Home page logo

interesting-people logo Interesting People mailing list archives

Re: Govt has right to block testing for mad cow disease, court rules
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 15:09:15 -0400

Begin forwarded message:

From: EEkid () aol com
Date: September 1, 2008 12:31:00 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Govt has right to block testing for mad cow disease, court rules

Valdis.Kletnieks-"As a result, the testing *would* create a false sense of security."

As opposed to no knowledge? Is ignorance bliss in a situation where a fatal disease exists?

While there may not be inexpensive, easy to use tests currently on the market, there are patents for tests which detect piron disease before symptoms appear. These tests need to be commercially developed.

Having a court ban testing is a huge mistake which will suppress destroy the future development of such friendly tests. Why develop a product which can't be commercially used?

Valdis.Kletnieks-"if you're testing for an fairly rare event with a test that has a noticeable false-
positive rate,"

Without comprehensive testing, there is no way to know just how wide spread the problem is especially if it's symptomatic as you stated, then consumed before the disease becomes symptomatic.

Prion diseases have been found in humans, house cats, sheep, goats, mink, squirrels, Elk, White-tailed deer, Mule Deer and Red Deer, There is also evidence that social interaction of the deer population at feeding stations play's a role in prion transmission. What other animal can you think of that can be found in dense populations and feeds socially? Prion diseases can be inherited. There is even speculation that they may spontaneously generate in some cases.

Without comprehensive testing, any commentary regarding the actual infection rate is simply speculation. Without knowing the actual infection rate, there is no way to know what the future human infection rate will be. Will the future human prion disease rate be 1% or 94%? Banning such tests only ensures the tools needed to determine the actual infection rate will be slowed to market or never exist.

To ban testing may prevent a "false sense of security" but, I'd be willing to bet a false sense of security is the last thing the cattle industry is actually worried about.


It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]