? About CAE

CaliannG · #41 07/05/11, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDKatie

I would only have issues if someone is knowingly selling positive animals without telling the buyer- that is just unethical.

This is, unfortunately, the very gist of the matter. Not only the knowingly selling positive animals, but how about knowingly selling suspected animals? Just where IS that gray, ethical line?

Most people here have trusted a seller, or been too naive to ask, and ended up with a diseased goat and heartbreak. You mentioned you worried more about CL than CAE? Some of us worry about ALL of them and worry due to experience.

How about the sweet, old lady that smiles and says, "Oh, that's a vaccination bump; I had the vet out here just last week."

"Are you sure? I really don't want a goat with CL."

"Oh yes, I am sure he gave the vaccination right there on her neck."

Just enough knowledge to know to ask about CL, but not enough experience to know she should DEMAND paperwork. The old lady is just savvy enough NOT to say the goat doesn't have CL, and deflect inquiries.

Later on, well, there were no guarantees.

As for looking down on people that keep known, positive goats, thereby running the risk of spreading that un-curable disease to other animals? Yeah, I look down on them. You could have culled that goat once you had a replacement. Accidents happen. I have two full grown does that will grab a teat and nurse from another doe for the couple of microseconds that other doe allows...and that is all it takes. It is not only kids that will steal a sip now and again...other does and even bucks and wethers in a herd will grab a sip as a teat goes by every so often. Therefore, just having a positive doe is a risk to the herd...period.

So yes, I consider you irresponsible in managing an un-curable disease in your herd, and I would not buy from you or recommend that anyone else buy from you. Would I consider you unethical or immoral? No. Would this knowledge cause me to consider other goat-related advise that you might give to be suspect? Yes.

Am I going to come with big signs and other clean herd people and picket outside of your barn? ~grinz~ Absolutely not! You need never fear that I still up protesters outside of your driveway.

I mean, things DO need to be kept in perspective.

mekasmom · #42 07/05/11, 04:13 PM

Let's just encourage people who are starting in goats. It's so sad to see so much fear and discouragement all over the forums on the web. Let's be people who encourage, "you can do it", " things will get better", etc. Lets be people who tell others how to diminish their losses.

What if there is a person who goes out and spends a lot of their money, let's say $1000 to start into goats, with high hopes and desires for a herd to help feed their family, then finds out one doe isn't perfect. Should they just cull, loose money, and give up because they are so discouraged? That is so sad. There is hope. Some people are in need, they cannot afford to loose a lot of money in a doe or kids. They are depending on these animals to feed their families. Let's encourage, give optimistic advice, and help others. Don't put them down. I remember 40yrs ago when we were young, and first married, loosing $300 on a doe back then would have been devastating. It would have been not having the money for our light bill for 4mo or more. It would have been a horrible thing to loose that money if we just bought a doe and then some one said to kill it, and it's especially sad when there are other ways to manage the virus, and still not loose a doe that could be productive. I remember what it was like to live hand to mouth back when we were young, and I know what it would have been like to be beat down over and over because a goat wasn't perfect. I just pray that people all over the goat world would think about the fear and discouragement they put out so easily. It scares people. It hurts and discourages people who come looking for advice.

At least give the correct information, use scientific studies, suggest vets to give advice, don't just blow out personal opinions that don't even agree with the scientific facts. Other people are on the receiving end of those words who will loose money if they make those decisions. And some of them in this world cannot afford to loose money.

Heritagefarm · #43 07/05/11, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mekasmom

At least give the correct information, use scientific studies, suggest vets to give advice, don't just blow out personal opinions that don't even agree with the scientific facts.

That's a good idea, but people love their own opinions. We don't have enough information, however, sometime I plan on doing a survey. I will ask questions of herds throughout the US about their experiences with CAE, how often they had goats switch, if they had CAE+ animals, how they handled their milk, etc. It will shed some much-needed light on the goat world and help alleviate some of the disinformation that flys around so frequently on these forums.

CaliannG · #44 07/05/11, 04:57 PM

40 years ago, it would have had to have been SOME DOE to have cost $300. Heck, if I had found a doe for $300 40 years ago, I would not have even considered buying her! I would, however, have called up the seller out of morbid curiosity to find out what was so special about that goat that made her worth $300. Did she milk molten silver or something? Grow a shear-able, gold thread coat?

I DO post scientific studies every chance I get...but yanno, hunting down those studies is time consuming once one has already done so the previous 53 times this topic has come up. Should I keep a library on my computer to just re-post the same links over and over (provided those links are still good and that the study hasn't been moved to another archive site in the meantime) for you people who are too lazy or too closeminded to do your own dang research?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=CAE+goats+studies+articles

( I am waiting for lmgtfy.com to have a Google Scholar application, but until then, type in the same words into Google Scholar, and you will find the latest and greatest.)

Now, lessee what CAE DOES to goats, hmmmm?

1. While asymptomatic goats with CAE do happen, they are not common. CAE positive goats CONSISTENT produce less in both meat and milk than their disease free counterparts.

2. CAE positive goats CONSISTENTLY have shorter life spans than their CAE counterparts on average.

3. CAE positive goats CONSISTENTLY have less than half of the lifetime milk production of their disease free counterparts.

4. CAE positive goats CONSISTENTLY have shorter productive time periods, both in lactation cycles and years of production, than their disease free counterparts.

5. CAE positive goats have over four times as many reproductive problems than their disease free counterparts, i.e. a positive doe is four times more likely to abort or not catch or settle at all than her clean sister...and a CAE positive buck suffers four times more likelihood of shooting blanks or sperm with poor motility that his disease-free brother.

So, if someone invests $1000 in a small herd, say it is two does and two doelings, and that person is poor and not able to invest a lot of money, and that person is easily discouraged...and one of that person's goats turns up positive for CAE.... and that person is depending upon these goats to feed their family...

WHY on EARTH would that person risk the rest of her clean herd when spreading the disease could mean she won't be able to help feed her family with ANY of them, and by culling the positive one, she can at least feed her family some goat chops out of the deal?

Why would she want to risk the REST of her investment if she is so short on cash?

Again, mekasmom, you are suggesting that if someone has an electrical short in their bedroom, and they can't afford an entire wiring system for the house...that instead of just pulling the breaker for that bedroom and keeping that room dark, that instead they just keep the electric on everywhere and risk burning their entire house down around their ears.

That is NOT a wise choice... to risk the future production, reproduction, etc, of your entire herd over one or two animals.

Besides, the OP already stated that she PLANNED to cull these animals, and that is the choice she had ALREADY made...but that she was naturally discouraged by it. I feel for her and I have been in her shoes. It sucks. But often, doing the right thing sucks. Just ask any Christian that actually follows the teachings of Christ if doing the right thing doesn't often suck and is sometimes discouraging when so many around chose to do the wrong thing.

MDKatie · #45 07/05/11, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

So yes, I consider you irresponsible in managing an un-curable disease in your herd, and I would not buy from you or recommend that anyone else buy from you. Would I consider you unethical or immoral? No. Would this knowledge cause me to consider other goat-related advise that you might give to be suspect? Yes.

Am I going to come with big signs and other clean herd people and picket outside of your barn? ~grinz~ Absolutely not! You need never fear that I still up protesters outside of your driveway.

I mean, things DO need to be kept in perspective.

Ok.

Heritagefarm · #46 07/05/11, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

1. While asymptomatic goats with CAE do happen, they are not common. CAE positive goats CONSISTENT produce less in both meat and milk than their disease free counterparts.

2. CAE positive goats CONSISTENTLY have shorter life spans than their CAE counterparts on average.

3. CAE positive goats CONSISTENTLY have less than half of the lifetime milk production of their disease free counterparts.

4. CAE positive goats CONSISTENTLY have shorter productive time periods, both in lactation cycles and years of production, than their disease free counterparts.

5. CAE positive goats have over four times as many reproductive problems than their disease free counterparts, i.e. a positive doe is four times more likely to abort or not catch or settle at all than her clean sister...and a CAE positive buck suffers four times more likelihood of shooting blanks or sperm with poor motility that his disease-free brother.

Everything you have written here is disinformation. Perhaps it was true when it was written 2,000 years ago, but not today.

MDKatie · #47 07/05/11, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heritagefarm

Everything you have written here is disinformation. Perhaps it was true when it was written 2,000 years ago, but not today.

But c'mon, she has a clean herd therefore knows more than everyone else!

CaliannG · #48 07/05/11, 06:13 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2843492

http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.c...0622R/abstract

http://http://www.journalofdairyscie...190-3/abstract

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...21997585900301

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...8.01188.x/full

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...90023305003047

Read each and every study, in full, as most of the information is not in the abstract. Pay for them, like I have, to improve my knowledge of the animals I raise for milk and meat.

Heritage Farms, by stating that what I have posted is disinformation, since it is backed up by study after study and research going back to the mid-80's as well as ongoing, published studies from this year, you are lying. Everything I have stated about CAE is fact shown in studies. I can post links to 20 more studies with the same findings and conclusions... and no one yet on this board has posted a SINGLE study that has a conclusion that is even different, much less contradicts the established findings.

HeritageFarms and MDKatie, with both of your posts, you are using nothing more that your opinions, and some fancy misdirection (try to discredit the person so people won't believe the information) to attempt to make others believe you. Where are your facts? Where are your studies that show that CAE positive goats are just as productive and live just as long and have no reproductive problems greater than average?

Well? Or do you have nothing more than emoticons to back up your claims?

MDKatie · #49 07/05/11, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

HeritageFarms and MDKatie, with both of your posts, you are using nothing more that your opinions, and some fancy misdirection (try to discredit the person so people won't believe the information) to attempt to make others believe you. Where are your facts? Where are your studies that show that CAE positive goats are just as productive and live just as long and have no reproductive problems greater than average?

Well? Or do you have nothing more than emoticons to back up your claims?

You seem hellbent on proving your point. We get it, ok? You think any animal that has any disease at all should be culled. We get that. That's your decision for your herd. The fact is, most of us with positive animals did not run out and search for positive animals to buy. Most of us unknowingly bought them. In my case, I bought a 2 yr old doe from a very nice 4-H family that I've known for several years. They take very good care of their animals, so I bought from them. I'm a sheep person, but I raised goats in 4-H when I was young. I'd never heard of CAE growing up, and it was only after I got this doe and started reading on forums that I learned more about it. I got her tested, and she was positive. LIke I said, I was pretty upset about it at first, but I wasn't about to get rid of her because I liked her a lot.

She's been a wonderful doe for our family. I told the people I bought her from that she was positive, and they tested their goats and found they were all positive, even the goats they'd just bought from another breeder. My doe's dam lived until she was 13 and never had a problem milking or breeding and was, in fact, asymptomatic. My doe has twinned both years I've had her and has never had an issue settling.

So, if I was starting over today with no goats, I'd find a clean animal to buy, but don't you act like you're all high and mighty and know more than I do simply because I made an educated decision to keep my positive doe. She's perfect for our family and I don't regret keeping her. Maybe you don't realize that different people have different goals for their animals. I'm not raising show goats, I have a family milker that my DSS *may* show at our county fair just for fun. While I do make sure to breed nice animals (no bad conformation, genetic flaws, etc), I'm not hell bent on finding the best genetics or winning ribbons in the show ring. Perhaps if I ever decide to truly start breeding goats for a living I'll reconsider keeping a positive doe. Until then, selling 2 kids a year hardly counts.

If it makes you feel better to look down on those who have positive animals, it's your right to do that, but I feel sorry for you.

And to answer your questions, I'm not attempting to make people believe me, I'm only telling of my reasons for keeping a positive doe. This isn't some game and nobody is keeping score. I don't care who agrees with me or not. And where did I get my facts? Real life experiences, that's where. The articles may say positive animals don't milk or live very long, but that's not the case for every animal. Like I said, my doe's dam lived until 13 and never had a problem at all.

susanne · #50 07/05/11, 06:33 PM

the problem is that the majority of people seek information AFTER they bought
their goats.

CaliannG · #51 07/05/11, 06:36 PM

No, MDKatie, my point is that *these are the scientific facts behind this disease*. YOUR decision to keep a positive doe is YOUR decision....but that does not give YOU the right to attempt to encourage others to be less than vigilant with their own herd because YOU have made a "personal, non-scientific decision" about YOUR herd.

Do I know more than you do about disease in general and CAE in particular? Maybe. Does that "MD" in your name stand for "Medical Doctor"? If not, probably. How many college biology, microbiology, and zoology courses have you taken? How much time have you invested in studying CAE, CL, Johnne's Disease and Brucella? Do you have more time and tuition invested in these things than I do?

And if someone who has studied computers tells you to be careful about doing XYZ because you can contract a computer virus and screw up your investment, are you going to rant about how they are acting all high and mighty, and what YOU do with YOUR computer is YOUR business.... and the computer person should not look down upon you, nor correct you when you tell other people that is okay to do XYZ, since you do that with YOUR computer?

You see, it is STILL an ad hominim attack that you are using to attempt to get others to validate your decisions. Instead of attacking my sources and facts, however, you first attack my ability to do modern research, THEN you are attacking my character, insinuating that I am arrogant and superior.

If you have some FACTS to back up that your "educated" decision was a logical one that other concerned people might wish to emulate, rather than an emotional one, then please produce those FACTS.

CaliannG · #52 07/05/11, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by susanne

the problem is that the majority of people seek information AFTER they bought
their goats.

BINGO!

And a big trouble is that it is human nature to rationalize keeping a bad purchase (I didn't have bad judgement and jump into a purchase without thinking or doing my research... it is simply that the problems that have arisen are minor. I made the right decision!) rather than admit they were unprepared and exhibited bad judgement, and rectify it.

That IS human nature. Yes, although I try to root that out in me, even I do the same thing sometimes. (But, but , but honey! They're CUTE! Don't you think we NEED rolling lawn sprayers that look like chickens?)

MDKatie · #53 07/05/11, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliannG

No, MDKatie, my point is that *these are the scientific facts behind this disease*. YOUR decision to keep a positive doe is YOUR decision....but that does not give YOU the right to attempt to encourage others to be less than vigilant with their own herd because YOU have made a "personal, non-scientific decision" about YOUR herd.

Do I know more than you do about disease in general and CAE in particular? Probably. How many college biology, microbiology, and zoology courses have you taken? How much time have you invested in studying CAE, CL, Johnne's Disease and Brucella? Do you have more time and tuition invested in these things than I do?

And if someone who has studied computers tells you to be careful about doing XYZ because you can contract a computer virus and screw up your investment, are you going to rant about how they are acting all high and mighty, and what YOU do with YOUR computer is YOUR business.... and the computer person should not look down upon you, nor correct you when you tell other people that is okay to do XYZ, since you do that with YOUR computer?

You see, it is STILL an ad hominim attack that you are using to attempt to get others to validate your decisions. Instead of attacking my sources and facts, however, you first attack my ability to do modern research, THEN you are attacking my character, insinuating that I am arrogant and superior.

If you have some FACTS to back up that your "educated" decision was a logical one that other concerned people might wish to emulate, rather than an emotional one, then please produce those FACTS.

I'm really not sure why you're getting so upset about what I do with my goats. And please show me where I tried to "attempt to encourage others to be less than vigilant with their own herd". I am simply stating my opinions on CAE and managing it in a herd. And yes, it was a LOGICAL decision because I looked at her dam and saw how she was still going strong milking and producing babies and asymptomatic at 13 yrs old, I saw how MANY breeders still choose to keep positive animals in their production herds even though they KNOW they are positive, or how MANY people just don't care to test at all because of the lack of actual loss it causes to their production. I also happened to LIKE my doe, which yes, was emotional.

I'm not about to send you my college transcripts, but I will say I was an Animal Science major and I don't feel the need to prove anything to you or "one up" you because like I said, this is not some game, it's a discussion on a forum.

This is all I'm replying to you, since you care to make this personal and I don't. I never have once said that people should not care about CAE or keep positive goats, I'm simply talking about my personal experience with CAE. Not to downplay the disease, but I'm sure you know that you can't learn everything through books, and sometimes you need hands-on, real-life learning.

Have a nice evening, or don't. I really don't care.

CaliannG · #54 07/05/11, 07:15 PM

~smiles and shakes her head~ Yes, I can see how posting links to studies and refuting your ad hominim attacks is all about me making things *personal*.

If you were/are an Animal Science major, surely you would have seen/read SOME study that backs up your claims? Can you tell me how what I have posted is wrong, and why the cause is that I have a clean herd and therefore know everything?

~chuckles~ Inquiring minds wish to know.

Creamers · #55 07/05/11, 07:30 PM

Quote:

So yes, I consider you irresponsible in managing an un-curable disease in your herd

You're considering at lot of large, quality herds irresponsible - this includes the people said to be respected on this board.

There are so many wrong assumptions in this thread - I just can't address it all . . . too tired today - it was a hay pick up day -

I would not manage CAE - I said that before I bought the one doe, took the loss of a lot of money for a show doe - gave her to a friend - and I have tested since almost day one of having goats, but I bought a doe too young to test and didn't get paperwork - my mistake.

I will add - I've pulled blood on a LOT of goats with no symptoms thinking I'd buy and 75% have been positive. I base what I know on what I've seen - I can't pay as much attention to studies if what I see in practice doesn't back it up.

Did I buy any of those does that were positive? No. Never. Just ended up with the one kid.

Do I think testing is 100% No. Never. Do I test? Yearly, and I'll continue - it is all I have as an option. Do I have 100% faith in the results - no. I hope they are right. . . I wouldn't bet my life on it.

Why do you think that people still do CAE prevention year after year on herds that are testing CAE free? There is a reason for that - it is because testing and results are the end all, be all. . .

All I or ANYONE else can do is test and try to keep the herd clean by practices in management, but will I say someone isn't responsible if a goat is not symptoms, is worth a lot in terms of dollar value and they need to manage it to get a doeling replacement out of her - NEVER! It is absurd, IMO. That is my opinion - ya'll can have your own.

Heritagefarm · #56 07/05/11, 07:45 PM

I found this interesting:
http://www.cornerstonefarm.net/gtcareof.html

Quote:

The following is a compulation of information gathered on CAE from questions submitted to a research veterinarian at Washington State University, by ENDGE members in 1999.

...

...some strains are less pathogenic than others.

...

Conservatively, there are about 12 major strains, but some strains exceed 20.

...

Many goat owners do not feel that the control of an infection that only causes ~10% disease is not regarded as a serious disease.

...

The virus is spread by blood inside blood cells, therefore it does not survive outside the goat's body longer then it takes blood or secretions to dry. Warm soap and water are the best disinfectants, since they cause blood cells to burst - rendering the virus inside no longer infectious.

(emphasis added)

freedomfrom4 · #57 07/05/11, 08:09 PM

I called an old friend who has been in goats a long time and when they got into goats it was 1973. The first does purchased were $300 a piece. They were froom the Caddillac Nubians. And no they didn't milk silver or have a golden coat

I just had to call her since it came up

CaliannG · #58 07/05/11, 09:15 PM

~grinz at freedomfrom4~ Oh, I remember when Boers first came out too. Local paper had 50% bucks going for $15,000 each!

In other areas, the same bucks were going for $5,000. It depends upon the geography. In the early 70's, there was a short-term spike in the price of pureblood when the PB herdbooks closed, but that was short term.

Ted: So glad you were able to post the non-scientific opinion posted on one, single web site that refuses even to cite the source. I was not aware that Research and Veterinary Dr.'s have to keep their name off of the internet so that they are not deluged by people bugging them for more information.

Oh, wait, it seems that isn't the case! There are LOTS of research doctors with their names and, yes, even their e-mail addresses plastered all over the internet!

So the un-cited and un-authored web site you posted that says that their information did, indeed, come from scientific sources, but do not show the actual study and refuse to mention the names of the researchers is certainly the very equal of all of the peer-reviewed studies I posted. I must bow to your superior opinion.

You are absolutely right. CAE is no big deal and people shouldn't even worry about testing or controlling it.

Oh, BTW, both IDGR and Tennessee Meat Goats have articles about how awful disbudding is and how it shouldn't be practiced...even though they also cite no scientific sources and post no researcher names or studies...so I shall expect your complete support when I go forth about the evils of disbudding....solely based on those two articles. I look forward to that thread.

~curtsies deeply~

teyze · #59 07/05/11, 09:37 PM

wow callie, I didn't realize I had joined a discussion where I would be accused of having a CAE positive herd and need to validate my reasons for keeping what YOU would cull.
As far as being called tenatious, thanks!
I do not however have a CAE positive animal. (nor ever have had to my knowledge)
I merely interjected an opinion to someone who was asking a general question to a GROUP.
The lady seemed particularly attatched to the animals, and didn't seem to have made up her mind yet about whether or not she would have the time to bottle raise new kids. I was just giving a possible solution.
I didn't realize that YOU were the only one on here with valid opinions. Perhaps I should take myself off your group (it is yours right??)
Oh wait, perhaps I should try and hang around and learn from the more polite and respectful people who post here.

CaliannG · #60 07/05/11, 09:43 PM

~sighs~ Will you PLEASE pick an I.D. and stick with it? Or are you simply trying to confuse the issue with your different nicks and accounts?