Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Montana cow tests positive for brucellosis

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 10:40 AM
Original message
Montana cow tests positive for brucellosis
Source: Chicago Tribune

Montana officials said Monday that a cow has tested positive for brucellosis -- a serious livestock disease that had been declared nonexistent in U.S. cattle earlier this year.

The infection means Montana ranchers must undergo an expensive testing program before shipping cattle out of state and will have to increase vaccinations. The state will lose its federal brucellosis-free status until it can demonstrate it has the disease under control.

Brucellosis is a disease carried by wild animals including bison and elk in the greater Yellowstone area. It can cause pregnant cows to abort their calves but transmission to humans is rare.

...

In February, the U.S. Department of Agriculture declared all 50 states to be brucellosis-free in their commercial herds -- the first time that had happened in 74 years.


chicagotribune.com


Read more: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-montana-brucellosis,0,6236915,print.story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. Now they will just want to kill the rest of the Bison heard
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Unfortunately, that's probably what they will want to do.
Both elk and bison carry brucellosis. The disease has a much lower occurrence rate in elk, but they tend to wander farther and mix more with cattle. The brucellosis in the Bridger herd likely came from elk, scientists said last year.

Bison are subjected to hazing and slaughter if they leave the park. Elk are subjected to neither.

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2008/06/10/news/10brucellosis.txt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellerpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. I didn't hear that pronouncement by the USDA in Feb.
or I would have called it a lie. My pet dairy heifer contacted brucellosis (Bangs disease) in 1965 from running with a herd of beef cattle for a summer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. why would that be a lie?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slampoet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
18.  self edit
Edited on Tue Jun-10-08 01:14 PM by slampoet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellerpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
21. I wouldn't have been. I misread the OP.
The heat has gotten to me today. :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. I think they just meant they "thought" domestic cattle were cleared of infections in all states
In 2005 their was an outbreak in Idaho. Wyoming also had infections in 2003 and 2004.

It's never really gone. It's only a matter of how long it's been since the last domestic case being recorded. They'd just reached a point where they would list all the states as being brucellosis-free for the first time in the past 74 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellerpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #5
22. I'm faint from the heat today.
Edited on Tue Jun-10-08 04:35 PM by yellerpup
I misread the OP to say that there hadn't been a case of brucellosis for 74 years. :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. Huh? What does a case of Bang's in 1965 have to do with
declaring it eradicated in the last couple of years?

You know, that TIME thing???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellerpup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
23. My mistake. You are right about the TIME thing, of course.
I misread the OP and posted as if the government reported that there hadn't been a case of brucellosis in the past 74 years. :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
6. What strain?
Biological warfare

In 1954, B. suis became the first agent weaponized by the U.S. at its Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas. Brucella species survive well in aerosols and resist drying. Brucella and all other remaining biological weapons in the US arsenal were destroyed in 1971-72 when the U.S. offensive biological weapons (BW) program was discontinued. <10>

The United States BW program focused on three agents of the Brucella group:

* Porcine Brucellosis (Agent US)
* Bovine Brucellosis (Agent AB)
* Caprine Brucellosis (Agent AM)

Agent US was in advanced development by the end of the Second World War. When the USAF wanted a biological warfare capability, the Chemical Corps offered agent US in the M114 bomblet, based after the 4-pound bursting bomblet developed for anthrax in the Second World War. Though the capability was developed, operational testing indicated that the weapon was less than desirable, and the USAF termed it an interim capability until replaced by a more effective biological weapon. The main drawbacks of the M114 with agent US was that it was incapacitating (the USAF wanted "killer" agents), the storage stability was too low to allow for storing at forward air bases, and the logistical requirements to neutralize a target were far higher than originally anticipated, requiring unreasonable logistical air support.

Agents US and AB had a median infective dose of 500 org/person, and AM was 300 org/person. The rate-of-action was believed to be 2 weeks, with a duration of action of several months. The lethality estimate was based on epidemiological information at 1 - 2%. AM was always believed to be a more virulent disease, and a 3% fatality rate was expected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brucellosis

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrs_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. most likely
B. abortus (bovine) Although, B. melitensis (the caprine form that is the biggest threat to humans worldwide) has been found in cattle before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. We are talking about naturally occurring Bang's? Why are you going off
on a tangent about bioweapons?

The cow caught Bang's because it isn't TRULY eradicated from the US. There is an endemic problem, sadly, in the bison of Yellowstone, who caught it in the first place from domestic cattle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrs_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. right
Edited on Tue Jun-10-08 11:50 AM by mrs_p
and whether cattle actually catch it from bison is highly controversial!

edit:spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Why are you going off on an anti-First Amendment tangent?
It was just a question. Searched for Brucellosis, wikipedia was one of the first entries. That was listed at wikipedia. So, asking what precise genetic strain would seem a question of relevance to reporters working on the story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I'm just anti-jumping to silly conclusions, like it's a bioweapon rather
Edited on Tue Jun-10-08 12:07 PM by kestrel91316
than naturally occurring.

I do know a bit about brucellosis, as a VETERINARIAN.

Oh, and if I wanted to go on an "anti-First Amendment" tangent, I would be asking for you to be f---ing tombstoned. Don't be a moron.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
impeachem Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. I had brucellosis!!!!!!!
It is a very serious disease, I am lucky to have survivied it. I was in intensive care when they figured out what I had.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. I know a teenage girl who is suffering from it right now
They believe she caught it from a nanny goat when she was trying to get the kid to suckle. She was exposed in late December began getting really sick in February and it took them until the end of April to get the right diagnosis. By that time it had involved her nervous system and she was in a wheelchair.

She's doing much better now, or was when I saw her last.

It is a serious disease when in humans. Luckily it's not that easy to catch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Yep. Nasty public health hazard. That's why we hae worked SO HARD
for decades to eradicate it.

One of the large animal medicine residents when I was in vet school (a sweet young buck from Australia) had caught brucellosis before we knew him and had intermittent problems with it where he would get sick and miss work. Not sure if the treatment has improved - they probably have better antibiotics for it these days compared to 25 years ago......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. If you object to the paragraph at wikipedia,
perhaps you should delete censor it. Perhaps you'll be successful, or perhaps your edit will be undone.

With salmonella-infected tomatoes it is reported as "saintpaul" strain of salmonella. Perhaps we'll find out more information regarding DNA information of this strain of brucellosis, perhaps not, since it is the FOOD supply we're talking about, though pasteurization probably gives a margin of safety.

It seems to me that you object to my question too strenuously. Seems like there's smoke there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Why are you trying to draw me into a flame war??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. ...
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-10-08 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
19. I love when they call these factory farms "ranches".
These are about the same as ranches as my back yard garden is a farm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC