Study: Hunters Die After Consuming CWD-Infected Venison

[tjm]

37 minutes ago, luckycraft said:

I get that too.  

Nope I can see that you don't get anything that I've said and that's okay. More bluntly; if you have any concerns don't hunt- because as soon as you touch that animal you are at risk. Your gutting knife is contaminated and must be soaked in lye or autoclaved before you use it again. Your clothing should be treated with lye and then incinerated. This is serous stuff,if you actually believe.

On the other hand if you deliberately  hunt in a diseased herd, you proclaim that you don't really believe at all and you ain't a bit scared, so why be the hypocrite and refuse to eat what you sought? Seriously, if you hunt diseased animals you must expect to kill diseased animals even if one of them has a negative test result.  I don't get why people act like a test after exposure is going to reverse their already done exposure and contamination.

[luckycraft]

5 minutes ago, tjm said:

Nope I can see that you don't get anything that I've said and that's okay. More bluntly; if you have any concerns don't hunt- because as soon as you touch that animal you are at risk. Your gutting knife is contaminated and must be soaked in lye or autoclaved before you use it again. Your clothing should be treated with lye and then incinerated. This is serous stuff,if you actually believe.

On the other hand if you deliberately  hunt in a diseased herd, you proclaim that you don't really believe at all and you ain't a bit scared, so why be the hypocrite and refuse to eat what you sought? Seriously, if you hunt diseased animals you must expect to kill diseased animals even if one of them has a negative test result.  I don't get why people act like a test after exposure is going to reverse their already done exposure and contamination.

Thanks man!   

[tjm]

Still don't get it?

I encourage testing even in herds where CWD hasn't shown up yet, after all it is the only method we have of tracking the spread of this disease. Because of cost the agencies probably won't test until a fatal case is confirmed as CWD, but they should. I think mandatory testing should be state wide and that a facility should be provided for poachers to have their deer tested too. It's our best attempt at tracking and possible control. 

I'm  just saying that the test is not meant to confirm the meat fit or unfit to eat. Science will say that until a connection between CWD and a confirmed case of vCJD (not CJD)  happens the meat is all equally fit or unfit for consumption. So far that has never happened. But I understand that it's just science.

For all forms of CJD an EU study showed "that "87% of cases were sporadic, 8% genetic, 5% iatrogenic and less than 1% variant."  (iatrogenic means a friendly doctor infected people with contaminated instruments) The 1% variant is the kind we are concerned with, that lot that was from a zoonotic source; so far all from cows with BSE.

[luckycraft]

No I get it, but if you feel like insulting my intelligence once more feel free to do so.    What I don’t understand is:

1.  Why you feel your population is assumed healthy when deer are free ranging, when an infected deer can look normal 

2.   Why you can’t admit you wouldn’t eat a known infected deer, but rather attack me. 
 

Exposure is one thing but actively ingesting it is another.    
 

the point is, if you say no you wouldn’t eat it then all the scientific data you put in her YOU don’t stand by and your point is moot.

 

I think I know the answer, but probably won’t get it. 

[tjm]

28 minutes ago, luckycraft said:

.  Why you feel your population is assumed healthy when deer are free ranging, when an infected deer can look normal 

Actually I can't. I kinda expect to be in a testing zone this year. I haven't a clue whether I'll hunt or not. The few pounds of good meat on deer are pretty costly in effort for a fat lazy fellow and I may just opt to buy chicken. Given the proximity of last year's positives, I suppose my herd should be considered as infected and so I will consider each one as having tested positive.

For  how can we assume that any deer taken from a known infected herd is not infected regardless of testing, when it's known that some false negatives happen?

32 minutes ago, luckycraft said:

Why you can’t admit you wouldn’t eat a known infected deer,

I haven't had the opportunity to actually make such a decision. No one can say what they would do in a circumstance that they haven't already been in. Although if I refused to eat one based on the current knowledge, it would be hypocritical wouldn't it?

[luckycraft]

15 minutes ago, tjm said:

Actually I can't. I kinda expect to be in a testing zone this year. I haven't a clue whether I'll hunt or not. The few pounds of good meat on deer are pretty costly in effort for a fat lazy fellow and I may just opt to buy chicken. Given the proximity of last year's positives, I suppose my herd should be considered as infected and so I will consider each one as having tested positive.

For  how can we assume that any deer taken from a known infected herd is not infected regardless of testing, when it's known that some false negatives happen?

I haven't had the opportunity to actually make such a decision. No one can say what they would do in a circumstance that they haven't already been in. Although if I refused to eat one based on the current knowledge, it would be hypocritical wouldn't it?

Holy moly!    

[Ryan Miloshewski]

This "study" is the equivalent of Wakefield's "study" claiming vaccines cause autism.

It's pseudo science and the fact it's being shared across platforms is a disgrace. CWD will likely become zoonotic at some point, but this is a lunatic Dablemont-esque article. 

[snagged in outlet 3]

19 hours ago, luckycraft said:

With all this posted.   Still no answers whether anyone would knowingly be willing to eat a positive.  

I don't have a dog in this fight but I'm not eating it...   No way!!  Deer meat isn't that good anyway.  

[luckycraft]

1 hour ago, snagged in outlet 3 said:

I don't have a dog in this fight but I'm not eating it...   No way!!  Deer meat isn't that good anyway.  

Appreciate the honesty!

[tjm]

2 hours ago, snagged in outlet 3 said:

Deer meat isn't that good

use more gravy