It would be interesting to see a study done on whether these genetically altered mice can contract CWD by ingesting unaltered deer meat from a CWD infected deer. In the article Atlasman has quoted, the mice have the pathogens injected directly into their brains. That creates a high concentration of the infection and an abnormal way of contracting it. I'd be a lot more worried if any scientist can prove that CWD can be transmitted through much smaller doses that have been ingested. That way, we are comparing apples to apples, not apples to oranges.

Not me.


At least you are honest about being selfish



That doesn't stop you from preaching QDM day after day.......think of what you might accomplish if you applied that same effort towards a worthwhile cause like CWD........instead of something so trivial.

I don't think that QDM is trivial, I think that it would help to stop the spread of CWD.

What's your point atlasman? I hope this is not another overreaction to an uncertain problem.
Let me first say that it appears to me that no testing of any kind should be done to lab mice or rats. The filthy little buggers die from everything!!!
(lol)
Seriously, "No known transfer of the disease has ever been found in humans." This is a powerfull statement. Overreaction causes stupid acts to take place. I had heard for instance, that an area of Minnisota where the disease was believed to be, allowed hunters, and even invited them, to eliminate the entire deer population!
Seems to be limited to animals in the deer family. Deer, elk, moose. I talked to a G&F biologist here in Wyoming and she said they were surprised Antelope don't get it. They even fed infected brains to the Antelope and did not get it. Not one!
So I figure, so long as I'm not in the deer family . . .

Here's the mostimportant thing, infected animals are easy to see and detect. I've seen several of them. They are listless, often have chunks of hair gone, do not spook at human presence, often are obviously emaciated which means that rib and hip bones are sticking out. You see one, and call the local Game warden to have them put it down.
What scares me the most, is overreacting to an unknown. And, they have no idea how to cure it. They have discovered that it is most likely transfered from animal to animal through tainted ground, dirt. Like that disease that pigs get.
Keep hunting, eating your harvest, and looking for animals that show obvious signs and you will live long and healthy.

My point is that the article shows a possible link to infective prions of CWD being in muscle tissue. This is new information in the world of CWD......and if it is true will effect how they advise cautious handling of game in certain if not all areas.......until now organs and cns tissue were their focus.


What is the "overreaction"?.........and what were the others that lead to your "another" label?



And let me reply by saying you should learn more about transgenic mice before dismissing them as viable research.


And until this information came out the above quote was always accompanied by "No prions have ever been found in skeletal muscle tissue".......ooops. It's a much better strategy to stay informed and not hang your hat on one statement and plug your ears to anything else because it might say something you don't want to hear. I don't want CWD to be a danger to humans as much as anyone in the world........but I would rather be informed and aware about such a dynamic topic.



I'm still confused as to what you see as an "overreaction"......discussing an article in a science journal is over reacting?? I haven't seen anyone here make any rash statements or jump to any conclusions.



I hope that works out for ya.



A lot of people thought that about AIDS too........now they are all dead.

Deer don't show the signs you are speaking of until the disease is advanced........the incubation period is a mystery and they don't have any idea when or how infective the deer are at various stages of the disease.


What scares me is that you hunt in places where sick deer are seen regularly and you trust your "eye" for a sick animal to be your guide. You do know that a sick animal doesn't have to be in advanced state of disease to be infective right?

The biggest issue we face as hunters are the canned hunts and high fence ranches. CWD has been linked to these places. I have done a lot of research the last couple of days and it is not good. We are going to have more sick wild herds if we let this get out of hand.
Its time we stand up and so no to high fences hunts. It is time to put a stop to it!!!!! We are going to let the Anti's eat us alive, and if we are true contravationalist we need to put a stop to canned hunts. We have only seen the tip of this iceberg.

I guess my question should have been, "So does this mean you are done as a deer hunter?"
Very simple solution is to have the animal checked by proper authorities before eating it. Here in Wyoming it can be done for free.
I think killing every living animal IS overreacting. And there are areas where this is what was recommended. Just don't like it.
So keep hunting, eating, etc. Just test it first.

Of course not.......talk about an overreaction [] I will never be done as a deer hunter.....I don't see what that has to do with making certain the meat I and my family consume is safe.



I don't know of any test in NY as of right now........there may be one I am not aware of though. How accurate is this test?? Does it detect all stages of the disease including the incubation period??


Unfortunately that is the most effective way to eradicate a disease in animals........right or wrong it will be done in problem CWD areas. The LAST thing they are worried about in a CWD outbreak area is hurting the hunting opportunities. Public health is the ultimate trump card.

The tests are conducted by the Game & Fish at their labs in conjunction with the University of Wyoming. Even though we're out here at the edge of the planet, I trust their results.

Would be a real money maker if somebody would come out with a "field test" that was reliable.

Sure glad they didn't think that way before they had a cure for polio.

Not sure I would call the New Scientist a scientific journal. In fact, let me correct myself. I wouldn't. It's more along the lines of Popular Science.