May 20, 2018

Parasite Transmitted By Ticks Discovered In Canada Lynx

From the Granite Geek:

“Scientists found lungworm infection in 22 of 32 animals where the lung was examined. According to Stevens, it is unclear how much of an affect the presence of these parasites had on the health of the lynx. Many cases had minimal reaction associated with the infection so the parasites were likely incidental. However, other cases had more severe inflammation associated with the parasites, which may suggest some effect on the overall health of these individuals.

However, scientists also found inflammation in the heart and skeletal muscle of multiple Canada Lynx, and in two animals noted a microscopic protozoal organism suggestive of Hepatazoon sp. Additional diagnostic tests are being performed at the University of Georgia to definitively identify the protozoal species in these lynx. Protozoa are unicellular organisms, which occasionally lead to parasitic disease in different animal species.”

It appears that it is not known, or at least made public, enough information to know the full extent of the presence of this lungworm which is passed on by ticks…and what brand of ticks are involved.

However, I will guarantee one thing. We also read this: “To our knowledge, the parasite we believe this to be has not been diagnosed this far north as it tends to infect animals in the southern states and has not been diagnosed in Canada Lynx, although they are often diagnosed in Bobcats in southern states. This parasite is transmitted by tick vectors and to this point, the range of these tick vectors is not described to be in Maine so it is unclear if the tick range has expanded into Maine or if the Hepatazoon-like organism in these lynx is one not normally found in North America.”

The guarantee is that the root cause of this “previously unknown” parasite will be attributed to Climate Change. It’s what’s for lunch.

Share

NEOSPOROSIS: Recognizing and Preventing Neospora caninum Infections

Neospora caninum is a major cause of abortions in cattle. First recognized in 1988, and linked
to dogs in 1998, this parasite causes an infection called neosporosis. Studies have shown that
at least half the dairy and beef herds in the United States have one or more animals that have
been exposed. In an infected herd, up to 30 percent of the animals may test positive, and some
cows may abort several times. With good herd management, through, you can reduce this
drain on your profits.

…These oocysts
are shed in the feces of dogs, and probably of wild canines including coyotes, foxes and wolves.
These animals become infected by eating infected animals, placentas or fetuses.<<<Read Entire Report>>>

Share

“Egregious” Letter to the Editor

A recent Letter to the Editor in a Portland, Maine newspaper, called hunting practices “egregious.” Egregious is defined as, “outstandingly bad; shocking.” The same can be said for letters to the editor of newspapers that are outstandingly bad at relating facts, exemplifying truth and presenting non emotional realities of real life in the forests and our backyards.

This particular letter states: “the use of dogs and snares, are cruel and unnecessary methods in hunting bear.”

Snares are as humane as it can get. The wildlife managers all across America use snares for capturing bears, and other wildlife, for wildlife research. The reason this is done is because the work and collection of data can be done without harming the animal. Non thinking people project human emotions and human feelings onto animals believing there is no difference between the two species. They have effectively been brainwashed.

I am wondering if this letter writer ever considered how bears, elk, deer, moose and many, many other species “feel” when wild dogs (wolves and coyotes) run these animals to death? Have they ever considered this reality? By their way of not thinking, shouldn’t we then propose a bill to prohibit the chasing of wild animals by wild dogs? After all, it must be inhumane. Animals are just like human beings aren’t they? And if that is so, then why isn’t their a law against inhumane killing of one animal upon another?

It must also be inhumane to allow wildlife, like bears to go untouched; allow nature, the cruel bitch that she can be, provide her “balance” by utilizing disease, starvation and cannibalism to place population densities in severe ups and downs.

The letter also states: “Time and again, any effort to improve the humane treatment of our wildlife has been thwarted by members of the Inland Wildlife and Fisheries Committee…” The author’s perverted ideas of what is “humane treatment of our wildlife” is simply balderdash of emotional nonsense never substantiated by fact.

The insanity that has gripped this nation is actually what is egregious. The very thought that humans are now programmed to go about destroying my right to self determination because of perverted religious quackery of placing human elements on animals is beyond egregious. It can only be described as hatred toward a fellow human being. And we know from whence comes hatred.

And the hatred is so intense that the blindness prohibits the reality that their insane practices results in the destruction of other wildlife as I’ve described above. It also breeds scarcity. Scarcity breeds more hate and greed, sickness, oppression and destitution. The insanity is that the truth cannot be seen and thus their destruction becomes self.

Share

Concern Over Disease on Domestic Elk Ranches

It amazes me the depth of ignorance and the breadth of bad information that easily become emotionally intoxicating talking points when discussing animals and disease and the role of government. Anyone who has read my work understands I have little good regard for government but I have less regard for environmental, non governmental groups that love to play god, while forcing some to play by different rules than others.

In a recent opinion piece found in the Idaho Statesman, “GUEST OPINION CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE Idaho is just not doing right by its wildlife,” by John Caywood, all this is brought to the surface.

Several years ago I worked with the Idaho Elk Breeders to help educate and get the word out about that industry and to thwart the efforts of some, led mostly by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and special interest groups, to shut down the domestic elk industry because of trumped up charges of irresponsible ranchers and the threat of spreading disease. It appears some of the same players are back at it again using emotional clap trap to push their agendas in a misaligned direction.

Please understand that those claiming there is a threat about the spread of disease wrongly are telling people that the threat comes from domestic elk spreading disease from the source of the ranch out into the rest of the world. How ignorantly absurd and flat out wrong!

Domestic elk ranches in Idaho have never had one reported case of chronic wasting disease, as seems to be the biggest concern of the letter writer, and from the many elk ranchers I have met and communicated with over the years, they tell me they fear that their animals will contract diseases from infected wildlife, of which the Idaho Department of Fish and Game seems to be deaf and dumb about.

An honest look into the history of chronic wasting disease will show that it just doesn’t appear on a ranch out of the blue. The State of Idaho has restrictions on the importation of livestock from states where disease is in existence. The actual threat that exists in this case is that the government-cared-for wildlife will infect a domestic cervid industry that has for years proven themselves to be responsible, dedicated and disease free. It’s absurd to think elk behind fences are threatening the wild deer, elk and moose of the state of Idaho.

But if we look at who’s making the noise over this change in regulations, it’s the same players as always. The writer evokes the virtues of the Idaho Sportsman’s Caucus Advisory Council (ISCAC), which historically has been a mish-mish of different people with a gripe claiming the several thousands of members on their side that don’t really exist. In addition, ISCAC has always been the mouthpiece for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and, once again, historically IDFG has opposed every aspect of the Idaho elk ranching industry, especially the hunting ranches.

The domestic elk industry in Idaho has an immense task on their hands keeping their livestock protected from the diseases present in the wild ungulate and other wildlife populations. Chronic wasting disease has been in Idaho for several years unknown by most and it didn’t get there from the elk ranchers inventing the disease but was imported into the state via carcasses of wild game.

If there is so much concern about disease in wild game animals coming from the elk industry, consider a few simple facts. One, elk ranchers are not interested in allowing disease into their businesses. Why would they? It’s their livelihood. There is no reason they and the Department of Agriculture would reduce the amount of disease testing, if it would threaten the elk industry. Two, they have proven that they run a clean ship, not because they have been testing every elk killed for disease for the past 15 plus years but because they have done everything right to protect their livestock from the disease on the outside of the fences in addition to following the import regulations. In short, they know what needs to be done. Third, wolves are known carries of well over 30 diseases, many of them harmful to humans as well as livestock. It is a known fact that at least 2/3rds of all wild wolves in Idaho contain the Echinococcus granulosus tapeworm that can be fatal to humans and create Hydatid cysts in the organs of elk. There is at least one well-documented case of human hydatidosis in Idaho. Wolves also spread Neospora caninum, which can cause abortions and neonatal mortality in livestock. All of this spread from outside the elk ranches.

And with all of this, IDFG still denies that there is any risk of disease from wolves and continue to place their hypocritical focus on the elk industry.

Maybe it’s time that the State of Idaho is required to test every one of their wild animals before being allowed to get near an elk ranch.

Tom Remington
Largo, Florida and Bethel, Maine

Share

Non Surgical Treatment for Echinococcosis

The YUDJINA Clinic specialises on the Echinococcosis Hydatid Cyst treatment (alveolar type also) – a very complex infectious disease caused by the helminthic invasion. The degree of insidiousness of this disease and its consequences can be compared, perhaps, only to cancer. The Echinococcosis infection and the development of the disease proceed imperceptibly for the person exposed to the larvated eggs. Echinococcosis is hard to diagnose.

Clearly expressed symptoms of the disease are absent during a long time, sometimes up to ten years. During this period, one or several Echinococcosis bubbles – cysts grow on various organs of the patient. More often the Echinococcosis affects liver, lungs, kidneys, and brain. Slowly expanding, the cyst reaches appreciable sizes – up to 20 cm in diameter, and its weight can reach 1 kg. Developed Echinococcosis cyst causes intense sufferings to the patient. In case of physical rupture of a cyst, a complex of various allergic reactions is possible, including the development of an anaphylactic shock.

…….The measures of the public preventive actions are to the following:
…….taking measures for the hygienic training of population, especially among the livestock breeders, the hunters, the dog breeders and the members of their families;(emphasis added)<<<Read the Rest>>>

Share

Hydatid Cyst Transmission and Growth

Hydatid Cyst Transmission and Growth
February 22, 2013
Author: Clayton H. Dethlefsen
Chairman and Executive Director
Western Predator Control Association

ISSUE: Can Hydatid Cysts cause the development of Hydatid Disease without the Transmission of E.g. Tapeworm Eggs through their expulsion in the fecal discharge of Canines?
 
DISCUSSION:

Key Point: Transmission from Hydatid Cysts that directly creates a new Cyst happens.  The only question is how this happens.
 
Ungulates with multiple Cyst including humans generally get them when Cyst that they already have burst or seep causing the Protoscolices (Hydatid Sand and/or the Cyst Fluid) to migrate to new location within the body.  Mostly these new cysts grow within the same body cavity or the same or immediately adjacent vital organs.

Hydatid Fluid contains tapeworm larva that have heads with connected tails that look much the same as swimming frog pollywogs. This fluid is often referred to as Hydatid Sand, which, if it gets into the circulation or respiratory system, can flow its way to new ungulate body locations.  Also, new cyst can form, if the initial Cyst was in the eye, in the eye socket, and if the initial Cyst was in bone marrow, new Cysts (because of the bone’s structure) are habitually confined to the bone’s cavity. Also, Cysts form in the tracheal and bronchial tubes, particularly where the Trachea branches into the Bronchi, or at a subcutaneous location if Sand from a burst or leaking cyst moves to these locations.
 
A good number of multiple cysts have developed from leakage of cystic fluid during surgical procedures including Puncture, Aspiration, Irrigation and Reaspiration (PAIR) and/or biopsy procedures used to determine if in fact a cyst is an Echinococcus granulosus (E.g.) product.  Most medical research on children and operations on these patients have been done in their brain cavity where PAIR and biopsy processes are extremely restricted. When secondary Cysts do form adjacent to vital organs or in adjacent brain locations, including those that form post operation, they cause a resurgence of nearly identical patient symptoms and problems. However, if the Sand migrates to other body locations the symptoms are usually somewhat different, as is their medical impact.

(Keep in mind that symptoms of Hydatid Cyst involvement are numerous, dependent on their location, and are similar to other vital organ maladies and/or infections such as tumors or bacterial infections which cause physical pressure increases and/or the destruction/decaying of organ tissue in circulation, respirations, digestion, etc. systems.)
 
The question of whether a person can get a cyst or cysts from puncturing them while field dressing game or butchering domestic animals comes up frequently.  In considering this we have to understand that viable (infectious) Hydatid Sand must get directly into a susceptible body cavity and/or vital organ, and the environment surrounding a cyst’s growth must nearly approximate the hermetically sealed or the surgical environment that is inherent with the formation of a new cyst, or a secondary cyst from an original leaking or bursting cyst.
 
We have positive medical records with photographs that show cysts occurring in human eyes, bone marrow and from external injection in subcutaneous tissue. We also know that cysts form internally in the vital organs and at the juncture of the trachea and bronchial transition. The cysts that occur at these non-normal locations form as a result of unusual circumstances, which generally do not include free movement of E.g. Eggs or Hydatid Sand through the normal process, i.e. the ungulate’s circulation system.
 
In the cases of Eye Cysts, Trachea and Bronchial Cysts and Subcutaneous Cysts, Cyst formation, normal and non-normal, has had only limited medical evaluation; therefore, no absolutely definitive formation-origin or cause has been confirmed. But several doctors and/or medical researchers believe that it is feasible that cysts in these locations can and do start with the direct-to-the-site, as opposed to by the normal circulatory system, introduction of E. g Eggs and/or Hydatid Sand from external sources and by external means.
 
The circulation system in the eye cavity where eye-cyst growth starts is primarily at the end of the circulation system, where very tiny capillaries distribute blood, and where the eye socket is warm and well lubricated. This fact and the fact that normal cyst formation is nearly always in the nearest and most easily accessible vital organ (fed by large veins and arteries) makes it highly improbable that eye cysts, for example, would be sourced through the ungulates digestive system with subsequent movement by blood-flow through capillaries. It is therefore more possible that initial and secondary eye cysts, as well as, subcutaneous, some bone marrow (reference broken bones) and bronchial and trachea cysts can and do occur as a result of more direct contact with and movement by outside physical transmission means.
 
Further, the normal development and passage of E.g. eggs (at this point they have developed into oncospheres) directs that they in sequence attach/seat themselves in major vital organs such as Liver, Kidney, Lungs and Heart, and as often in the case of children in the child’s Brain, and not further down the very constricted recesses of the circulation corridor. It is therefore most reasonable to conclude that cysts in the eye socket, bone marrow, and in subcutaneous tissue, as well as at the junction of the trachea and bronchi come by way of other transmission means.
 
From confirming medical data, specifically patient records and medical research, we find, conclusively, that cysts can develop and have developed from seeping or burst cysts, particularly when multiple cysts are found, and specifically without the introduction of new E.g. eggs (oncospheres). What is not clear, particularly with cyst that form from surgical procedures (where the body cavity is open to an external atmosphere) is how long Hydatid Sand will maintain a viable-infectious protoscolices loading or allow secondary cysts to grow after the patient’s surgery has concluded and the patient’s surgical site is closed.
 
During surgical procedures (a very sterile process in a maintained-sterile external environment) it is confirmed that Sand/Protoscolices exposure, because of the normal length of a surgical procedure, has been and is many hours. Hence it is reasonable and logical to conclude that (in the near-term) time of exposure of Hydatid Sand to an external environment seems to have little degradation or death effect which would prevent the formation of secondary cysts from Hydatid Sand.
 
Taking all this factually based information and using the “Reasonable Person” method of assessment, it is logical to assert that both primary and secondary Hydatid Cysts can form in ungulates if Hydatid Fluid flows, is inhaled/ingested or is injected from an external source (Elk, Deer, domestic sheep, cattle, etc.) into a human. Of course this Hydatid Fluid needs to move into open human and other ungulate orifices (mouths, bleeding cuts, nose, eye sockets, etc.) from where Hydatid fluid movement continues into susceptible body nodes through normal respiratory and/or bodily flow processes. Although rare, this action can and does happen.

It has been medically determined and medically reported that cysts can form in the respiratory system at and near the junction of the trachea and bronchial connection, in subcutaneous tissue through injection and direct contact with an open wound, and in a very wetted eye cavity. It is also a medical fact the E.g. eggs and subsequently oncospheres survive the passage through the hostile digestive environment in ungulates and that scolices/protoscolices are unharmed in the hostile canine and human digestive, circulatory, respiratory systems. If these conclusions were not factual the E.g. life cycle would have terminated centuries ago.
 
It has also been established that human hands, insects such as coprophagic flies and wasps, and wind are transporters of E.g. eggs from one point to another, and that ingestion, injection and inhalation are all primary means by which E.g. is transmitted. Thus, open access to Hydatid Sand with viable protoscolices from a burst or seeping cyst can also be transmitted by these means, and can henceforth be inhaled, ingested and/or injected into an ungulate with the result being the formation of new and/or secondary Hydatid Cyst.

CONCLUSION:

Fact–Humans get secondary Hydatid Cyst from internally located bursting and/or seeping Cysts.

Too, in the case of humans (hunters, butchers, etc.) it is not only feasible but it is truly possible for people to get Hydatid Cysts from an ungulate’s exposed Hydatid Cysts. This occurs when Hydatid Sand from a Cyst that has burst and/or is seeping comes into contacted with a human’s transmission means, and thereafter, this Hydatid Cyst Fluid (with viable Protoscolices) enters external body orifices. Transmission by hands or by having Sand surge or gush in some other manner into external orifices of the body are such means; hence, Cysts do not occur just from direct involvement with E.g. Eggs.

*Editor’s Note* – I presented this article to Dr. Delane Kritsky, noted parasitologist from Idaho State University. In particular I wanted clarification, once again, that hunters and trappers are not in danger of contracting hydatid disease simply by handling game animals that may have hydatid cysts. Here is Dr. Kritsky’s response:

Tom: It is true that if a cyst is ruptured within your body, it will result in new cysts developing. In addition, it is possible to inject material from a cyst from one host into a new host which will result in development of a cyst (or cysts) in the new host (This is often done to maintain E. granulosus and E. multilocularis in laboratory animals); injection is usually within the body cavity; this is one of the dangers associated with surgical removal of cysts — rupture and the release of the hydatid sand into the body cavity during surgery could result in new cyst development in the patient. However, there is no danger in becoming infected just by handling (or eating) a cyst that might have been present in a harvested animal. delane

 

Share