03-06-2004, 01:02 PM
|
|
|
Bone/ Blood Meal and Mad Cow Disease
The message
from (Bill Oliver) contains these words:
In fact, a 1996 estimate is a good place to start, since
the risk has gone down since then.
The risk of eating BSE-infected beef in Britain, has gone down since
then. That is not the same as saying, that the incidence of nv CJD
infection will decrease, because a) virtually all the meat-eating
population of the UK was exposed to BSE for at least a decade and B) we
still don't know the incubation period, or what other factors activate a
dormant infection.
2. In the words of the National Acadamies of Science report entitled
"Advancing Prion Science (published in 2004)":
"These studies provide some assurances for the lack of blood
transmission of TSE agents, but the inherent deficiencies of
epidemiological approaches, the rarity of the conditions, the difficulty
of correctly diagnosing true cases, and the long incubation period prior
to case expression make these assurances both tentative and infirm. This
is particularly true for assessing the risk of transmitting the vCJD
agent through the transfusion of blood or one of its derivatives since
this is such a new TSE."
Which makes my point. The event is so *rare* that it is difficult
to get decent statistics.
You've misinterpreted the above statement and got it back to front.
It says that because of the lack of statistics, any assurances about
lack of blood-transmission are tentative and infirm.
Or FOOLS like Wilson K, Code C, Ricketts MN., Risk of acquiring
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease from blood transfusions: systematic
review of case-control studies. BMJ. 2000 Jul 1;321(7252):17-9.
who conclude: "Case-control studies do not suggest a risk of
developing Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease from blood transfusion.
That 2000 research has been overtaken by events in the UK. Of the
140-odd UK cases of nv CJD, 15 were blood donors. The recipients of
their donations are monitored, and since 2000, one of those recipients
has developed nv CJD.
Or FOOLS like Ricketts MN, Brown P. Transmissible spongiform encephalopathy
update and implications for blood safety. Clin Lab Med. 2003
Mar;23(1):129-37
who conclude "At this time, the accumulated evidence does not support the
implementation of measures targeted against the risk of transfusion
transmission of sporadic, familial, or iatrogenic CJD."
Those forms of CJD are not related to BSE. The concern is about the new
variant of CJD.
\/\/\/\/\/\
Or FOOLS like Brown P. Variant CJD transmission through blood: risks to
predictors and "predictees". Transfusion. 2003 Apr;43(4):425-7. who
noted: "With the passage of time, systematically collected
epidemiologic data substantiated the absence of CJD transmissions in
blood recipients
Out of date, see above.
Furthermore, the presence of infectivity in
blood-interactive organs is not equivalent to infectivity in the blood,
However, it does pose the problem of human cross-contamination by
surgical instruments, since the prions are not susceptible to
sterilisation techniques.
Considering the millions and millions of blood transfusions that
have occurred since the BSE hysteria over a decade ago, and in that
time there has only been *one* ***possible*** example, which is
actually *more* likely to be diet-related, I'll go along with
the FOOLS who use words like "tiny," "negligible," and "minimal."
You're conflating statistics. There are only 15 *known* nv-CJD
infected human blood donors; their blood never reached "millions and
millions" of recipients. One case of infection from only 15 donors is
rather more worrying.
The "decade ago", is not yet grounds for complacency either, since we
still don't know the full range of the incubation period. Recent
research on discarded appendixes and tonsils showed that some of the UK
population are still carrying the prions.
Janet.
|