Slashdot Mirror


Investigating Chronic Wasting Disease

windows writes "The Saint Louis Post-Dispatch has an article in today's newspaper on efforts by many states to test for chronic wasting disease. The disease affects deer and elk, and is similar to Mad Cow Disease in how it destroys brain tissue giving it a spony appearance under a microscope. Due to the rapid spread of the disease recently, most states are enlisting the assistance of hunters to provide brain stems of deer, to test for the disease. The purpose of this study is just to determine how far geographically the disease has spread. It is not yet understood how the disease is spread or if it is a threat to cattle or humans."

307 comments

  1. IN SOVIET RUSSIA by IN+SOVIET+RUSSIA · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Chronic Wasting Diseases Investigate You!

    1. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, Shots in the Head are Trolled!

    2. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have noise to signal ratio!

  2. Chronic Wasting Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wasted my share of chronic... I never thought it was a disease!!!

    1. Re:Chronic Wasting Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost posted at 4:20... Nice.

    2. Re:Chronic Wasting Disease by garcia · · Score: 2

      that CHRONIC has a slightly different effect...

      It eats your brain but makes you fat all at the same time ;)

    3. Re:Chronic Wasting Disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're coming head first into a battle of diseases that mother nature is sending us. Eventually we'll have to just leave this planet or it'll kill us off.

  3. So by TheFlu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They don't know how it's spread or if it will hurt me, but I shouldn't worry about handling items possibly contaminated with the disease? Makes sense...

    1. Re:So by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 5, Informative

      They know it's carried in the brain and tissue of the spinal cord. If you don't cut into the brain or spinal cord when butchering the animals, you have nothing to worry about. You can handle all the meat from the animals that you want with no effects to you at all.

    2. Re:So by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, you turn the deer brainstems over to the government, and eat the rest of the deer. Five years later, some people knock on your door, and when you answer it, they shoot you and take your brainstem. Then they compare the brainstems, and see whether you contracted this disease from eating the deer you killed.

      Ten years and millions of government dollars later, they announce their research findings: "While it appears that eating deer infected with Chronic Wasting Disease will not cause you to be infected by the disease, our research indicates that deer hunters are at a high risk of sudden death."

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    3. Re:So by brandorf · · Score: 1

      They have come out with special rules (or really recomendations) for handling deer in Wisconsin, like wear elbow length gloves while gutting it and don't use the field knife on the family turkey when you get home, but most of that it common sense. The state had also set up services to get the deer carcass tested for CWD before it was determined to be safe to eat, orherwise the state would have the deer destroyed.

      --


      Bork Bork Bork!!
    4. Re:So by Shalome · · Score: 2

      Duh.. They know how prion-based disease is transmitted... it's through consuming the diseased tissues, largely. And in spongiform disorders, this is the brain/spinal cord tissues/fluids, as far as they know
      So basically, if you kill a deer that might be diseased, don't use/eat any part of the head.

      --
      Moderation totals that amuse me for one of my posts: Flamebait=1, Insightful=2, Funny=2, Overrated=1, Underrated=1
    5. Re:So by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Informative
      Yeah, nvCJD is also found in certain organ meats though, spleen, tonsils etc. So you should probably avoid organ meat. But it's a nerve disease, nerves go everywhere in the body, so there's possibly a risk from eating any part of the body; but some parts are far riskier than others.

      Still, there's no evidence that this particular disease can be caught by humans, but personally I would minimise my risk, by having the safer cuts of meat, atleast. YMMV.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    6. Re:So by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      again, like i told someone else....it's not found in the meat, even though the meat has tons of nerves in it. it's only found in the brain, spinal cord, lymph nodes and eyeballs....i doubt anyone will eat those parts of a deer...but eating the safer cuts of meat is a good idea until we really know more about the disease

    7. Re:So by Malc · · Score: 1

      Bone marrow too, I suspect. I'm sure a Briton could clarify things further, but with with mad cow disease the UK even banned meat on the bone (no T-Bone steaks) for a while. It might still be.

    8. Re:So by BandwidthHog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Seems the researchers are collecting entire heads of deer, and not just brainstems.

      Hopefully we won't have a lot of deer hunters erroneously informed by slashdot's misleading summary; asking the public to harvest the brain stems of these animals wouldn't be terribly wise.

      Fortunately, this being slashdot, basic demographics ensure that won't be much of a problem.

      --

      Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
    9. Re:So by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      the DNR advises boning out the meat, not sawing thru the bone...guess they're thinking the same thing.

    10. Re:So by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
      It's very difficult to prove that the disease is NEVER found in a particular part of the animal; if it was infectious one time in 10,000 you may not find that unless you did tens of thousands of experiments. I don't think that many tests have been performed.

      Also the butchering process can spread the infectious material around some, so probably no part of the animal is entirely safe.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    11. Re:So by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And there, the key phrase finally spills from the expert's fingertips onto his keys.. "until we really know more about the disease." Except for that "meat has nerves" and "don't eat deer brains," you don't know fuck all about it any more than anyone else does.

      Going by your logic, brain cancer's located in the brain so it can't be caused by any other outside factor, or affect any other area, even though the rest of the human meat has nerves all around in it. I picture you typing that stuff with a banjo on your knee, picking your teeth with a clipped toenail.

    12. Re:So by crawling_chaos · · Score: 2
      Duh.. They know how prion-based disease is transmitted.

      Are you suggesting that these deer and elk have turned cannibal? There has to be another method of spread or, as someone else has noted, this may not be prion-based at all.

      --
      You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
      -- Colonel Adolphus Busch
    13. Re:So by mary_will_grow · · Score: 1

      -- If you don't cut into the brain or spinal cord when butchering the animals

      Which is fine, assuming you dont want, uhh, steaks... :)

      --
      Why stick up for big business?
  4. Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None care about them. But if this disease gets spread over cattle and humans, so it's a disaster

    1. Re:Deers? by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In Wisconsin we sure as hell care about deer. Not "deers" you bonehead. Deer hunting is a vital part of the economy of many states and important to the culture of the people in these states. Maybe if you lived there you'd understand, so don't go saying nobody cares about deer.

    2. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      "I mean, who wants to die over a deer?"

      I'm sure the deer doesn't want to die, but you give him no choice in the matter I guess. Hopefully all of the hunters and other obsolete folks will come down with this.

    3. Re:Deers? by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      I wish i had more time to explain hunting to all the people who bad-mouth it and have never experienced it. I also wish people who don't care for hunting and don't want to learn anything about it before spouting off would just shut the fuck up.

    4. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      'hunting' sounds pretty much like 'sniping'. you take a gun, and shoot something unsuspecting from far away. at least you (hopefully) eat whatever it is you killed, as opposed to the snipers who just ran away. i'm sure it gives you a rush to kill things, but it's still murder.

    5. Re:Deers? by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      um...you've never heard of bow-hunting, or still-hunting...go educate yourself on the merrits of hunting before bashing it you fucking retard.

    6. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      okay. sorry if i made a generalization that you were using a gun and not a bow, or some other method of killing, hell a kife even. but is shooting someone with a bow alright then? if it gets my rocks off? ca i wait outside your house until you come home from work, and then shoot you with a bow, or stab you? how about if i eat you?

    7. Re:Deers? by Com2Kid · · Score: 1
      • Deer hunting is a vital part of the economy of many states


      Uh, who in the world buys deer, from what I have gathered (Grandfather hunted) deer meat is tough as hell and a bitch to cook.
    8. Re:Deers? by AndroidCat · · Score: 2
      Uh, who in the world buys deer, from what I have gathered (Grandfather hunted) deer meat is tough as hell and a bitch to cook.

      Well, haven't cooked deer. I'd suggest a strong marinade, maybe even lime juice, spices in a zip-loc bag for a day.

      Of course, marinading the chief with something high test always seems to work too. It doesn't have the kick that a good prion protein to the brain-stem does, but it has its charms.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    9. Re:Deers? by Saxerman · · Score: 4, Informative
      Deer hunting is a vital part of the economy of many states

      I live in Wisconsin and while I do hunt, I don't hunt religiously every year. My family owns our own land to hunt from which provides local property taxes. We bought local supplies to build the cabin and tree stands. We eat out most every night and buy local groceries when we don't. We paid a local company to have a well dug and put in a septic system. We frequent a number of local taverns and spend too much on beer and even more on tips. We've been hunting in the area of a number of years now, and the locals know us all by name.

      I didn't go hunting this year.

      --

      A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

    10. Re:Deers? by brandorf · · Score: 1

      Except for the fact that a deer is not a person. Do you feel bad for the cows that are lined up every day and summarily executed for hamburger? Do you think hunting turkey is bad a well? As opposed to the turkeys that are grown for consumption?

      --


      Bork Bork Bork!!
    11. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really care about [killing] them, for sure.

    12. Re:Deers? by brandorf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nobody buys deer, but they do pay to have their kills processed. The state also profits from the sale of Deer Hunting Licenses, and local retailers benefit from the sale of long guns, bows, ammunition, camo/blazewear, tree stands, etc. Hunting equipment is a very profitable industry.

      --


      Bork Bork Bork!!
    13. Re:Deers? by CommieOverlord · · Score: 1

      Iy is called "venison". And by no means as popular as chicken or beef, it is still somewhat common-place.

    14. Re:Deers? by Saxerman · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Uh, who in the world buys deer, from what I have gathered (Grandfather hunted) deer meat is tough as hell and a bitch to cook.

      Considering what we spend every year to go hunting versus the amount of meat we actually bring back, it would be a lot cheaper to stay home and buy the finest steak for diner once a week. See my previous post for more details.

      My family hunts for more reasons that just the meat. But the meat is part of the culture too. Venison (deer meat) comes in different flavors and textures which depend mostly on if the deer is healthy and eating properly. We make most of our venison into jerky and sausage, but we save the steaks and tenderloins which we eat on special occasions.

      Savages such as myself can still take a certain pride in knowing that we have brought food in from out of the wilderness. And that meat we're eating... well, some reason, the deer I shot, tracked, field dressed, dragged out of the woods, and brought home, my venison, tastes better than any steak I've ever had.

      --

      A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.

    15. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm against hunting in general, but I think turkey hunting is okay. Turkeys are smarter than most hunters. Ask the average turkey hunter how they did, and most are willing to talk about anything but whether they actually GOT a turkey. It's still not an equal battle, we'd need to arm turkeys for that, and then we'd have to license turkeys for hunters season.

      I'm all for exterminating deer, at least where we've almost totally displaced them from their (former) forests. If it's a choice between a deer killing a motorist on I-95 and some whack job who gets all horny shooting a lured deer, I'm all for Mr. horny deer-killer.

    16. Re:Deers? by davemeg · · Score: 1

      Yes, we should pay attention to this. If this is related to mad cow disease/kuru/Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease, then the infectious agent is a prion. Commonly used sterilization techniques don't work. these diseases are nasty, progressive until fatal, and have no real treatment.
      prion
      n : (microbiology) an infectious protein particle similar to a virus but lacking nucleic acid; thought to be the agent responsible for scrapie and other degenerative diseases of the nervous system

    17. Re:Deers? by swillden · · Score: 2

      Venison (deer meat) comes in different flavors and textures which depend mostly on if the deer is healthy and eating properly.

      It also depends a lot on what the deer has been eating. That's part of the reason I prefer the archery hunt -- it's earlier in the year when the deer are still eating high mountain meadow grasses. At least my part of the country, by the time the rifle hunt comes around, most of the deer are in the lower country, feeding on sage brush and such.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    18. Re:Deers? by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1
      Actually, the epidemic (if that's what it is) may have started in domestic livestock and spread to wild herds via contact along fencelines.

      I've been following this for a while. I hunt with a camera instead of a rifle, but it's just as important to me even if I don't eat much venison. I've read that overcrowding and mismanagement of domestic herds may have played a big part in the disease getting its foothold. It would be a tragedy if this turns out to be yet another example of mankind's careless destruction of nature.

      Here's another interesting article.

    19. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [i]Deer hunting is a vital part of the economy of many states [/i]

      And the manufacturing of gas to kill Jews was a vital part of the German economy for a while. Too badly we can't open the camps back up to handle these animal torturers.

    20. Re:Deers? by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      Ask the average turkey hunter how they did, and most are willing to talk about anything but whether they actually GOT a turkey.
      LOL. That reminds me of the people I see fishing from the beach with 8 rods apiece. I've never seen a fish caught yet.

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    21. Re:Deers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, there it is. The standard cry from someone who probably knows little about the subject.

      There's this misconception about hunting people have, that all hunters do is take the biggest gun they can find, walk into the woods where a deer has been chained up to a pole and blow it away. Poor defenseless deer, right?

      Let's not forget that deer have an excellent of hearing and smell, and will know you're coming before you do. Or that they can haul ass, jump 5 foot fences and are agile. How about the hundreds and hundreds of acres of forest you have to try to find them in, on top of their natural camo. Or the trees and brush you have to shoot in between and through to even have a chance at hitting one. Or the fact that many times, a deer that's been shot looks at you funny, flips you the bird and keeps hauling ass. Take a look at the numbers for how many hunting permits a US state issues versus how many deer are harvested. Sometimes, you'll spend a week in the woods and see nothing more than squirrels and birds. Repeat that for three years. Poor defenseless deer.

      You're right, it is murder. Hunters kill things. But if you call hunters murderers, you'd better be at least a vegetarian, else where do you think the meat for your burgers, chicken and turkey comes from? You wanna talk about defenseless animals, talk about the ones in cages bred for the slaughter. Hunters take the personal responsibility of actually putting in the work for their meat, not relying on someone else. Most people don't have the guts to kill, dress and butcher what they eat. I'd like to see them spend the day in a slaughterhouse. Yeah, right. That would be icky and mean and gross. But they sure like the end results, don't they?

      Moron.

  5. All that time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ..I thought I was wasting away because I sit inside reading Slashdot on lovely sunny Sunday afternoons.

  6. In other news... by Sirion · · Score: 5, Funny
    "[CRW] is similar to Mad Cow Disease in how it destroys brain tissue giving it a spony appearance under a microscope."

    This just in: researchers have found symptoms of Chronic Wasting Disease in various Slashdot editors. Details at 11.

  7. spony? by Polymorph2000 · · Score: 0

    Spony isn't in the dictionary......so what is something that appears spony?

    1. Re:spony? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Spony isn't in the dictionary......so what is something that appears spony?

      I believe the author meant 'spumoni.' It's delicious! :-9

    2. Re:spony? by hplasm · · Score: 1

      The 'J' was missing. Should be 'sponjy'...wait..doesn't that have a 'U' in it?

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  8. Great... by Knunov · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "...most states are enlisting the assistance of hunters to provide brain stems of deer, to test for the disease."

    Now the rednecks and hillbillies will have a government approved reason for hunting defenseless animals for entertainment.

    This wouldn't happen IN SOVIET RUSSIA. IN SOVIET RUSSIA, THE STATE HUNTS YOU!

    Actually, I suppose it would. IN SOVIET RUSSIA, they probably hunted endangered species for shits and giggles.

    Knunov

    --
    Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
    1. Re:Great... by VampireByte · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Now the rednecks and hillbillies will have a government approved reason for hunting defenseless animals for entertainment

      It's not just for entertainment, they also do it for food. If people aren't supposed to eat animals then why are they made out of meat?

      --

      Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

    2. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people are made out of meat as well, and people have problems eating them.

    3. Re:Great... by Knunov · · Score: 2

      "It's not just for entertainment, they also do it for food."

      This reminds me of a discussion I was got in with a friend of mine that hunts for 'sport'. (as if shooting an animal taking a drink of water from 500 yard away with a rifle is 'sport'. jump on a deer's back and snap its neck with your bare hands, THEN you can call it a sport) Anyway, my argument was that eating cow meat was more humane because the animal yielded more meat, and as such, fewer animals had to die to reach the desired meat yield.

      "If people aren't supposed to eat animals then why are they made out of meat?"

      Humans are also made out of meat. And I *rarely* eat humans. The smell turns me off.

      Knunov

      --
      Why do users with IDs under 100,000 or over 700,000 usually have the most worthwhile comments?
    4. Re:Great... by Cyno01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I really dont get these eco-wanks who are all against hunting. The reason we have hunting is to fix our mistakes! I know that hunting has become an excuse for hicks to go shoot off their guns, but it does serve a purpose. The deer population needs to be kept in check, theres no argument for that. Years ago we fucked up and removed the natural checks, wolves, mt lions etc for fear of our livestock. The unfortunate consequence was that without predators the deer population exploded. Now we have too many deer, and because of too many deer problems arise, like chronic wasting disease. I think its wrong for hicks to go out and kill things for the sake of killing things, but without them we'd have carcases of starved and diseased deer everywhere, hundreds more (people) would die each year in deer vs car accidents, and our crops would be gone. I live in the middle of metro Milwaukee, i've had a deer in my front yard. Maybe in the deep suberbs, but you shouldn't have deer in your yard in the middle of the city! Hunting is just our way of trying to fix what we screwed up. I dont understand why people think piles of rotting deer carcases along the side of the road are preferable to sharpshooters in helos.

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    5. Re:Great... by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, I'll take a stab at this troll...

      Obviously you know nothing about hunting. Most hunters go out to fill their freezer and feed their family.

      Hunting is an inexpensive way to feed a family and thin out an overpopulated herd. Why let the deer die of overcrowding and starvation? Overcrowding leads to many types of disease also. I don't know if CWD is due to overcrowding, but it does accelerate it's growth.

      Many hunters (myself included) donate meat that won't fit in my freezer to shelters and churches. Solves more than one problem (herd population and feeding hungry).

      Also, as any bowhunter knows, deer not far from defenseless.

    6. Re:Great... by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

      The only reason we don't eat people is because they taste terrible. Oh yeah, and brain diseases canibalism leads to brain diseases.

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    7. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know tons of other hillbillies and rednecks that read slashdot daily and am going for thier CS degree. If you live anywhere near Wisconsin, thank all us ass backwards inbreds for hunting, auto collisions and crop damage is bad enough _with_ poplation control. But thats not why I hunt, I do it because there is a very primitive but compelling feeling out in the woods, one Ive never felt elsewhere, try it once, youll know what im talking about. Oh, and for the record, in four years of hunting, i havent killed a defenseless one yet, but when I do, Ill be sure to eat it so it doesnt go to waste. How many defenless cows have you eaten this year?

    8. Re:Great... by Kaboom13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Now the rednecks and hillbillies will have a government approved reason for hunting defenseless animals for entertainment."
      I am not a hunter, but believe it or not, controlled hunting is neccesary. Most of the natural predators of deer have been killed by humans, because they threaten cattle. Deer are voracious eaters, and without predators to heck their population will decimate their enviroment. Controlled and limited (and legal) hunting is the only way to clean up the mess we made in killing off all the larger predators. Some people enjoy hunting, and often pay for the priviledge. Hunters did not need a goverment approved reason, they already had one. Furthermore, deer are far from defenseless, and in an unarmed fight would probably win against a human. Hunter's use rifles or arrows because thats what we are best at.

    9. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i question your premise that it's valid to feed your family off of dead animals. do you realize how inefficient it is to grow animals and then kill them? we're not scrapping to stay alive, we have plenty of resources available to produce a steady supply of non-slaughtered food.

    10. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How many defenless cows have you eaten this year?"

      None.. Just because some animals are (wrongly) bred-and-slaughtered doesn't serve as a valid argument for others to be.

    11. Re:Great... by elmegil · · Score: 1
      I *rarely* eat humans.

      And I rarely beat children. Oh, wait...

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    12. Re:Great... by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe you have plenty of resources.

      I suggest you take some of your resources down to the local food bank and feed some hungry people.

      It is not ineffecient at all to kill a deer and butcher it and eat it. If the deer didn't exist and I had to feed it a ton of food for 2 years before I could slaughter it, then maybe.

      On the other hand, I don't eat grass. Deer are very plentiful (very overcrowded), eat grass, and taste great. Venison provides nutrition for humans.

      I realize you just have some aversion to killing animals for food, and that is fine. Good for you. But don't spread FUD about eating meat. In moderation (like any food product) it is good for you.

    13. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And i would question yours. I am not even a hunter I your argument makes no sense. You have lots of deer out in the woods so many in fact that there is too many. Therefore if you kill and eat one it is more efficent than growing tofu.

      You my friend are an idiot.

    14. Re:Great... by mickwd · · Score: 1

      "Now we have too many deer, and because of too many deer problems arise, like chronic wasting disease."

      Good job there isn't a human over-population problem anywhere in the world, isn't it ? No doubt you could use your extensive medical knowledge to tell us what might occur if that were to happen.

    15. Re:Great... by Cyno01 · · Score: 2

      IANAMD but i do know that disease spreads where there are to many people too, but the point is, human overpopulation isn't because someone else killed off all our predators.

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    16. Re:Great... by Mr_Icon · · Score: 2
      IANAMD but i do know that disease spreads where there are to many people too, but the point is, human overpopulation isn't because someone else killed off all our predators.

      No indeed.

      --
      If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
    17. Re:Great... by dameron · · Score: 1

      Well, I'll take a stab at this troll...

      Make sure you field dress him, remove his brain stem and spine, then strap him to the hood of your SUV...

      Obviously you know nothing about hunting. Most hunters go out to fill their freezer and feed their family.

      When they're not reading slashdot.

      Many hunters (myself included) donate meat that won't fit in my freezer to shelters and churches.

      I have a hard time believing any organized charity would accept meat wrapped in white paper and labeled with masking tape much less turn around and feed this meat to the needy. The liability issues involved with spoiled or poorly dressed meat, or things like "spony" brains, should scare away any organization with significant assets.

      -dameron

    18. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on down to Hell Hole swamp where we live at we would love to talk to you about hunting.

    19. Re:Great... by brandorf · · Score: 1

      The donated meat usually come from the meat processing plants (you give these guys your dead deer, and they give you back the interesting meaty bits, cut and shrinkwrapped, and they dispose of the skin and organs) The hunters don't donate the food directly, but when they send their kill to be processed, they can have X% sent to charity, so the local food bank gets venison steak and whatnot.

      --


      Bork Bork Bork!!
    20. Re:Great... by dameron · · Score: 1

      Well, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the info. It's been about fifteen years since I lived in the south and did any hunting, and that was mostly squirrel, not exactly something that'll have many "leftovers" to donate.

      Hunting for food, when there really is a need, is probably a good thing. It's the upper middle class trophy hunters (which I think are much more numerous than the "must hunt for food" types) that bother me. Maybe states should issue 70% fewer licenses, have slightly longer seasons and
      higher limits, and make getting a license "need based".

      -dameron

    21. Re:Great... by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hunting is an inexpensive way to feed a family

      I'm a hunter, and I think that hunting is both a worthwhile sport and the best mechanism we have for stabilizing herd sizes and preventing massive winter kills, but I take issue with the statement that hunting is an inexpensive way to feed a family.

      Add up everything you spend on gas, food, clothing, hunting and camping equipment. Then figure out how much time you spend hunting and how much money you could have made in that time by working overtime or working a part-time job or a small consulting contract. Then divide that by the pounds of usable meat from an average animal and multiply by the odds of actually taking an animal and you'll almost certainly find that your deer meat is much more expensive than the best steak you can buy at the local grocery store.

      Do the same analysis for an elk or moose hunter and the numbers come out a bit better, mainly because the average elk or moose is so much larger than the average deer (and I'm thinking mule deer, not those dog-sized whitetails), but it's still about sport, not food.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    22. Re:Great... by Nordberg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortuanately humans don't hunt in the same way most predators do.

      Natural predators intentionally single out the elderly, the sick or the young. They thin out the herd in the right way, taking out the weakest link which actually makes the population stronger as a whole. Humans on the other hand tend to go for the strongest, healthiest bucks first. They want trophies, and the tastiest meat. Most hunters wouldn't waste a bullet on a sickly deer, much less want to eat it.

      Hunting might keep the nuisance deer out of our yards and off our highways, but it sure as hell isn't helping the deer as much as a healthy wolf or cougar population would.

      --
      *Splort*
    23. Re:Great... by dhogaza · · Score: 2

      "eco-wanks" for the most part aren't against hunting. Animal rights advocates are. Just as they're against removing exotic fauna that decimate native flora in National Parks (mountain goats in Olympic NP comes to mind) and various other sane acts supported by serious conservationists ...

    24. Re:Great... by dhogaza · · Score: 2

      Traditionally, controlled hunts have targetted bucks, which does little to control population (hint: deer are polygamous).

      Biologists have argued for doe hunts for years, which many hunters resist. Fortunately biologists in some parts of the country, at least, have in recent years becoming somewhat successful in educating the hunting public about the need to reduce the number of does in the population in order to reduce the number of births and therefore the population. This can do a lot to increase the health of individual deer in areas where there are far too many of them.

    25. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kinda like prion diseases?

    26. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Traditionally, controlled hunts have targetted bucks, which does little to control population (hint: deer are polygamous).

      Biologists have argued for doe hunts for years, which many hunters resist. Fortunately biologists in some parts of the country, at least, have in recent years becoming somewhat successful in educating the hunting public about the need to reduce the number of does in the population in order to reduce the number of births and therefore the population. This can do a lot to increase the health of individual deer in areas where there are far too many of them.


      You are either intentionally, or mistakenly misleading readers. Maybe a combination of both.

      Maybe in several decades ago, your misinformation may have rung true, but not in the last few decades.

      In most of the areas I am aware of, there are several ways of regulating the ratio of bucks to does taken. In my state, tags are issued for bucks at the license selling outlet, and tags for does are issued via lottery, also at the same time as the license is purchased. So there is a separate tag or permit issued depending on the sex of the deer. Since the doe permit is an extra cost depending on the type of license, and a separate application, anyone not wanting a doe permit simply doesn't apply for it. On the other hand, leftover permits are issued to those that can apply for the leftover permits on a second attempt, after a deadline for original permit applications passes.

      So it doesn't take education to convince hunters to take does. This also destroys the much ballyhooed fallacy that all a hunter is interested in is a trophy. Make more permits available for does, and more permits will be applied for and used. This is how my area controls deer herds, through the doe permit process, not the regular (buck) permit process.

      Other areas use different dates to regulate when or whether bucks or does can be hunted. A buck only hunting period, a doe only hunting period, a buck and doe hunting period, whatever.

      The facts are that does, through proper game management, are taken at whatever the state and local governments are considered optimal, and adjusted accordingly through subsequent seasons, with all factors (weather, forage, previous deer take, damage to saplings, etc.) taken into account.

      As for other comments that attempt to perpetuate the myth that deer hunting is not cost effective after considering camping, transportation, lodging, etc., another myth. People who live in rural areas who hunt definitely supplement their incomes or food purchases by hunting. Everyone I know who hunts, hunts in groups, not alone. Everyone I know who hunts has been successful on a group basis every year going back decades. Those that are not successful, for whatever reason, receive meat from those who are in specific years. In my area, it is possible to take three or more deer per year, depending on a lottery, method of hunting, application period, etc. The sole problem some of us run into, is freezer space (not a problem for most folks, especially in rural areas, or those with access to a commercial freezer).

      I have a rural neighbor whose son shot a 500 lb bear this year. Last year, he himself shot a bear close to that weight, and his son shot another. This is in addition to the deer he and his sons take annually. Along with the wild turkeys and other (grouse, rabbits, geese, etc.) wildlife, I've never heard of or seen him buying meat in town in the past twenty years or so that I know him. Another neighbor lost his health insurance, has diabetes, lost an eye to diabetes, almost lost a leg to diabetes, had a heart attack recently, has trouble controlling his sugar, can't afford health insurance, is being sued for medical bills, is about to lose his house, can't work, is on social security disability, has a $1200 per month disability check (for both him and his wife), and has prescription drug bills that exceed $600 per month (which he can't afford, so he takes less than a quarter of the meds he supposed to take), and has a multitude of other problems. His two adult sons have low incomes, are both married with kids, and have their own difficulties. Try telling them that the deer and other wild game in their freezers isn't worth it because of "camping" and "transportation" costs.

      I spent nothing on hunting equipment this year. Or last year. Or the year before. About three years ago, I did spend some money on ammo ($23) for sighting my rifle. But the rifle is accurate, and it rarely takes me more than a handful of shots each year to check the accuracy. About 15 years ago, I did spend money on a rifle and scope. About 15 years ago, I did spend money on a bow. Shotguns are hand-me-downs. But once all the equipment is bought, that's about it. My hunting clothes (the newest) are at least ten years old. Same with nearly all of the accessories. A good investment for me.

      While unsuccessful hunters, and those occassionally successful, may take into account "camping" and other "tranportation" costs, and decide whether it is cost effective to hunt, this is a false argument for most hunters. My father and I butcher our own deer. We make our own sausage, cutlets, chops and other cuts without paying anyone else to do it. We also feed dozens of others in our extended family who wait annually for the venison they get. This year, we included the neighbor with diabetes in who we shared the meat with. Other years, he has included us when his hunting, or that of his children was more successful than ours.

      There have been other innaccuracies in other posts. In our area, if you shoot a deer that cannot be consumed, you get another tag/permit. So to state that a hunter would not shoot a sickly deer is innaccurate. I made sure that everyone in our hunting group was aware of CJD, and what happened in Illinois, Wisconsin, and other areas. We were and are in full agreement, and there wasn't any debate or negative comments, that if we saw a sick deer, or a deer or other animal (rabies is also prevalent in area) acting strangely, we would shoot it and recover it for inspection by wildlife biologists. One friend shot a buck about ten years ago which when skinned, showed signs of disease. There was an infection in the shoulder, and he was advised not to eat the meat. He promptly notified wildlife biologists, and was issued a new permit. He was more than happy with this arrangement.

      While I have never taken a doe, it is only recently that I have decided to do so if the opportunity came up. This is not because I am a "trophy" hunter. My trophy has been hanging on the wall for more than 15 years.

      With effective camo clothing (during bow only seasons), a disciplined hunting style, and luck, I have been lucky enough to have deer forage for food within several feet of me, and in many cases, they have been close enough for me to be able to place a hat on their heads if I tried. In the past, I have refused to shoot a doe because invariably, does have two or three fawns with them, and I refuse to shoot a doe if it will affect the chances of the fawns surviving the winter. This has nothing to do with "trophy" hunting. We've wanted to get the deer population up locally, due to the heavy hunting pressure in the area, irrespective of the wider area considerations. Now that these goals have been reached, I've made the decision to take any doe that has fawns with her that are large enough to survive the winter. Some does have small, late born fawns, others have larger fawns that have been born timely or early, and have been feeding well on local farmers' corn and other crops.

      My past refusal to take a doe has been taken into consideration by the area wildlife biologists. They base their calculations on number of permits to issue partly on success ratios of previous years, and other factors. So whether I decide to take a doe or not, for whatever reasons, this is factored into the number of permits made available, and in other areas, how long to extend doe only seasons, etc.

      The buck/doe permit system has been in effect for decades. The same for buck/doe separated hunting dates in other areas. So the arguments over "trophy" hunting, and not shooting does is a false one. Anyone who doesn't want to shoot a doe, fine. There will be other hunters who will be more than happy to get the extra tag. And who will fill it.

      As for "trophy" hunting, it is in all probability most every hunter's desire to be lucky enough to see and shoot a large buck, one worthy of mounting. But this is not what drives hunters to hunt. It is a bonus. And it is one of the anti-hunting establishment's key words in their attack on hunting. They can attack all they want, but I'll be in the field again next year, and the year after that. God willing.

      And as for the hope that CJD will stop hunting, not in my area. The locals will be more than happy to get the extra permits that others don't purchase. And I'll still fill the tags, even if I don't eat the meat, as part of the control on population that I signed up for when I became a hunter. I'll be more than happy to wait until I can send the head/brain stems for testing, and not eating the meat until the test results are back.

      Deer meat, and other game meat is certainly better than the vaccine/anti-biotic injected commercial meat in stores.

    27. Re:Great... by Blackneto · · Score: 2

      There is some problems with your solution on the licenses.
      At least here in Illinois we are over populated with deer. so reducing the lisences would not help.
      We have longer seasons if you bow hunt or use black powder rifles. I wish they would open up more of that time for regular hunting. Need based would also cut down on the amount of licenses sold.
      It would be nice if they changed the licensing so that trophy hunters have a 1/2 limit with a limit of 2 trophies. for every 1 trophy they get they have to get 2 sick/weak ones for conservation purposes. I think a few years of that would bring the animal population to managable size.

      --
      Ursula Andress, Catherine Deneuve, and Charo, twice...
    28. Re:Great... by agentmunchkin · · Score: 1

      I suggest you take some of your resources down to the local food bank and feed some hungry people.

      Food banks in the Madison, WI area won't take venison. As a matter of fact, they reject quite a bit of meat, saying their customers prefer hamburger.

    29. Re:Great... by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 2

      It doesn't have to be expensive. It can be for hunters who buy 40 stupid gadgets every year and don't really know how to hunt however.

      I'd take vacation time anyway, and I wouldn't work a second job while I take vacation time. I get paid for my vacation time so there is no loss on salary.

      I bowhunt most of the time. While bows are expensive (I bought a new one this year) they last a very long time with proper maintenance.

      I eat less while hunting, for 8 of us this year the cost of food for one week was 45 dollars.

      I camp with my family, so I already have camping equipment. It's not an extra expense because I would have it even if I didn't hunt.

      It's not too hard to process your own deer if you take the time and learn how.

      I get about 250-300 pounds of meat per year and spend about 150 dollars. I'm getting a good deal.
      Specially cause it's not all hamburger.

  9. From the article by VampireByte · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...has some hunters wondering if the trophy animal they bag could eventually kill them.

    Of course they could always mount the head on the wall, then one day while they are standing under it the nail lets loose and the antlers of the trophy runs through their neck.

    --

    Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

  10. Greg Egan by Jhan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Perhaps one of my favorite SF writers, Bruce Sterling, was closer than I thought...

    In "Sacred Cow" he postulated that there was a slower, more insidious form of BSE which only affected humans after decades... Resulting in >80% death tolls in Britain, >60% in the rest of Europe. 50% in the US. 20% in Japan. A modern black plague.

    The western world collapses, India, Japan and China rise to control the world.

    --

    I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.

    1. Re:Greg Egan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm... If it takes decades before you notice anything, then what's the problem? If anything, a disease like that would only make Western economies MORE competitive, by dramatically decreasing the pensions we have to pay!

    2. Re:Greg Egan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The western world collapses, India, Japan and China rise to control the world.



      If we're all dead, who cares?

    3. Re:Greg Egan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't be too surprised if something similar happened in the future. Maybe not a BSE variant. I think a antibiotic-resistant bacteria or something would be more likely. Think about it: the main way that antibiotic-resistant bacteria is by overuse of antibiotics. And doctors increasingly get patients that demand antibiotics, even if they're unnecessary (if they've got a virus or something). And then there's the people that quit taking antibiotics after their symptoms go away, but before the infection's completely killed off, leaving behind a few stronger bacteria to reinfect again, requiring stronger and stronger antibiotics...

      Not saying antibiotics are bad or anything, but if your doctor says antibiotics aren't necessary, DON'T insist on getting them, and when you do get them, follow the damn instructions. Too bad the people that need to know this don't read slashdot...

    4. Re:Greg Egan by Morf · · Score: 2, Informative

      The idea that there is a slower more insidious form is very strongly backed by studies of Kuru ( a disease of cannibalistic Fore highlanders in Papua New Guinea).

      There were three distinct groups of people who died - people who died in the first wave had one genetic profile, in the middle wave, another , and in the final wave, up to 40 yrs later, a different genetic profile again.

      Also, all those who have died from nvCJD thus far have been homozygous for a gene known to give shorter incuation periods for diseases like this (such as Kuru and the heridary forms of CJD and Gerstmann-Streussler-Schinker).

      Morf (CJD research geek)

      --
      -- Why should I question authority?!
    5. Re:Greg Egan by jub · · Score: 1

      Haven't seen that one, very interesting.

      There's also an interesting article about three wisconsin hunters who hunted together, and all 'coincidentally' died of rare brain diseases.

      I don't think we can assume we know anything about prions and what they can do.

    6. Re:Greg Egan by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      I do believe that given a long enough timescale, the death tolls in all of these nations will be exactly 100%.

      -Nano.

    7. Re:Greg Egan by giminy · · Score: 2

      Thank you Kurt Vonnegut.

      --
      The Right Reverend K. Reid Wightman,
  11. we are too tough... by shaitand · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We are too effectively battling disease nowdays, so it's targeting animals instead. Good, let the bastards rot. Besides that the deer population is actually higher than it's ever been. They can afford to lose a few.

    1. Re:we are too tough... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      This is insightful, bad mod, bad.

    2. Re:we are too tough... by tijnbraun · · Score: 1

      Sorry ... what you just wrote was not insighful... firstofall were are not really good at battling disease at this moment... for most of the infectious diseases the prevalence is increasing... second prions do not contain DNA therefore can't evolve like normal diseases in any way.

    3. Re:we are too tough... by InadequateCamel · · Score: 1

      We are effective at battling disease/illness? Tell that to the English bat researcher who died from rabies last month. Or how about those people who die from TB or the Plague? Or if you want one that is a little more "Western", how about MRSA infections?

      To focus more on disease i can flip through an entire medical dictionary here if you like. A few that come to mind are lupus, diabetes, cirrhosis, hepatitis B/C, cancer, etc... We don't have a clue what were are doing. We research patchwork drugs that alleviate symptoms, but we do not cure the diseases themselves because we don't understand how they work on us.

  12. Nature way for the NRA by cruachan · · Score: 1, Troll

    Buy gun
    Go hunting
    Shoot deer
    Eat deer
    Die a slow lingering death from prions
    Profit the human race!

    1. Re:Nature way for the NRA by dochood · · Score: 1

      Or, we could let them breed out of control until they are all over your yard, in your garage, and jumping in front of your car, killing you and your family members.

      Which do you prefer, you Troll?

      dochood

    2. Re:Nature way for the NRA by timeOday · · Score: 2

      What, you think the NRA invented the idea of living things eating each other?

    3. Re:Nature way for the NRA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im sure the NRA put the whitetail's primary predator (timberwolf) onto the endangered species list too. I can just smell that conspiracy in the air.

    4. Re:Nature way for the NRA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but they invented the concept of killing animals for fun. Those NRA freaks should be murdered the same way they murder animals. We should let all 4 million of their members lose in the woods and then have us normal people track them down and shot them. That would get rid of the vile horror of animal torture. At the very least, we should put the NRA members in work camps.

    5. Re:Nature way for the NRA by Blackneto · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't eat living things.
      I make sure they are properly dead first.

      --
      Ursula Andress, Catherine Deneuve, and Charo, twice...
    6. Re:Nature way for the NRA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually this is about the most ignorant post I have ever seen. What does deer hunting have to do with shootign anythign for sheer fun. This person clearly has no idea what hunting is, has never done, it and has no idea what the NRA really is besides what the local newspaper tells them to think. And as far as letting NRA members lose in the woods and sending what he thinks is normal people after them with guns... bad idea for him. I'm betting the NRA folks can aim and shoot while this person has no idea how to properly handle a firearm. Funny how anti-hunters are... Don't shoot deer, they're pretty. lets go to the local McD's and get a quarter pouder. Cows are ugly and it's OK to eat them. Farm animals live a captive life with no sense of a real life in the wild and absolutely 0% chance of survival. Hunted animals live thier whole life naturally, and have a very good chance of dyingof natural causes havign never been shot by a hunter. Oddly anougn I am NOT an NRA member but if such a thing happened as this moron asks for above I'd be out there with them wiping out the fruits who think that the second ammendment is so bad but then arguing that the first ammendment allows them to do whatever they want up to and including stealing software... Ignorant sh!ts!

  13. chronically wasted by NineNine · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm chronically wasted. Does this mean they're gonna have to shoot me and test my brain stem. Geez, I hope not. Or, if it has to happen, I hope they do it when I'm really, really wasted. That way I won't feel it. Just an idea. Dude.

  14. There No Story About World AIDS Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yet there is a story about disease in deer.

    Good job, Slashdot. Good job.

    1. Re:There No Story About World AIDS Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL!!!!!! that was fucking funny

      I wish we could go queer hunting

    2. Re:There No Story About World AIDS Day by donscarletti · · Score: 1
      Why should there be a story on world AIDS day?

      I concede that AIDS may kill more people than any deer thing and I am not claiming it is not a big issue. However AIDS is not exactly breaking news and the fact that people decide to name a day after it makes no difference to that fact. If slashdot kept in touch with all of the days we wouldn't have time for anything current as current issues have not been around for long enough to name a day after.

      Until of cource there is a "Cronic deer wasting day" which of course would simply be a bunch or NRA rednecks with rifles charging around a forest cronically wasting deers for scientific research.

      Now that would be news

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    3. Re:There No Story About World AIDS Day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... Now there is a good idea. We should chop the heads of gays and examine their brain stems. Maybe we could learn a few things. ;p

  15. Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Subcarrier · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They know it's carried in the brain and tissue of the spinal cord. If you don't cut into the brain or spinal cord when butchering the animals, you have nothing to worry about. You can handle all the meat from the animals that you want with no effects to you at all.

    So how does it spread, then? The elks rub their brain stems together in the throws of passion?

    --
    "I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
    1. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      the only possible threat to humans is in the brain and spinal cord....i didn't say that's how it's spread. And, why are you asking me how it's spread? The article says that they don't know how it spreads...

    2. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you were expressing a level of knowledge about the matter that you obviously don't have. Please don't try to make an argument about a disease that even experts have yet to give plausible explanation to. It's embarrassing.

    3. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by BlowChunx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The point that was trying to be made is this: if you don't know how it is spread, you can't possibly say what is (un)safe to do.

      It seems likely that the elks don't rub brains in daily life, so handling the brain most likely isn't the vector of infection...

    4. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      based on what we know is what i stated...where i got my info is easily available from the WI DNR...but, the disease is not found in the meat...testing told us that.

    5. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then, Dr. Sickmtbnutcase, would you mind explaining one more time how it is that you're -certain- that we're "okay" handling the "meat" of infected animals, unless we're exposed to the brain or spinal cord? Because I didn't get any of that information from the article upon which you apparently based your years of research.

    6. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      ok, if something isn't there to affect you...how are you going to get affected by it? do some reading oh, and CWD has been around for over 20 years...started in the western US....nobody's died from it.

    7. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vector? I didn't know the brain could have a magnitude.

    8. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty clear that you don't have any idea what you're talking about, just give it a rest. Again, despite your "do some reading" dreck, you're still making claims that you know absolutely nothing about. Yes, they haven't found anything that would appear to indicate a cause, or that it was anywhere else in the body. So what did it do then, pray tell..materialize out of thin air on -only- the brain and spinal cord? Is that what you're trying to tell me, the disease magically manifests itself with no external causes, no entry into the body from an external point whatsoever? Because if it is what you're saying, you're even more of an ignorant fool than I initially thought.

      Point number two..nobody's died from it. Well, that's nice. I'm sure within the first few years no one died from AIDS either, they just felt sick a lot..then within a certain amount of time enough people developed symptoms and died that real research began into the CAUSES of the disease. So thank you again, Professor, but you still aren't sharing any information that's of any use to anyone..you're just a know-it-all who knows very little.

    9. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Natalie's+Hot+Grits · · Score: 2, Informative
      Assuming when he says "vector" he means "way" of infection, which is a direction, or pathway, then yes, it is a vector. Wether or not the magnitude is 1, 0, or any other number doesn't matter. Even if it has no magnitude (0), it can still be a vector. In one dimension, vectors are represented without direction, only magnitude(or, one might say, it is represented with a direction AND magnitude, if you count the negative sign as direction and magnitude as only positive values).

      If the above doesn't convince you, lets look deeper into the problem. The definition of "vector" says...

      vector (vek'ter) n.
      1. Mathematics.
      a. A quantity, such as velocity, completely specified by a magnitude and a direction.
      b. A one-dimensional array.
      c. An element of a vector space.
      2. Pathology. An organism, such as a mosquito or tick, that carries disease-causing microorganisms from one host to another.
      3. Genetics. A bacteriophage, plasmid, or other agent that transfers genetic material from one cell to another.
      4. A force or influence.
      5. A course or direction, as of an airplane.

      So definition #5 is one vector without magnitude. But more interestingly, definition #2 is yet another likely meaning for his usage of "vector" in the parent post. Both definitions would be gramatically correct, opposite what you are implying.
      --
      Two infinite things: your stupidity and mine. But I'm not sure about the latter. If my sig offends you, I'm sorry.
    10. Re:Squeeze my sponge and I'll squeeze yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mad Cow is transferred through fecal matter. Suffice it to say, I wouldn't kiss a cow if I were you.

      No, they don't eat poop for fun, but it does get in/on their foodstuffs.

  16. Re:Greg Egan (NOT) by Jhan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Doh! I changed Egan for Sterling in the text but not in the subject... Time for bed...

    --

    I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.

  17. Wisconsin has this problem by McCrapDeluxe · · Score: 4, Informative

    As mentioned in the article, CWD has recently been found in Wisconsin. It's been all over the news here. Hunter turnout is down 20%, I believe.

    Here's one article from the local paper.

    1. Re:Wisconsin has this problem by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

      licenses down 13%. Kill down about 20%. (i didn't shoot one this year)

    2. Re:Wisconsin has this problem by dochood · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, that'e exactly the WRONG reaction! We need MORE hunters, not FEWER!

      If I had gotten one this year, and they offered to test the animal for me, I'd have taken them up on it, and waited for the results before eating, just as a precaution. But I certainly wouldn't have foregone my yearly hunt out of fear, and fear of a disease that is infecting a small number of deer, mostly in certain counties of certains states.

      dochood

    3. Re:Wisconsin has this problem by Pakman+42 · · Score: 1

      I got 2 this year in Wisconsin, and our party of 5 shot a total of 12 deer in the T-Zone hunt. There are just so damn many of them there. We could have killed a bunch more, but we didn't want all that meat. The wildlife people took 8 of the heads (not the fawns or ones shot in the upper neck/head) and the guy couldn't keep thanking us enough that it started to get really annoying.

  18. Deer Population Control by dochood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Deer hunting is the best way to keep the herds thin and help prevent the spread of disease.

    Some bunny-huggers out there think they are doing the deer a favor by trying to stop hunting and implementing deer-transfers from heavily human-populated areas, when they may, in fact, be contributing to the problem.

    In Missouri, hunters take about 225,000 deer a year out of about 1 million or so. This taking of about one quarter of the herd has helped keep the numbers fairly steady. This steady hunting pressure keeps the herd at sustainable numbers in most areas.

    The areas in MO that have the worst deer population problems are around the big cities (St Louis, Kansas City, and Jefferson City). People are constantly running into them with their cars in the suburbs. The conservation department tries to encourage bow hunting around these areas by selling up to 5 $5 "urban archery" permits per hunter. But it's hard to hunt (even bow hunt) where people are too close by, because a lot of city-folks seem to have a negative attitude towards hunting.

    dochood
    MO Deer Hunter

    1. Re:Deer Population Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, most people object to being accidentally shot by some idiot with a bow.

    2. Re:Deer Population Control by Cyclometh · · Score: 1

      Good lord. "Urban Archery"? That's insane. I'm picturing some guy who spends his week behind a desk as a CPA or something and wants to be a stud for the weekend so he gets himself a bow and one of these permits, then puts an arrow into the side of someone's house.

      Any information on whether these bow hunters ever nail a person by accident? In an urban area, it'd probably be just about as easy as with a rifle.

    3. Re:Deer Population Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked the problem was the Human Being over-population, not uh, deer?? Maybe we should put these "population control" measures in effect towards the real problem.

    4. Re:Deer Population Control by Shalome · · Score: 2

      I agree with you for the most part, but I also would like to say that the "bunny-huggers" don't seem to understand that humans have not only virtually elminated the natural predators of the deer, but we've eliminated their feeding grounds as well. Then people complain on the one hand about the "predatory virulent deer" encroaching on their lovely suburban gardens and freeways, and on the other hand complain about the "bloodthirsty, inhumane hunters" who do no more than their part to keep the population in natural balance as dictated by the conservation society...

      As one who lives in metro St. Louis, I understand the dilemma.

      --
      Moderation totals that amuse me for one of my posts: Flamebait=1, Insightful=2, Funny=2, Overrated=1, Underrated=1
    5. Re:Deer Population Control by bfinuc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Note that deer populations were never a problem before hunters with guns showed up.

      The argument that you should kill deer in order to reduce the occurrence of the disease is rather dubious, not least because it isn't clear that the "disease" is infectuous.

      Calling people "bunny huggers" is like tattooing "I'm an asshole" on your forehead. Go ahead, whatever. (Put more philosophically, it reveals your locus of loyalty without materially contributing to the argument.)

      The claim that hunting stabilizes the population is invented. In fact you don't know why the population is what it is - and neither do I. One way to test it would be to ban hunting completely for a decade or two and see what happens. None too likely in the near future.

      An important fact is that hunting - or something -reduced the population of many species in North America over the last few hundred years.

      The claim that hunting "stabilises" something which was in a long term decline and has recently bounced back is sophistry - it presupposes that we all agree that the populations are stable and claims without proof that they would be less so if hunting disappeared.

      Of course there are still a lot of other factors involved. I suspect that the spread in marginal wooded areas has a lot to do with the increase in deer population.

      The post is a troll.

      --
      I bragged about my Karma at a job interview but I didn't get the job.
    6. Re:Deer Population Control by tijnbraun · · Score: 1

      probably the best way to keep a population of deer healthy is to let them be controlled by natural predators...
      they are more likely to pick out the weak and sick (thereby controlling epidemics as well although slight)...
      It's very difficult for a hunter to assess whether one deer is fit, especially from a long distance...
      or you should prefer to hunt the deer with a club and run after it, trying to smash in their skull

    7. Re:Deer Population Control by Malc · · Score: 1

      So when we stop deer hunting, we should also re-introduce the deer's natural predetors too? I don't think people will be too happy with packs of marauding wolves. Your post is the troll.

    8. Re:Deer Population Control by rodgerd · · Score: 2

      Release wolves into the wild again, then. That'll take care of the deer.

    9. Re:Deer Population Control by rodgerd · · Score: 2
      Note that deer populations were never a problem before hunters with guns showed up.


      That's an overly broad claim. However, there is likely a correlation between "humans with guns" appearing and "exermination of wolves, mountain lions, bobcats, and other deer predators".
    10. Re:Deer Population Control by silentbozo · · Score: 2

      Well, you could just let them starve to death. Once the population grows large enough, there will be insuffcient forage for them all, resulting in a big die off during the winter, assuming some idiots don't try to prop up their population by dropping bales of hay and putting out deer chow. If they don't want hunters to control the population by culling the herd, nature can do a sufficently through job if left to its own devices.

    11. Re:Deer Population Control by tijnbraun · · Score: 1

      well I guess that will weed out the sick aswell... so yeah sure why not... I mean, I 'm not against hunting (people did it since the stoneages, although
      a bit different) ... just that natural predators are good in lowering the prevalence of a disease...

    12. Re:Deer Population Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you call people assholes, you label yourself as a Dukakis-loving veggie-screwing moonmaiden.

      By all the Gods, I wish they'd open a season on eco-dweebs. It may not save any lesser animal species, but it'd do wonders for humanity.

    13. Re:Deer Population Control by swillden · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, you could just let them starve to death. Once the population grows large enough, there will be insuffcient forage for them all, resulting in a big die off during the winter, assuming some idiots don't try to prop up their population by dropping bales of hay and putting out deer chow. If they don't want hunters to control the population by culling the herd, nature can do a sufficently through job if left to its own devices.

      The problem with that approach is that it tends to wipe them out. For example, about 15-20 years ago over half of the deer population of Utah died in one hard winter, in spite of heroic feeding efforts. Without the feeding efforts it's likely the number would have been close to 80%. That wasn't because there were twice as many deer (or 10 times as many) as could be sustained by the land; the excess population was less than 10% (the excess was due changes in Department of Wildlife Resources hunting policies).

      See, in a normal winter, the deer are generally eating very low-quality feed by the time spring comes and the snows recede to uncover the leftover grasses. If it's a hard winter, or if the population is too high, they more or less run out of food some time before spring and a portion of the herd will starve. However, if you add a hard winter to overpopulation then the deer will exhaust even the poor food sources (bark and the grass they can dig for) and even the strongest and most able members of the population will be hit hard, and a huge percentage of the herds will die. According to a report I read that extrapolated from the above-mentioned fiascp: 25% overpopulation, six extra weeks of snow and no feeding would cause 95% of the population to die before spring.

      That's not all, either. Starving deer do a lot of damage to the forest, chewing all the bark off of trees from ground level up to as high as they can reach (5-6 feet), eating the tips of tree branches and ripping up meadows as they paw at the snow trying to get to what grass lies beneath. This hurts other animals and slows the herds' recovery as well.

      Before man got involved, the population didn't get too high because of natural predation (mountain lions, brown bears, the occasional grizzly, coyotes and a few wolves) but those same predators tend to kill a lot of our sheep and cattle, so we've eliminated most of them (I spent a few hours yesterday working on the coyote population). Given the elimination of natural predators, if humans didn't hunt to keep the deer, elk and moose populations within bounds, winter kills would be extremely severe and we'd have far, far fewer of the animals than we do. Wildlife managers try to determine what the optimal average population is and then use hunting to keep the actual population at about 85-90% of that level (as a buffer against hard winters).

      It's paradoxical, but true, that without controlled hunting our big game populations would be far, far smaller. Nature would provide her own balance, all right, and that balance would be one of very small, very inbred herds clustered around the few reliable overwinter food sources.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    14. Re:Deer Population Control by Chagrin · · Score: 2

      I agree. Unfortunately, farmers aren't so hot on the idea and regularly pledge to shoot any wolf they see.

      --

      I/O Error G-17: Aborting Installation

    15. Re:Deer Population Control by Wingnut64 · · Score: 0

      That might work, but idiots _WILL_ drop hay. The only way to control the herds are to:
      1. Hunt
      2. Let them starve

      and 'nature lovers' won't let you do either. So instead we have cwd, etc.

      --
      echo 'Header append X-HD-DVD "0x09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0"' >> /etc/apache2/httpd.conf
    16. Re:Deer Population Control by rw2 · · Score: 2

      That's not all, either. Starving deer do a lot of damage to the forest, chewing all the bark off of trees from ground level up to as high as they can reach (5-6 feet), eating the tips of tree branches and ripping up meadows as they paw at the snow trying to get to what grass lies beneath. This hurts other animals and slows the herds' recovery as well.

      This is an important point. I have a small farm in the eradication zone in Wisconsin and, despite the seriousness of the questions at hand, would definitely not support this mechanism for getting the herd size down. As it is we have very very few small trees that survive the winter grazing well and end up with a lot of Oak bushses.

    17. Re:Deer Population Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Release wolves into the wild again, then. That'll take care of the deer.

      ..and small children, livestock, domestic animals...

      Coyotes are numerous where I live and believe me, they'll go after trash cans, domestic animals and live stock before they'll go after deer. Seems deer aren't as easy to catch as a full hefty bag on the curb or neighborhood pet.

      Fortunately, coyotes are, so far, rather timid here, and won't typically confront a human if there is enough territory to allow easy avoidance. But as the cities continue to dump into the 'burbs that is changing.

    18. Re:Deer Population Control by SideshowBob · · Score: 2

      But it's hard to hunt (even bow hunt) where people are too close by, because a lot of city-folks seem to have a negative attitude towards hunting.

      Well, this may have a lot to do with city-folks not wanting people firing weapons near them, in general. Especially camouflaged yahoos whom are occasionally inebriated.

      My father in law in Missouri has chronic problems with the local red-necks trespassing on his property to hunt, even going so far as to knock his fence down in order to get their SUVs in and tear up the creek bed that runs through his land. The lazy bastards can't even be bothered to get out on foot to "hunt".

      Its also not unheard of for stray bullets to strike residential structures.

      These are probably some of the reasons that contribute to folks' unease about hunting near them.

      And I would say that calling hunting the "best" way to control wildlife populations is at best a matter of personal opinion. I would much rather have a balanced ecosystem with wild predators rather than relying on extremely undependable human intervention.

    19. Re:Deer Population Control by Idarubicin · · Score: 2
      There was a series of Dilbert strips about this. The "Secretary with a crossbow" was apparently a big hit with underappreciated clerical staff. One of the strips (pardon small errors, this is from memory):

      Dilbert: You've been harpooned, sir.

      PHB: Yeah, but I capsized her desk.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    20. Re:Deer Population Control by cornice · · Score: 2

      I happen to live where there are plenty of bow hunters (SLC Utah - very urban surrounded by very rural/mountainous). During the bow hunt I have no worries about biking, hiking, etc in the surrounding mountains. During the rifle hunt I stay home.

      I also know that some towns in CT (1 hour from NYC) have hired bow hunters to thin herds. In the town that my parents live in _the garden club_ supported this policy. Keep in mind that this town is primarily made up of homes on 1-3 acre wooded lots. You could _not_ safely fire a rifle but the bow hunters have operated without incident.

      Bow hunters, in Utah anyway, have to go through some training to get a hunting permit. They also have to spend a lot of time stalking and waiting since they don't have the luxury of shooting some buck on a ridge 1/2 mile away. Bow hunters will rarely take a shot unless it's virtually guaranteed to be a kill. Does this rule out yahoos and morons? No but it should put it into perspective.

    21. Re:Deer Population Control by cornice · · Score: 2

      First, it's not that these populations "bounced back". These populations are, as far as anyone can tell, at an all time high. It's more like an infestation in some locations. Second, your argument is dangerous in that it invites only inaction. "Let's just sit around and study something and see if we really understand it." I see the need for study but a more balanced approach might be more effective.

    22. Re:Deer Population Control by dochood · · Score: 1

      That's why the Conservation Department encourages Bow Hunting in the "urban" counties by selling the cheap permits.

      A bow has an effective range of around 40 yards, and a maximum of probably no more than 80 or 100 yards.

      And there are laws against shooting a gun too close to a residence, and the last time I checked, trespassing (especially by knocking down someone's fence) is still illegal. There's no excuse for that kind of criminal behavior.

      No matter what group of people you look at, there will be a small percentage that act STUPID enough to make it look like the entire group is, as you put it, "camouflaged, inebriated yahoos". I think that the statistics show (VERY low accident rate, considering 400,000+ hunters in the woods during firearms seasone) that the majority of hunters are ethical.

      dochood

    23. Re:Deer Population Control by dochood · · Score: 1

      Every year, Missouri publishes information on the number of deer hunting accidents.

      For the last five years, I have read of no more than 10 accidents in a given year. Sometimes there are fatalities (2-5 a year), and I don't think I've ever read about one from a bow (injury to the hunter or a bystander).

      The numbers are astoundingly low, considering there are about 400,000+ firearms hunters in the woods, and about 30-40,000 bow hunters, during a relatively short period of time.

      It turns out that deer hunting is actually safer than most other sports. This usually comes from the fact that a gun in a person's hand usually SOBERS them a bit into realizing that they do carry death in their hands, and must be careful. Also, many states have Gun Safety class requirements (such as Missouri) as well.

      dochood

    24. Re:Deer Population Control by dochood · · Score: 1

      After you.

    25. Re:Deer Population Control by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      What's this? A well-developed, factual argument? You do realise you're on Slashdot don't you?

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    26. Re:Deer Population Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Note that deer populations were never a problem before hunters with guns showed up.

      Actually hunting has been around with and without guns for a very very long time. More accurately deer populations weren't a problem until we humans decided to destroy the natural environment, kill the evil predators that would also kill our kids, and build out big cities next to rivers and waterfronts that are also the best natural habitat for wildlife. Then hundreds of years later ignorant urbanites who know nothign more about the circle of life than going to the local grocery store stigmatize hunters as evil. Perhaps re-introducing wolves to urban areas and making it a crime to kill them would be a better idea. That would lower the deer populations closer to the city. I'm betting it would improve the neighborhood too.

    27. Re:Deer Population Control by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 2

      there is likely a correlation between "humans with guns" appearing and "exermination of wolves, mountain lions, bobcats, and other deer predators".

      Don't forget the non predators, such as the american buffalo, which used to roam in herds before eurpoeans settled in north america, but are now mostly found in zoos, due to their mega-meat-a-liciousness and hungry frontier hunters. This was joked on by the Simpsons.

    28. Re:Deer Population Control by bfinuc · · Score: 1

      I didn't call anyone an asshole.

      --
      I bragged about my Karma at a job interview but I didn't get the job.
    29. Re:Deer Population Control by bfinuc · · Score: 1

      "Back" may be a little misleading. Maybe the populations "overshot", assuming we agree on what the population should be.

      "Infestation"? "Dangerous"? Relax. How do deaths by deer intervention rank? "Effective"? To what end?

      My argument was that the previous post was a troll. No more an no less.

      I didn't make any policy recommendation at all in my post about deer, hunting or trolls.

      If you insist, here's a recommendation on all three: Tax 'm! Or do you prefer income tax?

      --
      I bragged about my Karma at a job interview but I didn't get the job.
  19. Simpsons Reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before I read the summary, a scene from a simpsons episode entered my head.

    TV reporter : "Coming up next, a new fad that is sweeping the nation, wasting food!"

    Shot of man holding a cooked turkey throwing it in the trash, and then opening a carton of milk and slowly pouring it into the trashcan.

  20. Leave it to the government... by VampireByte · · Score: 1

    Imagine that, the government finally came up with a program encouraging people to give head.

    --

    Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

  21. In other news.... by DAldredge · · Score: 0, Troll

    "[CRW] is similar to Mad Cow Disease in how it destroys brain tissue giving it a spony appearance under a microscope."

    This just in: researchers have found symptoms of Chronic Wasting Disease in various Slashdot editors. Details at 11.

  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Stuff that matters? by Kohath · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's supposed to be News for Nerds, not News for Herds.

  24. Gnews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    News for HURDs

  25. Obligatory Final Fantasy Reference by boo__yeah · · Score: 1

    Tellah: You spoony Bard!

    --
    -- .giS yreve ffo ekaT
  26. Wrong. by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Informative

    It affects the nerve tissue, not necessarily just the central nervous system, and nerves pervade the body. Also, while it only seems to affect nerves, that doesn't mean that a virus or prion that causes it isn't present in other body tissue.

  27. Darwin, anyone? by USC-MBA · · Score: 1
    Despite the reassurances, some hunters say they will stop hunting if chronic wasting disease is found in their area. "If it comes down here, I think everybody'd quit hunting," said one hunter who brought his freshly killed deer to a check station near Tremont, Ill., on opening day. "I mean, who wants to die over a deer?"

    Who knows, if this disease spreads slowly enough, and reaches a point of equilibrium, it may very well turn out to be to the deer's a benefit.

    As any financial advisor can tell you, humans are by nature a risk-averse species. As the above quote illustrates, fears of brain-eating prions in deer could mean the end of the deer-hunting industry, freeing the deer from the scourge of rifle-toting primates at the price of a handful of scrappie deaths each year.

    Could it be that natural selection has finally discovered a way to human-proof a nonhuman species?

    1. Re:Darwin, anyone? by fain0v · · Score: 3, Funny

      I guess hunters will have to start hunting other non-human species like lawyers, politicians and financial advisors.

    2. Re:Darwin, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when does season open and where do I get my permits??

    3. Re:Darwin, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "freeing the deer from the scourge of rifle-toting primates...)

      I guess if it wasn't for the advent of the rifle, we'd still be hunting with stone spears, just like primates. It's amazing that someone who claims to have an MBA is so clueless.

      As for scrappie deaths...when you hit a dear at 60 mph on the highway because the population has grown exponentially with no hunting, Be sure and tell your insurance agent that you'll pay your claim out of your own pocket so the rest of us with a clue don't have to pay for your stupidity.

      MBA indeed.

  28. why this is news by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

    Some people might not understand that CWD can/is a threat since it is not found in humans and we're not sure if it can spread to cattle and humans. CWD is serious since it is going to require time and money to understand the disease. And, without much understanding, hunting license sales are down and less money that could be used for research is not being spent. We NEED to know what this disease really is and what its possible consequneces to humans and other animals might be. If this disease goes unchecked, what are we going to say when it's too late and humans and cattle get it?? Supposedly, when it was discoverd, mad cow disease wasn't able to spread to humans, yet it's now known that it does...and how do we know that CWD won't spread to humans if the research isn't done, and people are misinformed or uninformed on the issue. Yes, this is important, and the best for all hunters to do is to continue to buy licenses, participate in hunts to erradicate diseased areas, and to do anything they can to help. This disease is critical to the future of people and to the states we live in.

  29. Re:In wisconsin... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

    Depends,
    are you gonna start feeding deer heads to cattle?

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  30. I just don't know how to respond to this article. by t0qer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So instead of trying to provide some insightful comment built on reason, i'll just go imaginitive and see what I come up with...

    I'm guessing that the problem occurs first in domestic livestock then moves it's way down to the wild population. This is a great agurment for natural selection VS. controlled breeding, gene manipulation and cloning.

    For whatever reason, us humans have the gall to think we can master in 20 years what took nature millions of years to perfect. Despite natural selection being cruel in both the animal world and human (small geeks get beat up/eat up by jocks) just the fact that it has worked over eons is proof alone that it is far better than any technology we as humans can develop.

    I used to tell this story when I got drunk to people, it's funny so laugh..

    Why alchohol makes you smarter.
    Your brain is like a herd of buffalo. The process of natural selection makes the herd healthier because the wolves will kill the slower buffalo trailing the herd first. By killing off the sick and weak buffalo the herd is left with healthy stock to breed, thus introducing healthier buffalo's into the herd.
    Your brain is like that hurd of buffalo when you drink. The alchahol kills off the slow and weak brain cells leaving only the healthy ones to reproduce, thereby making your brain a faster more efficient machine. This is why everybody feels a little stronger when drinking! /end joke
    That little joke does have grounding in reality in that the domesticated animals were not bred for diesease resistance or agressiveness, but rather for docileness and meat. This in turn has made them more susceptable to dieseases that their wild cousins would normally laugh off.

    Add to that equation the use of antibiotics and steroids in domestic livestock. It's been proven with humans that over time a diesease will mutate where it is no longer killed by an antibody. We then change it a bit, and the diesease mutates yet again. Steroids inhibit the production of white blood cells while strengthening muscles. Steroids don't kill the germ, they just make you feel like you have none. So germs can keep on breeding inside an organism all jacked up on steroids and it wouldn't even know it.

    The hugely scarey thing is humans are now *considering* tweaking with our own genes, and despite that 3lb's of grey stuff we got on top of our heads, unless we irraditate the earth (in which case we ruin it) there is no way we are going to be able to stop the googleplex of 1 celled organisms that inhabit this earth from overthrowing us.

    I guess the moral i'd like to make to all this is we need to "re-teach" ourselves to live in harmony with nature. Just because you destroy a forest, pave it, and put pavement over it doesn't mean you "conquered" nature. If it's not there how can you say it was conquered??

    Just my 2cents.

  31. CWD by modernbob · · Score: 1

    I live in Western Nebraska (Crawford) and we just went through deer season here. What a mess! After reading this article and what I have alread learned it's apparent that trasmission of this disease is not well know and is still potentially dangerous to humans. I for one will not buy meat from packing houses that pack wild game and additional will not hunt anything and eat it.

  32. no, you're wrong. by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

    if you'd read anything or listen to anything, the disease is not found in the meat, even though the meat is filled with nerves....

    1. Re:no, you're wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This coming from the guy that hosts his dirtbike pictures on a Tripod site. Where did you pick up your medical degree, 7-11? Mmm, "the meat is filled with nerves.." good call there pal. Looks like you got your learnin' alraht.

  33. TSE's are scary stuff. by rossifer · · Score: 5, Informative
    Chronic Wasting Disease, Mad Cow Disease, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease are all forms of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (TSE's) and they really ought to frighten you.

    The parts that ought to frighten you don't necessarily seem that bad until all of the factors are taken in at once:

    1) total incurability of infected people/animals.

    2) near indestructability of prions (1100F for hours, etc.)

    3) ability of TSE's to cross species (scrapie in sheep, BSE in cattle, CJD in people, TME in mink, PSE in pigs, etc.) and it's all the same group of diseases. They differ in the speed that they cause damage, but that's about it.

    4) The US meat/poultry industry practice of rendering slaughterhouse remains and *DOWNER CATTLE* into feed for other animals and poultry. This rendering process always includes brain and spinal cord tissue in the resulting product.

    Basically, if the US meat industry hasn't found BSE in cattle, it's because it doesn't want to. The fact that downer cattle are never checked for BSE should piss just about everyone off. When Dr. Richard Marsh at the University of Wisconsin injected US cattle with TME infected US mink tissues, the cattle didn't act like the British cattle, they simply collapsed, looking like any other downer cow.

    The US industry takes those downer cows, never checks to see what might have brought them down, grinds them up, brains and all, and feeds them to chickens, pigs, other cattle.

    The scariest part is that slower forms of CJD (the human disease) look exactly like Alzheimer's and other forms of progressive dementia. In a Yale study, 6 of 46 Alzheimer's patients (13%!) were CJD positive at autopsy.

    CWD (deer, elk, etc.) is almost certainly picked up from raiding contaminated feed meant for livestock. At least, that's my marginally informed position on the topic. It has to be injested somehow and it's a distorted animal protien so these wild herbivorous animals have to be consuming animal proteins to get sick.

    The European Union has now banned all animal products in livestock feed, but the US FDA resists this simple and absolutely necessary step to halt the progress of the perfect pathogen throughout the United States.

    An article that does a much better job of describing these problems and substantiating these arguments is at: "mad cows and englishmen". I hope it worries you and that you tell someone else about it. Even better, tell your congresscritter about it and what you think about it.

    Regards, Ross

    1. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by Turing+Machine · · Score: 5, Informative

      but the US FDA resists this simple and absolutely necessary step to halt the progress of the perfect pathogen throughout the United States.

      Err... you're a little behind the times. The FDA banned mammalian protein in livestock feed way back in 1997.

    2. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by rossifer · · Score: 1

      Read the article:

      "mad cows and englishmen".

      The FDA rule that you quote is an extremely weak rule, is the only FDA rule on the topic of preventing BSE, and the serious problems with it are discussed in some depth in the article.

      The fact is that the FDA has not yet banned animal protien in animal food products and really really needs to before things get bad. As in awful.

      Regards,
      Ross

    3. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by Turing+Machine · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, you think disinfo.com is a reliable source, do you? Most of us prefer to get our hard news from sites that don't have special "aliens", "conspiracies", "mind control", and "drugs" links in the sidebar.

    4. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by OldMiner · · Score: 2
      The European Union has now banned all animal products in livestock feed, but the US FDA resists this simple and absolutely necessary step to halt the progress of the perfect pathogen throughout the United States.

      Simple economics with a slightly evil twist. Cattle grow faster on a high protein diet -- bone meal -- rendered animals. You force them to eat grain and it costs a lot more money and time to get them large enough to slaughter. That's probably on the order of billions of dollars yearly. There's a lot of lobbying power in that amount of money.

      --
      You like splinters in your crotch? -Jon Caldara
    5. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by rossifer · · Score: 1

      It's not that disinfo is a source of reliable information or not. I have both disinfo books, and each one is about half-filled with comments I've written in the margin about the crack smoking that the author is doing. The other half is some really impressive outside-the-box thinking and writing.

      The thing is, disinfo is the only source of a lot of information that happens to be unpalatable to the mainstream press. Read this particular article and judge it on it's merits. Specifically, judge it on it's bibliography and the merits of the group of people who are quoted and cited.

      I agree that much of what disinfo has to offer is crap. The fact that 5% of disinfo is fantastically useful stuff that you won't get anywhere else is why I'll put up with the effort of filtering through the crap.

      BTW, if your remark that disinfo is usually crap is an argument that the FDA rule really is a good one, that's called an "ad hominem" argumentative fallacy. Just for future reference.

      Regards,
      Ross

    6. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by rodgerd · · Score: 2

      I've posted a pointer to the actual regulations further up in the discussion. They have not banned animal protiens in livestock feed, there are plenty of loopholes in the definition - most notably any animal protien which has been prepared for human consumption. Since cooking a meat-on-the-bone meal doesn't kill prion-based illness, you've got a huge infection vector right there.

    7. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They didn't ban it in livestock such as pigs, chickens, turkeys. Just in runinants, which are cows,horses and maybe sheep - I'm not sure.

      In Michigan we are hearing of violations of the ban occurring in feed processing plants.

    8. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "3) ability of TSE's to cross species (scrapie in sheep..."

      The species barrier is simultaneously one of the scariest things about TSE's and one of the weirdest things about them. It's pretty clear that nvCJD and Kuru are caused by eating cow and human tissue (respectively) with prion in it, but people have been eating scapie infected sheep for centuries with no proven case of infection. This is a big part of the reason the nvCJD problem is so bad, when mad cow disease was found out about, no thought it was going to be a problem for people, just for livestock. This is the reason that no one is saying that you absolutely shouldn't eat CWD deer and elk. Maybe its okay to eat them, maybe it isn't. Maybe deer are okay and elk aren't. We don't know. Stanley Pruisner got the nobel prize for asking questions like this and figuring out paths of infection, which are mighty baffling. Of course, given that diseased deer might be able to give you nvCJD, do you really want to take the risk?

      As far as the indestructibility of these things, think about the known path of transmission, eating the stuff. This a conformational disease of proteins... it is astounding to me that the low pH of the stomach doesn't neutralize these things. The thing that really confuses me here is that the precedent is for spread of TSE's to require eating of the diseased tissue. It's not like these are viruses or bacteria that are tansmitted by air. How is it affecting such a high fraction of deer populations? Deer aren't particularily known for eating eachother are they? I think of Bambi eating clover, not its mother. The nose rubbing thing is plausible for some transimission, but I can't believe that it's a very efficient way for these things to get spread.

    9. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by Technik~ · · Score: 2, Informative

      2) near indestructability of prions (1100F for hours, etc.)

      3) ability of TSE's to cross species (scrapie in sheep, BSE in cattle, CJD in people, TME in mink, PSE in pigs, etc.) and it's all the same group of diseases. They differ in the speed that they cause damage, but that's about it.

      I would really like to see something supporting the idea that a protein can survive 1100 degrees F for any amount of time. For comparison- picked up from various web searches- Aluminum melts around 1220F and Zinc at 787F while fiberglass roofing ignites without exposure to flame at around 900F and rigid PVC pipe does so at 850F. The extreme end of thermophilic bacteria is around 113C (235F) so infectious agents surviving intact for extended periods at 1100F more than highly unlikely.
      There were studies that found that prions survived 30 minutes at 134C (273F) in an autoclave but later studies found that 138C (280F) with or without a strong alkaline bath disinfected them. It's now part of nursing curriculum: Decontaminating the Indestructible Prion

      Anyone interested in the diseases and cross-species aspects might want to read Paul Ewald's Evolution of Infectious Diseases and Plague Time.


      - technik

    10. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by Idarubicin · · Score: 2

      Please, someone mod the parent up. A protein at 1100 F? Boiling off a lot of the bound water associated with most proteins will badly denature them by the time you get up around the 200 F mark. (There are definite exceptions, however--prions possibly included.) In air, I would go so far as to say that any protein will oxidize (if not burst into flame) at 500 F or less. Just having all that thermal energy kicking around will facilitate rapid rearrangements of proteins, even under an inert atmosphere. Sure, prions are harder to inactivate than most other biohazards, but they still obey the laws of physics.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    11. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. by mesocyclone · · Score: 2

      One of the mysteries of TSE's is the survivability of the infectious agent at high temperature and in chemical exposures that should kill all life and denature proteins.

      But, it is an established fact.

      The 1100 degrees F comes from an experiment that claimed to show that reducing infectious tissue to ash from very high temperature treatment failed to remove infectivity.

      In assessing the suitability of a site for landfill, the Environment Agency assumes that incineration inactivates infectivity. Brown et al(1999) however, have shown that hamster TSE infected tissue is not necessarily completely destroyed at 600C. In the Brown experiment, infectivity was destroyed at 1000C. We do not know the minimum time/temperature combination required to ensure infectivity is destroyed.

      I believe that the transmission of TSE's via proteins is the mostly accepted hypothesis, good enough to earn Prusiner a Nobel prize. The reason some folks have a problem with the hypothesis is exactly the sort of objection the previous poster made: How can a protein survive those conditions.
      However, a lot of research has failed to provide a convincing alternative.

      Also, keep in mind that if the infectious agent is a protein in some form, many standard rules of infectious diseases go out the window. Prions are not life forms. They carry no genetic encoding of any sort.

      Cross-infectivity of prions has long been an area of active research. In general, TSE's tend to be most infectious within the species they are found. However, most TSE's are transmissible to other species at some dosage and some method of transmission (the best is direct intracranial injection).

      One fear with CWD is that it might have a low infectivity to humans - one low enough that it is not yet detectivle, but high enough to cause excess deaths from consumers of venison. I certainly plan to avoid venison (but then I am not a fan of it) and wish I had eaten less beef during my many UK visits. Oh well...

      --

      The only good weather is bad weather.

  34. Prions by edward.virtually@pob · · Score: 1

    I recommend this link for a good discussion of prionic proteins and how they relate to CWD and similar illnesses.

  35. Keep yourself safe. by quitcherbitchen · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is a decent article that addresses how to clean a deer with caution and respect to CWD:

    Cut with Caution: How to safely field dress deer

    1. Re:Keep yourself safe. by Kwil · · Score: 1

      That'd be great.. ..assuming we actually knew how it was transmitted.

      Seeing as we don't, the article is educated guesswork at best, complete hogwash at worst.

      --

      That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

    2. Re:Keep yourself safe. by quitcherbitchen · · Score: 1

      That'd be great.. ..assuming we actually knew how it was transmitted. Seeing as we don't, the article is educated guesswork at best, complete hogwash at worst.

      Actually it's just education. It describes precautions and gives some useful tips to hunters. I didn't see any conjecture or false claims. Field dress precautions are especially important due to the fact that we don't know the means of transmission or impact of CWD.

  36. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  37. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the posters right, we have to many deer running into cars, and hunting accidents get rednecks outa the gene pool

  38. The rise of civilization... by dagg · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ... "The deer had been acting strangely, so conservation officers shot it and sent samples of its brain to Galesburg to be tested."

    To think, just a few years ago, that sentence would have stopped at "shot it". Now after shooting it, we send it's head to Galesburg. Civilization has come a long way.

    --
    Sex - Find It
    1. Re:The rise of civilization... by swillden · · Score: 2

      To think, just a few years ago, that sentence would have stopped at "shot it". Now after shooting it, we send it's head to Galesburg.

      Don't be silly. A few years ago it would not have been shot, it would have been passed over in favor of a healthier animal.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:The rise of civilization... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "The deer had been acting strangely, so conservation officers shot it...

      Hmm, reminds me of a cartoon that was in the local paper :)

  39. threat to who? by happyslinky · · Score: 1

    "most states are enlisting the assistance of hunters to provide brain stems of deer, to test for the disease. The purpose of this study is just to determine how far geographically the disease has spread. It is not yet understood how the disease is spread or if it is a threat to cattle or humans.

    What they failed to mention is that by having the hunters collect the stem cells they can also find out if it's a threat to humans. Good thinking!

  40. PLEASE MOD PARENT UP by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

    Please mod this guy up. This is the most informative thing I've read on this subject in a long time.

    --
    Huh?
  41. Class action lawsuit.. by robbo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Interesting that this is a story today, because yesterday a group of Canadian elk ranchers announced a class action suit against the Canadian gov't for failing to take action against the spread of CWD. More details are here.

    --
    So long, and thanks for all the Phish
    1. Re:Class action lawsuit.. by Jus+ad+Bellum · · Score: 1

      I haven't had a chance to read your article yet but I will after I post this link.

      It's to an old David Suzuki "Science Matters" article. In the article it goes over the problems that game farms might actually be causing wildlife. Anyways here is the post.

    2. Re:Class action lawsuit.. by swb · · Score: 2

      Sounds like a pre-emptive strike by ranchers to get better livestock price guarantees if/when their herds are ever ordered destroyed. An Elk farmer in Minnesota had his entire herd destroyed and his compensation was the market value of the animals, which sounds fine, until you find out that the Elk market has gone through some gyrations in the past few years, and Elk prices are way down.

      Many ranchers are "stuck" holding a lot of Elk herds that are worth a lot less than when they were bought, meaning that you need to hold them, breed them and sell a lot more Elk to make back your initial investment. If you sue the government now, you might be able to get a negotiated agreement to refund more than the current market price for Elk if they have to wipe out your herd.

      On one hand, I feel for the guy who put his whole nut into the "Elk Ranch" concept and is being essentially wiped off the financial map. On the other hand, I can't help think its special-interests-via-the-courts welfare.

  42. FAQ on CWD by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 3, Informative

    WI DNR site has a FAQ and other info on CDW here

  43. THROES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus Fucking Christ.

    Did you learn how to spell from Rob Malda ?

  44. Spony by serutan · · Score: 2

    Yeah, it's a typo. As in "SponeBob". But before I read the article I did spend a couple fruitless minutes trying to look it up elsewhere on the internet, in a weird spinoff of RTFM. [Slaps forehead]

  45. rofl - mod up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  46. Great time to be a vegan. by Mr_Icon · · Score: 2

    I was eating my steak, and it was like, "moo," "moo," and then it was, like, half of my brain stem was gone.
    And I was like: "Huh?"
    It devoured my brain.
    It was really a good brain.
    It was kind of a... bummer.

    Seriously... give this a consideration.

    --
    If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
  47. Another reason for genetic engineering by gelfling · · Score: 2

    Yeah that's right. Let's build a better bovine. One that's immune to this shit. And anyone who wants to take their chances out in the woods with fuzzy wuzzies and eating pine nuts can have at it. Just so long as they don't breed or breathe near me.

    1. Re:Another reason for genetic engineering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yep, right. lets build cows without brains!
      and while we're at it, why don't we grow them in tanks?

    2. Re:Another reason for genetic engineering by gelfling · · Score: 2

      No let's breed cows to DRIVE tanks.

  48. Wait a second by LostCluster · · Score: 2

    How can state governments test for Chronic Wasting Disease... I thought most state governments suffered from it!

  49. Like poor Americans need more to eat by bfinuc · · Score: 3, Funny

    I spent some time last summer wandering around Walmart stores in Eastern Kentucky last summer, and I can tell you, poor Americans don't need any more meat, or anything else to eat.

    I've spent time in poor Asian countries in my day, and I can assure you - really poor people don't weigh three hundred pounds.

    I'm not that old, but I can remember when hillbillies were skinny. Times change.

    --
    I bragged about my Karma at a job interview but I didn't get the job.
    1. Re:Like poor Americans need more to eat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at where you were at? I mean, Wal-Mart?

      What tasty food can you buy at Wal-Mart (or any American Grocer for that matter) that is inexpensive, quick/easy to prepare and not full of starch, carbs and sugar?

      Eating healthy in America is not cheap.

    2. Re:Like poor Americans need more to eat by sheldon · · Score: 2

      "Eating healthy in America is not cheap."

      Naw, it's cheap.

      It's just not very tasty.

      Ho-Ho's taste better than beans and rice.

  50. Re:In wisconsin... by Cyno01 · · Score: 2

    On thursday for hors-duervs my uncle, who bowhunts, real hunting IMO, brought a big hommade venison summer sausage. Even though it was from last years hunt, almost no one touched it. This is really scary stuff, especially since its on the front page of every paper here in wisonsin almost every day.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  51. But AIDS is a World disease by OldMiner · · Score: 2

    AIDS isn't as big of a deal as many other diseases in America. The biggest killer in the U.S. is still heart disease. In this country, it is largely a gay male's disease (woo hoo, that'll get me flamed), and even in that demographic it hasn't caused the kind of decimation it has in demographics like, oh, the whole of South Africa.

    Like it or not, the U.S. remains extremely egocentric. This is Slashdot, not the BBC.

    --
    You like splinters in your crotch? -Jon Caldara
    1. Re:But AIDS is a World disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well yea, unles you are gay you don't have to worry about aids. It's a plague brought upon by God because of all those f*gs sleeping with monkeys.

    2. Re:But AIDS is a World disease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah! Woohoo! Damn, er straight!

    3. Re:But AIDS is a World disease by tijnbraun · · Score: 3, Funny

      furthermore since aids is most likely to be transmitted by sexual contact... it has no place in "news for nerds"

  52. goddamn tree huggers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hippies piss me off, they say they want to save the earth, but all they do is smoke pot and smell badsave a plant, eat a cow

  53. Thanks man, that guy scared the shit out of me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I almost went vegetarian. Man, that could have sucked.

  54. Definitly by Cyno01 · · Score: 2

    Wisconisn sure does, our state deficit last year was something like $6bil, so now we dont have the cash to research this stuff.

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  55. Re:In wisconsin... by Jus+ad+Bellum · · Score: 1

    start feeding deer heads to cattle?

    I'm pretty sure that this has happened already. Seeing as animal byproducts are already used as nutritional filler for livestock. All it would take is a farmer to go hunting, bag and cut his deer, then send off the non-edibles to a byproduct processor (Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies {TSE's} are really hard to get rid of).

    Now all we have to do is wait for the end result.

  56. Silly deluded Euro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're completely detached from the real world.

  57. Trojan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So where can I pick up my Trojan Deer Condoms?

  58. Re:In wisconsin... by rodgerd · · Score: 2

    Perhaps you ought to take a look at what the rules are on animal feed in the United States. Amongst other things, a cow can be fed food scraps of animal protein - yet cooking does not destory prions, as many people in Europe can tell you.

  59. Re:Wisconsin has this problem - more info by afrank · · Score: 2, Informative

    The University of Wisconsin is doing some pretty major research on this topic, and I believe it to be leading research in the field right now. The central location for public information on the topic at the UW is here.

    --


    Out of order?! Fuck, even in the future nothing works...
  60. In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "[CRW] is similar to Mad Cow Disease in how it destroys brain tissue giving it a spony appearance under a microscope."

    This just in: researchers have found symptoms of Chronic Wasting Disease in various Slashdot editors. Details at 11.

  61. NOT ALL OF US EAT CATTLE...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey Meat Muncher,
    Not all of us eat cattle. In case you werent aware there is a fairly large contingent of humans who dont eat meat. We like to call ourselves Vegitarians. If you are worried about CWD, dont eat meat. If you dont eat meat, you will never get this disease.

    The only way for a vegitarian to injest a prion is if the ashes from a diseased animal were used to fertilize a field and some of the fertilizer were to stick to the vegitable or fruit. The chances a prion will be sticking to your strawberry are highly unlikely, and it would have happened to you if you were a meat eater anyway.

    I usually dont preach about vegitarianism, but this kid seems to be really frickin scared of the disease and believes everyone eats cattle.

    Kick the McDiet.

  62. Spreading Disease by Bowling+Moses · · Score: 1
    One possibility mentioned on the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation website is that it may be spread by elk nibbling on bones infected with chronic wasting disease. This does make a lot of sense as bull elk will need to consume enough calcium each year to add upward of ten pounds of antler, which is essentially bone and requires a lot of calcium and that bone marrow can have a pretty heavy load of infectuous particles. Cow elk only have to give birth to a bouncing 15 pound calf with hooves ;).

    Another possibility I don't think anyone's really looked at is infection by contact with blood. Elk are huge, powerful animals: a big bull elk can weigh over half a ton. They scrape their antlers against trees to remove the velvet and I've seen scrapes start at a foot off the ground and extend to probably eight feet. Hell there's one in a place I go hunting that likes to snap 2 inch diameter trees in half with his antlers. Anyway, when they fight during the rut there's the potential for massive and even fatal injuries. It doesn't seem too far out of line that it could be transfered from one infected but early symptom bull to a healthy bull through their injuries.

  63. Re:WHY NO LINKS FOR WORLD AIDS DAY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe because Taco is a homophobe who lives four streets over from his mother in Holland, Michigan.

    And both diseases (okay, AIDS is virus) are caused by lifestyle choices. Do you want to eat meat? Risk getting CJD. Want to fuck monkeys, men, or loose women, all of whom may have shared a needle (well, maybe not the monkey... yet)? Risk getting AIDS.

    Want to avoid getting killed by eating meat? Uh, that is, animal (food) meat: Don't eat meat! Irradiation and cooking (below 1800F) isn't going to kill prion diseases (yes, 1800F). These wasting diseases can only be abated by changing the way that we feed and slaughter animals. It's not in the corporate ($$$) or political ($) interest to do this.

    Want to avoid getting killed by a formerly gays-only disease (remember health class: "Got AIDS Yet")? Don't fuck people you don't know so well. Condoms aren't effective enough. Latex condoms are riddled with voids about 3-10x larger than the HIV virus. They're about 85-90% effective barrier if you're fucking a WASP (stone cold corpse bitch filing her nails while you ram her doggy style), that reliability goes down pretty quickly the more "stressed" the latex gets.

  64. Re:Ahem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Down with Saudi Arabia!!!

    Sing it, my brother! Those fucking al-Queda, suicide bomber, and terrorist lovers should be destroyed along with the Republicans who support our "friendship" with the Saudi murderers. The blood of everyone killed on 9/11 lies squarely on the Saudis who funded the terrorists, and on the Bush administration (oil men) that supports the Saudis, and on GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota and whoever makes or buys gas guzzling SUVs that keep the terrorist funders (the Saudis) rich.

  65. Re:But AIDS is a World disease *sigh* by OldMiner · · Score: 1

    I know, I shouldn't feed the trolls. But some people seriously have that sort of knee-jerk reaction: That is, they see someone say "it's a gay disease", and they throw up their arms and declare the person a bigot. Unfortunately, it's the way things are.

    If you had looked at the statistics on the page I linked, you'd notice that, through June 2001, in the U.S., of the total 807074 people reported with AIDS or HIV, 368971 of those likely were exposed under the category "men who have sex with men". That's 45%. A quarter of that were exposed through heterosexual contact.

    Now, as to the credibility of those statistics, on the same page:

    These HIV figures include only those states with confidential HIV reporting
    Source: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

    If you don't inject drugs and aren't a gay male, AIDS likely shouldn't be as big a worry as, say, hepatitis might be.

    --
    You like splinters in your crotch? -Jon Caldara
  66. Re:Wisconsin has this problem - more info by biobogonics · · Score: 1

    The University of Wisconsin is doing some pretty major research...

    Given the quality of their veterinary school and the proximity of the UW to the state health lab, I'm sure the UW will make major progress on this.

    Meanwhile in Michigan, hunters are worried about a CWD outbreak along with a not yet controlled outbreak of bovine TB. In years past hunters have been asked to stop at DNR check stations and leave their deer heads for examination for TB. I did not see any of these stops on southbound I-75 this year.

  67. Moderators, please think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While this might be funny, it is physically impossible for their brain stems to rub together unless their entire skull is open.
    For the facts though, it is not fully certain that prions are found only in the nervous system. There has been thought that excrement or saliva may carry some. It is hard to track though, when you are not fully certain what it is that you are tracking.

    1. Re:Moderators, please think by MAurelius · · Score: 1

      It's a shame when such an insightful post is submitted Anonymous Coward. In the future, log in and get cool Karma for such thoughts. Marcus

  68. Importance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I agree that AIDs day is important to cover, CWD, MadCow, and CJD are almost certainly the same thing. These will be the next big epidemic. BTW, I mention in a later posting about working at CDC in 1980-81. At that time the raygun was busy wanking off about Herpes and Other minor VD. Had he given the 2 million that was asked for by the CDC, for tracking the infected ppl of that time, the current US infection rate would be somewhere between 1/2 to 1/100 of the current rate.
    While Raygun screwed US back then, there is no going back. Right now, we can do something about CWD and if we do nothing, then, I suspect, this will be as bad as AIDs.

  69. Re:I just don't know how to respond to this articl by gurensan · · Score: 1

    There's one minor flaw in your alcohol story. Neurons don't reproduce! If they did, we wouldn't have stupid people!

    --
    You are all fartheads.
  70. Meat-eating apes by Sangui5 · · Score: 1

    There's a lot of evidence that our "natural" diet is composed of a large percentage of animal protien, upwards of 60%. We don't have the bone structure or jaw muscles to be true herbavores, and large brains are found mostly (always?) in predators, since they have the caloric intake to support them.

    Additionally, there are present-day cultures, such as the Inuit, who get about 95% of thier calories from animal products, without bad health effects. Their high-protien diets are offset by a high-activity lifestyle, and by eating leaner meat that is the usual fare in many other places.

    This month's Scientific American has a very interesting article about homonid diet. You may want to check it out.

  71. Re:In wisconsin... by OS2_will_prevail! · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you should look at your own links to animal feed rules! Yes, cattle can be fed animal protien, but not animal protien derived from ruminents. (These include deer, cattle, buffalo, etc, etc.) So, no deer parts are being fed to cattle.

    --
    People are more violently opposed to fur than leather
    because it's safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs
  72. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  73. Re:cough*idiot*cough by myowntrueself · · Score: 2

    Oh I just picked the most tried and tested method.

    I'm sure you could come up with more ingeneous ways than eating brains, but hey, eating brains makes you smarter!

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  74. rules are rules! by myowntrueself · · Score: 2

    I think that any statement to the effect that

    "The official rule is that blarg is not allowed therefore blarg does not happen (on any large or widespread scale)"

    should, for any given blarg, be taken with a large pinch of salt (or whatever other white powder you choose).

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  75. Don't panic! by bluGill · · Score: 1, Troll

    Warning, do not panic over CWD. That isn't to say don't worry about it, because it is potentially serious. However it is not something to panic about.

    CWD has been known for 30 years in elk. Someone needed a story for a slow news week. Because of the story people start worring, and getting meat that would not have been tested before tested. Suddenly we find it all over, and conclude it is spreading like wildfire. However there was never a widespread study of where CWD is before this year, so it is incorrect to say it is spreading. Many experts belive (Note, they all admit we know little about this) that it has been everywhere for years. Other experts think that it is spreading. However we do not know.

    The key point is we know very little about it. What we do know is bad, but that isn't much. Enough to insite the idiotic masses into panic, but I like to believe the /. readership is smarter than that. Take reasonable precautions, and go on with life.

  76. justice system a little extreme? by commodoresloat · · Score: 2

    A deer can now get shot simply for acting strangely?

    1. Re:justice system a little extreme? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1
      A deer can now get shot simply for acting strangely?

      Yes, it's one of the troubling new provisions of the PATRIOT act. They've even removed due process requirements: If you're a deer, you could be shot down without warning based on nothing more behavioral profiling, and they don't even need to obtain a hunting license beforehand.

    2. Re:justice system a little extreme? by Wingnut64 · · Score: 0

      justice system a little extreme?
      Yeh, his lawyer should have appealed.

      --
      echo 'Header append X-HD-DVD "0x09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0"' >> /etc/apache2/httpd.conf
  77. It's that bastard Allan Kieda by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 2

    Yeah, Al Kieda, that notirous terrorist guy has spiked the food chain with horrible prions that will kill all the non Islamics!

    But all is not lost -- since these prions are such resiliant substances, maybe we can build jet engines out of them and bomb stupid old Al out of existance.

    In other news, doctors have reported a huge increase in the number of people now qualified to seek a presidential candidacy or Senate seat.

    They're putting this down to a brain wasting disease too.

  78. Maybe... by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1

    Like, say, Alzheimer's disease?

  79. Re:But AIDS is a World disease *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AIDS likely shouldn't be as big a worry [hepatitis-central.com] as, say, hepatitis might be.

    Agreed. My wife works for the state health department, and she says some days it seems half of the people she talks to have Hepatitis! Their office has yet to handle a case for a person with AIDS.

  80. Yah right by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2

    They do it for food? By the time you add up the costs of gear, guns, gas and, of course, the beer the average hunter could've driven to any supermarket and bought 10 times as much meat as they get by hunting.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  81. Evidence of Spread to nvCJD to Humans by MAurelius · · Score: 3, Informative
    The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel published this story in July about three friends who died. Two died of CJD and one of Pick's disease, which is sometimes hard to distinguish from CJD. The kicker is, these three friends hunted together and ate together at game 'feasts' back in the 1980s and 1990s. The Infectious Disease doc mentioned, Dennis Maki, is very well known and respected in the medical community here in Wisconsin. Here's the link:

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/State/jul02/60546.asp

    As previous posts have mentioned, prions are nearly indistructible. Multiple cases of human CJD have been proved to be transmitted by surgical instruments that were 'sterilized' by standard techniques after being used on a patient later diagnosed with CJD. My point is: we are well advised to be extremely cautious where potential transmission of prions is at issue.

    The previous post regarding 46 brain biopsies of Alzheimer's patients, among which 6 cases were 'positive for CJD' is puzzling. The microscopic look of the two diseases is completely different. CJD brain tissue looks like Swiss cheese under the microscope, while Alzheimer's brains show neurons replaced by 'neurofibrillary tangles.' These look like bits of brown stringy stuff where the neuron body used to be. Clinically, however, the diseases both cause dementia. Normally the time course of CJD, from first symptom to complete dementia, is much shorter (weeks to months) than Alzheimer's (years).

    Hope this gives people some things to think about.

    Marcus

    1. Re:Evidence of Spread to nvCJD to Humans by fendel · · Score: 1

      As previous posts have mentioned, prions are nearly indistructible. Multiple cases of human CJD have been proved to be transmitted by surgical instruments that were 'sterilized' by standard techniques after being used on a patient later diagnosed with CJD.

      This is chilling, considering how much deer meat is put through meat processing equipment. It doesn't matter if you try not to shoot sick-looking deer; if that processor had any contaminated meat go through the works, there are prions on the equipment. My significant other is a hunter who happily brings home packages of venison sausage and jerky, having made every lame rationalization in the book (including "I make sure not to shoot sick-looking deer"). For all I know, my kitchen is a prion hot zone.

      I wasn't too happy when I found out my favorite butcher shop also processes venison.

  82. One problem though... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2

    I agree that people screwed things up by eliminating deer's natural predators because Farmer Fred was pissed about losing a few sheep. The problem with hunters though is that they go after the biggest and strongest animals instead of the weak or sick like natural predators do. I figure after a few hundred years of this kind of hunting deer will be the size of dogs and have stubby little antlers.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  83. Living on deer meat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can afford all that hunting gear you can afford to go to the market and buy food for your family. This is a bogus argument.

  84. Best by spamfodder · · Score: 1
    This is the most informative, best-written article that I've ever found about Mad Cow disease, CJD, et al. Since I read it a few years back I've been chopping my own meat in a Kitchenaid grinder attachment for my mixer.
  85. The real need for hunting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is time to legalize the hunting of people (a certain person didn't wait for it to be legalized in the DC area though). Here are some reasons:

    1. Rampant overpopulation with some herds starving (Somalians, etc).

    2. No natural predators left to do it for us (if only sharks could walk)

    3. Overpopulation is driving out other animals from native habitats

    4. High danger of collisions with cars on roadways

    5. Hunters could feed their families with the meat and cloth them with their kill's suits, dresses, etc.

    Vote Republican!

    1. Re:The real need for hunting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sharks wouldn't have a fucking chance on dry land. they breed too slowly.

  86. Prion science by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

    Is this article going to create "BSE is dying" trolls?

  87. Thanksgiving topic by Suffering+Bastard · · Score: 1, Interesting
    During Thanksgiving dinner at my parent's house in a Chicago suburb, one of our traditional family guests brought up this very same problem. He's a bowhunter who makes frequent trips up to Wisconsin to snag a few deer. He has had two friends recently die of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, and while there is still as yet no proof that the disease came from a deer, both unfortunate victims had eaten game deer within a few months prior to contracting the disease.

    His policy now is never to shoot a lame looking deer. In fact, he only shoots healthy looking bucks, no doe (does?) or fawns. He figures if the deer is a strong healthy buck, it's much less likely to be infected. One of his hunting partners will sometimes kill a lame looking deer for the sake of a) putting it out of its misery and b) keeping it from infecting any other animals.

    Apparently, you can no longer transport a deer carcass across the Wisconsin state line into Illinois. You can transport the cut and packaged meat, but not the whole animal. You are also encouraged to donate what parts of the carcass you don't take home with you to the reserve from whence you killed it, so it can be studied.

    Scary stuff, indeed. Starts getting me thinking about becoming a vegetarian, even though I love venison.

    -SB

    --
    "Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
    - Deep Thought
  88. There is a reason there is no story! by wwwgregcom · · Score: 1

    Slashdot is news for nerds. AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease. Need I further explain?

    --
    What signature defines me as a person?
  89. Here's the scoop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is from my mother...head of infection control at a major hospital...

    It's a "preon" it's not a bacteria, virus or anything you've ever learned in biology class. (please excuse people how actually have learned what's known about preons)

    The fact is they can't stop preons with ANY known medicine, vaccine, etc. They CANNOT sterilize intruments that have come in contact with the preon.

    Preons are prevelant is places other than deer(e.g CWD). It is not known how long they can survive outside hosts, or anything else for that matter. They've begun to speculate in the past few years but that's all.

    It's a serious issue.

    1. Re:Here's the scoop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      woops...i was just informed i spelled it wrong...it's "prion"

    2. Re:Here's the scoop... by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      Yes indeed, it's a pr oteinaceous, i nfectious on . (They needed some sort of suffix so I guess they thought "on" sounded nice and scientific).
      To complete the niceties, you might also like to note that bacteria is the plural of bacterium.

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
  90. Please mod parent up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please mod parent up... it's got some good replies to some other high modded posts, and deserves to be more widely read.

  91. Re:But AIDS is a World disease *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well those figures are skewed though. First of all, more non-gay people took the survey because the gay population was too busy sleeping with each other to fill out the cards. Second, it's those bisexuals that have spread the disease to us individuals who do not lack the braincell that says "DON'T BE A T00L, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SLEEP WITH WOMEN.". ;p

  92. Couldja' make that a chicken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    --- Concerned Cow

    1. Re:Couldja' make that a chicken? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do not trust Concerned Cow.
      He is only out to get you.

      -- Untasty Chicken

  93. Re:But AIDS is a World disease *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's true. But honestly, there wouldn't be a problem if people wouldn't sleep around. Everyone has their own morals, but come on now. Honestly, deep down, all kidding aside, I bet everyone here (provided you are male ;p) want's a woman he can rely on, fall in love with, and remain with for the rest of his life. Yeah, that's hard as hell to find, but they do exist. And I'll DEFINATLY get flamed for this one, but sex is just like any other materialistic object. Like, the XBOX or something you have really wanted comes out and you finally, after months of waiting, get one. Then eventually, it loses its appeal, and you have to buy NEW games. New Cars. New PDA's ;p And finally, new wives. Why? Sex gets old, and the unfortunate thing is that most people, and most = usually men, don't realize that what they really need is a woman to love, not a woman to just sleep with. And yea, I'm a guy dammit too, I'm not some chick blowing off steam.

    So, how do gays fit in? I have no flipping clue in hell how that crap happened. Everywhere you look there are dumb people, and they are just a little more to the pot. Do I respect their opinion? Yea, do I think they are right? No. Oh well, rant rant rant.

  94. Re:But AIDS is a World disease *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm. That is interesting, but I believe it deals more with masterbation. If gay people would just masterbate more instead of sleeping with other dudes, maybe they would *auto-correct* themselves. I mean come on now. Type in the word "porn" and you are overwhelmed on the net with good hardcore naked women. That's what those bastards need. They need their senses to be overtaken by good ole big tatty p0rn.

  95. Re:Bush's Screw-up, Just like Raygun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bush (Dubya that is) is a Texan. All Texan's like BBQ and are required to eat beef at every meal. I guess there's hope....

  96. Re:WHY NO LINKS FOR WORLD AIDS DAY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Latex condoms are riddled with voids about 3-10x larger than the HIV virus.

    This is a lie perpatrated by Christians. Do the research. Latex is not porous.

  97. Venison by cjsnell · · Score: 2

    For those poor Slashdot readers who have never had the chance to taste real venison jerky, let me recommend a site to you: VenisonWorld.com. Venison World is a little store in po-dunk Eden, TX. Eden is out in the middle of nowhere but I used to drive through there several times a year while travelling between home and college. The venison jerky that this place sells is quite pricey but is really out of this world. That Oberto beef jerky for sale at the 7-Eleven can't touch this stuff.

  98. Re:WHY NO LINKS FOR WORLD AIDS DAY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a lie perpatrated by Christians. Do the research. Latex is not porous.

    No Christians here, just a pragmatic agnost. Perhaps you should put down the Penthouse (I can stereotype, too).

    Yes, latex does have natural voids in it. That's one reason why manufacturers test for pinholes in their latex condoms and gloves. Guess what? The detectors are pretty good to about 5 microns (HIV is about .1 micron).

    When stored improperly (heat, light, exposure to air), used too vigorously (as if there were such a thing), or comes in contact with an oil-based lubricant, then you're fucked, so to speak.

    In a quote from Consumer Reports (1999) they claim that "With correct use, a condom will break as little as 2 percent of the time and, authorities believe, will slip off as little as 1 percent of the time." So that's at least a 3% chance of getting infected. Granted, if you're a typical Slashdotter, that means you'll probably go your whole life without testing the odds too often, but still, is it worth it?

  99. Re:I just don't know how to respond to this articl by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2

    Yes we would. People reproduce, and will still have stupid populations.

    --

    How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  100. New Plaque Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    New Plague Indeed.
    What many here are joking about is the beginning of a plague like has never been witnessed before.
    Initial infections were first noted in New Guinea in the '50's. Called Kuru then it was transmitted as a result cannibalism, (Natives would eat dead relatives) and having 100% mortality. Since that time Scientists have known about prions and the danger they represent but have always maintained prion disease was self-limiting (100% mortality) within one generation.
    The problem is the disease just won't go away: Witness England in the 1980's. There, again, it was felt the disease was the result of feeding animal protiens infected with Prion to herbivores. The public response by government officials was the same: destroy infected animals in a big show to convince the public 'something was being done' but in fact the real problem is of course self--limiting (100% mortality). Besides, had not the ignorant British fed animal protein to herbivores nothing would have come of it at all.
    Now we enter the 1990's and our old friend is back--only now something very ominous has occurred. You see a Missouri Deer hunter, up until about 1998 or so considered himself lucky if he could get a 'Doe Tag' or a 'Bonus Tag' and thereby legally take more than one deer per season. But now, all of the sudden, all a hunter need do, in Missouri, is simply request a bonus Tag and he will be given one - for a modest fee of course. Now in Missouri no deer Hunter need be lucky to bag all the deer he wants.
    What may we infer from all of this?
    1) Prion have not gone away.
    2) They are not self limiting-but they are 100% fatal.
    3) Prions are now in our food chain.
    4) No viable explanation has, as yet come forth as to how North American 'wild' herbivores have contracted prion disease.
    5) Certain sectors of the Government are more than mildly alarmed hoping the American Deer Hunter will buy them some time to figure what to do. (At what cost to the hunter and his family?)
    6) World Health organizations are now holding their collective breath and watching Great Britain for possible massive human prion infections to begin to manifest.

    Now for the real Soothsayer of Doom stuff:

    Fast forward to the year 2025--England has been quarantined for seven years (nothing goes in nothing goes out) The crematories are running night and day. In Asia mass starvation has begun as prion infection has entered the Piscean as well as other food chains. In Europe and the United State martial law is declared when the lies and dissembling is no longer effective. As the deaths and bodies pile up, diseases thought long dormant receive new life and also join the rampage in an unrelenting slaughter which will leave half to three-quarters of the earths animal life forms dead.
    Its already started and nothing is going to stop it-certainly not the Missouri Deer Hunters. ...and if you are one of the few left in 2025 ,not much outside the memory of your own loved ones is going to mean much I would think.

    Of course we could agree I am just another raving, lunatic, crackpot soothsayer of doom, forget about all this prion crap and go grab a hamburger at McDonalds :)

    Just another Anonymous Coward

  101. Re:But AIDS is a World disease *sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> I bet everyone here (provided you are male ;p) want's a woman he can rely on, fall in love with, and remain with for the rest of his life.

    No way! What I want is to have sex as much as possible with as many different women as possible, with no risk of pregnancy or disease.

    A lot of women want the same thing with men.

    Unfortunately, that's not possible yet-- so I'm biding my time... narf narf

  102. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. PSE is a meat problem. by The+Desultortor · · Score: 1

    PSE stands for pale soft exudative. It's a meat quality problem for pork not a TSE disease.

    PSE occurs when the post slaughter pH of pork drops too fast while the carcass is still hot. This causes muscle proteins to denature.

    The muslce protein denatureation causes the pork to lose water holding capacity, this cause is to appear PALE, lose structure making it SOFT, and EXUDE water. Hence PSE.

    Read more about it here:

    http://www.aps.uoguelph.ca/~swatland/ch9_1.htm

  103. Re:Really??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >> Hey, I didn't go through 2 million years of evolution to get to the top of the food chain all for nothing! ;-)

    Next up: Thoolie argues with a bear and a shark that *he* is on the top rung. Heh heh!

  104. In sheep, it's called Scrapie by octalman · · Score: 2, Informative

    BSE, or Mad Cow Disease, as the press has dubbed it, appears to have been transferred from sheep to cattle. About twenty-five ago Great Britain began allowing feed processors to use steamed sheep bone meal in cattle feed. BCE began to appear in bovines a few years later.

    The disease in sheep is known as scrapie and has been known for around 250 years, according to the U. S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA even has an active program intended to eliminate scrapie. I am not aware of any definite link between scrapie and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were.

    How scrapie was transmitted to elk and deer doesn't seem to be clear, but deer are distant relatives of goats and sheep. It does seems clear that politics is the reason for the name Chronic Wasting Disease, just as the press has insisted on Mad Cow Disease, instead of referring to the true origins of the disease and admitting that it originated in sheep.

    1. Re:In sheep, it's called Scrapie by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2

      Scrapie in sheep does not seem to be transmissable to humans. Scrapie has been in Britain for hundreds of years, and as far as anyone can tell, does not seem to cause disease in humans. However, even if the deer are getting scrapie- that doesn't necessarily mean that humans are in the clear- it looks like the disease can change when it goes via a new animal, and it might then be more infectious. (I think experiments have shown this with prion diseases as a group, although not with scrapie, yet, AFAIK.)

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  105. Organophosphates by Martin+S. · · Score: 2


    IANA pharmacologist. However Organophosphates is known to leech copper from the brain and replace it with manganese, and represent the most credible explanation for BSE in Cows, Scrapie in Sheep and CJD in people.

  106. No evidence by Martin+S. · · Score: 2


    Still, there's no evidence that this particular disease ...

    There is NO evidence BSE/CJD is an infectious (#1), and little evidence this/these are even a *disease*. There is masses of evidence that Organophosphates poisoning produces exactly the same symptoms, Brain lesions resulting in Neupathy; by a know process Manganese leeching Copper from the brain. One of the British victims of CJD was vegetarian who had not eaten meat for years, did own cats that where treated with Organophosphates flea treatments.

  107. BINGO!! by Insightfill · · Score: 2

    Recent autopsies of Alzheimer patients show that ~30% of them exhibit brain matter characteristics consistent with CJD. THe question is: is current US beef already heavily infected with a long-term strain of this condition?

    I'll try to find a link later.

  108. Re:TSE's are scary stuff. PSE is a meat problem. by rossifer · · Score: 1

    In this case, PSE refers to Porcine Spongiform Encephalopathy, which is most definitely a TSE.

    Regards,
    Ross

  109. Case against Organophosphates. by Martin+S. · · Score: 2

    "An Introductory Hypothesis on the causes of the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies"
    http://www.purdeyenvironment.co m/IntroHyp.htm

    "Organophosphates Implicated In Mad Cow Disease"
    http://www.cqs.com/opmadcow.htm

    "Cases of BSE and CJD May be Due to Environmental Contamination with Manganese Compounds and Organophosphates"
    http://www.nzhealth.net.nz/dis_ ease/cjd.html

    "The nature and cause of BSE
    Other theories about the nature and cause of BSE "
    http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/report/volume2/cha pte a4.htm#820644

    "ICI's ex-chemical weapon insecticide causes BSE & CJD Cover-up Insecticide causes Mad Cow disease"
    http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/ICI-I nsecticide -Mad-Cow.htm

    "A Case for the Role of Copper Deficiency in "Mad-Cow" Disease and Human Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease"
    By William H. Dresher, Ph.D., P.E.,Geoffrey Greetham, Ph.D., F.I.M. and Brenda J. Harrison, Ph.D.
    http://innovations.copper.org/2001/12/Mad-C ow.html

    http://www.treff-raum-espaciotime.com/Articles/m ad cow.html

    "Mad Cows or Mad Scientists? Could the Scientists Be Wrong on Madcow Disease?"
    http://www.safe2use.com/ca-ipm/01-02-02 a.htm

    There are hundreds more similars links on google:

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=U TF -8&q=CJD+BSE+O

  110. scared? by zigga_976 · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't be worried about disease, unless you're from Wisconsin... I shot a buck and a doe this year, and asked the DNR to test my dear, they whacked the head off both and told me not to worry, and if I was just be sure not to cut into bone marrow. I'm not worried about CWD...at least not yet. Look for posted test results from MNDNR test sites that should be out within the week. Only then can we begin to worry, or not.

  111. Hmm... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2

    I thought that was you have when you suck at quake...

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  112. Re:Deer (and other) studies and the correlation by chialea · · Score: 2

    Err... I wouldn't be so hasty about claiming culinary superiority, there certainly are people who cook around here, and that well.

    As for nutrients, I haven't had any problem with my diet, even when training heavily at martial arts, and I'm a vegetarian. Granted, I eat cheese, but that's vegetarian under most definitions (at least the rennet-free stuff).

    Lea

  113. Chronic Wasting Disease by Sanga · · Score: 1

    Just reading the headline, I thought it was some kind of disease aflicting SUV buyers, unrepentant newspaper buyers, people that print a 400 page document only to print it again after changing a line and leave it to rot afterwards, people that do not reuse/recycle etc...

    ---
    Reuse till you recycle. Recycle till you are recycled.

  114. WHAT HAPPEN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what happen?

    1. Re:WHAT HAPPEN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody set us up the troll post!

  115. IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chronic Wasting Diseases Investigate You!