From:
colburns@comcast.net
Date: 2005-01-02 08:52:16 UTC
Subject: Help With Unknown Deadly Virus
To: ferrethealth@smartgroups.com
Message-ID: <2168821.1104655936662.JavaMail.root@thallium.smartgroups.com>
Dear FHL Folks-
=
I talked to my Mom the person doctor about the horrible animal disease repo=
rted in yesterday's FML and she has several interesting things to say about=
it. One being that there are so many untested assertions in the statement=
that the lady gave (Not calling anyone a liar, saying that there are a lot=
of variables floating around in that statement, only one of which can be t=
ested at any given time.That is how a true hypothesis is nailed down.) that=
it is not really a case hsitory. A large amount of it may simply be anecdo=
tal, information passed down the grapevine, and not true eye-witness testim=
ony..She would *never* take this unexamined as a person's disease history, =
she says. For example, she sees no evidence at all that what the people are=
getting and what the animals are getting is the same at all. The people ar=
e getting a G.I. upset, which is pretty common for us, and easily spread a=
round, especially this time of year. That's the simplest explanation, and t=
hose are usually the best.
The animals appear to be getting something hemmoragic (the people aren't), =
and the easiest way to test for that would be to do a coagulation battery a=
nd platelet count on them on day one, follow it up on days two and three, s=
ee if it changes. Have they lost their clotting factor? Is their liver gone=
? Bone marrow gone? Did they eat Warfarin baits, etc.? All those things ne=
ed to be looked at.
If nobody has been able to determine what is killing the animals, what agen=
t (bacteria, virus, toxin, etc.), then you can't truly say that the "diseas=
e" is 100% fatal. If the disease can't be found, how can you be sure that =
it is uniformly fatal? You can't *find* it yet to rule this out one way or =
the other. You do know that the animals who show certain symptoms (days 1-3=
) are doomed. That doesn't mean that their cagemates don't shrug "it" off,=
and never show the first day 1 symptoms.
Antibiotics, of course, that may have been given to these animals won't tou=
ch a virus except under the strangest of conditions. (Antibiotics kill bact=
eria, not virus. Doctors know this, but dispense them anyway to human patie=
nts like candy because patients expect to be 'given' something.). So far th=
ere is no evidence that this is a virus, that's just how the poster conciev=
es of the problem. Obviously, she's got to call it *something*, but calling=
it so doesn't make it so.
Obviously, Mom is not a Vet, but she does have more than 30 years of clini=
cal experience in having people come to her with odd stories, and having to=
sort the "wheat" facts from among the "chaff" to decide what is relevant i=
n their story of "what went wrong when", what is coincidence in that story,=
and what is just plain noise to be ignored. Vets do the same thing, good =
ones, anyway.
Alexandra in MA
=
=