other countries only single cases were noted so far. A major

difficulty here is that people may

be infected and unknowingly be in the incubation phase of the disease at

the time of a clinical

procedure, this phase possibly lasting several years. This necessitates

rather severe prophylactic

measures. The route of infection is not known, but could be ingestion of

BSE contaminated food.

11

Health care workers are one of the populations at risk, of which those

working in the operating theatre

(surgeons, nurses) have the highest risk, especially when surgery on the

brain is performed.

Considering the rather limited number of patients with TSE, and the

professional measures which can

be used to avoid contamination/infection, the actual risk to anyone is

very limited. For those patients

with a known TSE infection (CJD, vCJD) proper measures can be instigated

to protect the health care

workers. The use of natural rubber latex medical gloves is one of them.

In view of the limited number of humans infected with vCJD, the general

risk for health care workers for

infection with vCJD even in the UK is marginal at most. As stated for

specific cases, specific measures

can be instigated to reduce the risk of infection. The risk for

infection with vCJD (or BSE) by food

consumption is unknown, and is largely reduced by various EU

regulations, but is probably higher than

the risk introduced by patient contact.

For viral infections (HIV, Hepatitis) the situation is quite different.

The risk especially for health care

workers for infection with a viral infection can be rather high.

However, this risk can be reduced to

almost zero by proper preventive measures such as using protective

clothing and natural rubber latex

medical or examination gloves.

An overview of the estimated risks for transmission of infectious agents

through natural rubber latex

medical devices i.e. gloves and condoms, along with risk management

procedures is presented in Table

2.

8. Conclusions/recommendations

For TSE it is unknown whether the agents can pass through an intact

latex membrane. The estimated

size of these agents lies below that of viral simulants which cannot

pass the latex membranes, so,

theoretically, TSE passage cannot be excluded. However, in view of the

known physical and chemical

characteristics of TSE agents and natural rubber latex, it seems

unlikely that TSE can actually pass

through intact latex. This is probably also true for alternative

materials. So far, no infections with TSE in

health care settings could be attributed to the barrier failure of latex

medical gloves. Moreover, the

population at risk for TSE infection in health care settings is very

low, even in the UK. For condoms

there is no indication of risk for TSE infection as there are no

indications for sexual transmission of

TSE’s.

Both natural rubber latex medical gloves and condoms offer good

protection against transmission of

viral infections including HIV. However, the protection may diminish

during use, especially when the

glove material is aged or damaged. By far the greatest risk for

transmission of infectious agents, is

encountered when a glove is torn or punctured during a medical

procedure. In order to prevent this,

more detailed instructions on use of latex medical gloves would be

warranted in terms of factors such as

the duration of use and the use of double gloves. It should be

emphasized that medical gloves and

condoms are single use devices.

It is known that some chemicals can penetrate natural rubber latex and

affect the physical properties of

the product. It is, however, unknown as to whether this process can

influence transmission of infectious

agents, either positively or negatively.

In general, in terms of leakage properties, no alternative material has

been found to be superior to

natural rubber latex.

9. References

snip...


http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scmp/out48_en.pdf


TSS

http://www.ngpc.state.ne.us/cgi-shl/...&f=12&t=000319
MADCOW is offline