CWD found in SW MT

[Stay Sharp]

I have a feeling it's been in most states that it's being found in...all along. Just not been tested for until recently. Recently being, what, the last 10 years or so? Obviously, I have no factual info, just giving my opinion. That may be $.01 in this case.

you are correct since its naturally occurring in many species including humans. during our cwd committee work I asked the researchers that if cwd was detected in WI in 2002, how Long had it been in WI to reach detectable levels via random (small) sampling and that agreed and replied "many years"

 

[Stay Sharp]

as far as human testing, it been ongoing for 50 years in many states and still no cases of deer derived VCJD in the human population. the grand total of 4 that arrived here from other counties linked to mad cows was the cause of those 4.

 

[nontyp]

I have a feeling it's been in most states that it's being found in...all along. Just not been tested for until recently. Recently being, what, the last 10 years or so? Obviously, I have no factual info, just giving my opinion. That may be $.01 in this case.

If that were the case, either A.) Disease prevalence rates would be very high or B.) the deer would have evolved over time to not be susceptible to the disease. Not sure what you mean by all along. What we actually see happening is that once it is detected in an area, prevalence rates gradually go up. This would suggest that the disease is new to the area where it is detected.

 

[tzone]

If that were the case, either A.) Disease prevalence rates would be very high or B.) the deer would have evolved over time to not be susceptible to the disease. Not sure what you mean by all along. What we actually see happening is that once it is detected in an area, prevalence rates gradually go up. This would suggest that the disease is new to the area where it is detected.

No. What you're seeing is once it's been detected in an area. Testing frequency is going up, and with it, so are positive tests.

 

[nontyp]

No. What you're seeing is once it's been detected in an area. Testing frequency is going up, and with it, so are positive tests.

Correct, once it is detected there is generally more testing, and the likelihood more positive tests goes up. Beyond initial detection though, prevalence rates in infected herds goes up over time.

 

[tzone]

Correct, once it is detected there is generally more testing, and the likelihood more positive tests goes up. Beyond initial detection though, prevalence rates in infected herds goes up over time.

But how do we know? It's a naturally occurring disease right? It seems to be present where deer are "over populated" or close to it. The areas of MN and WI we hunt, it's not found. But, there is not baiting or feeding like the game farms they're finding it on. The deer here that seem to have it, are near those places.

Like I said, I'm stating my opinion here. Just trying to get people to think. I have no doubt that it is becoming more prevalent.

 

[nontyp]

We know due to testing. Naturally occurring could mean a number of things. If you mean that it just spontaneously pops up when deer numbers are high, I don’t believe that is probable. The disease isn’t well understood, but likely started as a mutation from another tse like scrapie. No one knows exactly how it started or spread. I think it is likely that game farms have been the main vector of spreading the disease over large geographies though.