My Frustration with CAE

billooo2 · #1 07/27/12, 06:03 AM

In over 20 years we seem to have made little progress in how to manage CAE!!!

This is my third time with dairy goats. The first time ws over 20 years ago. There were plenty of goats with swollen knees and udders that had the texture of liver. Now I have seen some healty looking 8-10 year old animals....with nice udders......and I am told that they are 'CAE positive.'

IMO, one of the major problems is that our tests only test for the presence of antibodies,.......as opposed for the disease itself.

I spent most of my career in the medical field. Every year I had a 'tine' test to see if I had been exposed to TB. If I had a positive reaction, I woluld have had further testing to see if I actually had TB. We have no equivalent tests to see if a goat actually has CAE.

In people very few of the people with a positive tine test ever actually have TB. Why is that???......their immune system worked!!!

In my conversations with WADDL, they tell me that out of the animals that test positive........only 1 in 10 will show any symptoms in the next 3 years!!!

That tells me that we are culling/trashing a lot of goats with very good immune systems!! Should we not be breeding for goats with good immune systems???

Because of my medical background I am used to reading about studies.....that have been peer reviewed.....and only after they pass the 'muster' of peer review, then they might be accepted for publication in a journal. and then there would be follow-up studies done to see if the results are duplicated. We have none of this in dairy goats.

So, we are left with a plethora of 'old wives tales,' rumors, and "pet theories.' Does anyone still believe that if person 'A' inadvertently touches a CAE positive animal, and then shakes hands with a person that owns CAE negative animals, then CAE would be transmitted to his/her animals.......???? Yes, there used to be a group of people who would not shake hands with anyone at a goat show because they were convinced that was how CAE was spread.....

Bill......frustrated with the lack pf progress.....

dosthouhavemilk · #2 07/27/12, 06:38 AM

My understanding is that the PCR test for CAE actually tests for the virus itself. Though I see on the WADDL site that as of a year and a half ago they were still working on improving that test.
It costs more and I do not test with it myself. If I get two positives through Biotracking, I consider them positive. Heck, there are some "test negative" does in my herd I consider positive anyways.
We had a 10+ year old "test positive" doe who never showed any symptoms of being CAE positive. I would never have known her line was positive without testing. Her 10 year old daughter has had five or more negative tests over the years...the most recent one last year. Her (very rare) doelings are pulled for prevention.
We cull positives once we have enough clean daughters, or the one line starts to actually go, or rather went, symptomatic. Our line prone to going symptomatic has been cleaned up and all that remains are our Prevention raised offspring and their offspring. Cull in this case means to a slaughter auction.

Alice In TX/MO · #3 07/27/12, 06:48 AM

It's my understanding that identifying this disease is relatively recent. Movement in the medical industry is SLOW. We're doing good!

Creamers · #4 07/27/12, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billooo2

IMO, one of the major problems is that our tests only test for the presence of antibodies,.......as opposed for the disease itself.

I spent most of my career in the medical field. Every year I had a 'tine' test to see if I had been exposed to TB. If I had a positive reaction, I woluld have had further testing to see if I actually had TB. We have no equivalent tests to see if a goat actually has CAE.

In people very few of the people with a positive tine test ever actually have TB. Why is that???......their immune system worked!!!

In my conversations with WADDL, they tell me that out of the animals that test positive........only 1 in 10 will show any symptoms in the next 3 years!!!

That tells me that we are culling/trashing a lot of goats with very good immune systems!! Should we not be breeding for goats with good immune systems???

Because of my medical background I am used to reading about studies.....that have been peer reviewed.....and only after they pass the 'muster' of peer review, then they might be accepted for publication in a journal. and then there would be follow-up studies done to see if the results are duplicated. We have none of this in dairy goats.

So, we are left with a plethora of 'old wives tales,' rumors, and "pet theories.' Does anyone still believe that if person 'A' inadvertently touches a CAE positive animal, and then shakes hands with a person that owns CAE negative animals, then CAE would be transmitted to his/her animals.......???? Yes, there used to be a group of people who would not shake hands with anyone at a goat show because they were convinced that was how CAE was spread.....

Bill......frustrated with the lack pf progress.....

You would think so, but logical thinking is a rarity.

KrisD · #5 07/27/12, 09:13 AM

I think most of us that had a goat test positive would retest knowing that a positive number could just mean exposure and not always disease itself. For me it would also depend on how high the test came back at. If it as super high then she probably would have it, i would still retest since testing is so cheap. I would not breed a doe that was positive, period. As someone who lives with several chronic illnesses I wouldn't wish that on anyone. There is plenty of good stock out there that is negative to risk passing a disease on. The other thing to consider with positive animals is that the can't tell us if they are feeling bad today, instead they have to hope the owners notice something is off.

dosthouhavemilk · #6 07/27/12, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrisD

I think most of us that had a goat test positive would retest knowing that a positive number could just mean exposure and not always disease itself. For me it would also depend on how high the test came back at. If it as super high then she probably would have it, i would still retest since testing is so cheap. I would not breed a doe that was positive, period. As someone who lives with several chronic illnesses I wouldn't wish that on anyone. There is plenty of good stock out there that is negative to risk passing a disease on. The other thing to consider with positive animals is that the can't tell us if they are feeling bad today, instead they have to hope the owners notice something is off.

Are you suggesting the positive animals be killed? Or simply not breed them and let them live as long as they would. Without a purpose except as an expensive yard ornament (which is fine if one can afford it). A small percentage ever have symptoms. The symptoms, when they occur, tend to be obvious. We breed our positives. They raise meat wethers. They get to enjoy motherhood and we are not out those genetics. The meat wethers won't live more than a year anyways, so they are not likely to be affected by the disease.
I guess since we tested for the first time 10 years into owning goats and dam raising all those years only to discover that at least 3 of our 5 original does were likely CAE positive. I just couldn't give up all those does. So we are slowly cleaning our herd. Our kids raised on Prevention from our positives are clean. One generation is all it takes. Why remove the traits a good doe can carry and pass, when it is that simple?

KrisD · #7 07/27/12, 11:57 AM

I'm not suggesting anything to each his own. If mine were positive (I've never had a positive) I would just not breed them. Too many ways an accident can happen. There can be an emergency and you aren't there to catch the kids. Or like my Saanen kid who sneaks in and steals a drink from a doe that isn't her mom until the doe catches her. How many of us have had a goat break out of their yard? I would let them just be brush eaters if they were that important to me or butcher them if not.
I often have symptoms that on one knows about it doesn't mean they aren't here I just don't say anything. Goats are pray animals, as pray animals they tend to not show symptoms of illness or injury unless they have to. They could very well be suffering in silence until they just can't anymore. If I love them I wouldn't want to risk that. Not directed at you Roseanna but is it ever ok to let our animals suffer just so we get to keep good genetics? There are lots of great genetics out there and lots of great producers. If even one mistake happens and a doe breaks into a pen and the kids snatch a drink and become infected (i know very rare) that is our fault, we did that to them. These are just things I think about. This is not directed at anyone so please don't take offense.

Hollowdweller · #8 07/27/12, 12:03 PM

I'd think a doe testing +++ would have to be a potential for infection.

If you have a kid that has been fed CAE++++ but pasteurized milk, that kid will usually show positive for 6 mo or so and then be neg as an adult.

Hollowdweller · #9 07/27/12, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrisD

I'm not suggesting anything to each his own. If mine were positive (I've never had a positive) I would just not breed them. Too many ways an accident can happen.

I think for me it would depend on the animal. If the animal is really great then it would be worth the risk. If not, then no.

All of my goats I own descend from the pasteurized daughter of a CAE+++ doe I owned.

At the time I owned that doe, who had to be put down at 3 due to arthritis, I had numerous other goats of varying lines. Over the years all those animals were sold or culled out and only the ones related to that doe remain.

If I had not bred her then I would have never had the good milkers and easy keepers I have today.

So it's really a judgement call.

But if the person is going to let the kids suck, or really even let the kids run with the adult goats then it's probably better to cull all the ++++ ones.

MDKatie · #10 07/27/12, 12:17 PM

I have a positive doe (June), who is asymptomatic. Her dam (who was positive) lived to be 13 years old and was asymptomatic. June is bred every year, and I catch her kids and bottle feed every year (using cow colostrum and milk replacer). June's daughter, Ida, is negative and will be bred this year. I'm still not sure if I'm going to let Ida raise her kids or not. I wouldn't have a problem with it, except they're all going in the same pasture, and I'm not sure if June would let other kids nurse. She has NEVER had a kid at her side, so I'm not sure she'd tolerate it, but if Ida has doe kids I may consider bottling them also, just to make sure they don't nurse off June.

In my experience, CAE is not that big of a deal, though I do bottle raise kids to prevent it.

Hollowdweller · #11 07/27/12, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDKatie

I have a positive doe (June), who is asymptomatic. Her dam (who was positive) lived to be 13 years old and was asymptomatic. June is bred every year, and I catch her kids and bottle feed every year (using cow colostrum and milk replacer). June's daughter, Ida, is negative and will be bred this year. I'm still not sure if I'm going to let Ida raise her kids or not. I wouldn't have a problem with it, except they're all going in the same pasture, and I'm not sure if June would let other kids nurse. She has NEVER had a kid at her side, so I'm not sure she'd tolerate it, but if Ida has doe kids I may consider bottling them also, just to make sure they don't nurse off June.

In my experience, CAE is not that big of a deal, though I do bottle raise kids to prevent it.

Yeah that would make me a little nervous since kids will usually try to sneak a drink from any doe.

Pony · #12 07/27/12, 05:59 PM

I am not able to pull kids and bottle feed. The risk of a positive doe would be too great for me. So, if I have a doe come up positive, I have two options: Sell with full disclosure, or cull.

I will cull, as I do not have control over what happens when the animal leaves my farm, and while some here obviously view it as tossing the baby with the bathwater, I see it as taking appropriate precautions given what we know of the disease.

Statistics are all very nice in the theoretical world of academia. But when you're living where the rubber meets the road, you don't have the luxury of relying on statistics to keep your herd clean and your goat asymptomatic.

KrisD · #13 07/27/12, 06:41 PM

Amen Pony!

grandmajo · #14 07/27/12, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billooo2

In my conversations with WADDL, they tell me that out of the animals that test positive........only 1 in 10 will show any symptoms in the next 3 years!!!

I look at it this way. Let's say that a woman that you were very interested in had tested positive for HIV. You know that she is HIV positive, but she is not showing any symptoms. Would you be willing to take an unprotected "roll in the hay" with her, just because she was symptom free?

Personally, I would cull, as in the animal is butchered. I'm with Pony on this, even if I sell the animal with full disclosure, there's no way to know what happens to it after it leaves my farm.

Alice In TX/MO · #15 07/27/12, 08:21 PM

I've never had a positive test result, but someone I know did. We butchered the doe.

julieq · #16 07/27/12, 08:36 PM

We've never had a CAE positive animal in over a decade of testing, but we've been really careful about purchasing from breeders who test yearly and don't have positive animals either. And we're probably more intense than others about keeping a biosecure herd. We don't visit fairs, shows or even other farms where the CAE status is unknown.

After dealing with HIV patients in our medical practice in past years, we don't want a retrovirus in our milk supply at all. There's so much more money available to study HIV in humans than CAE in goats, but they still don't have a great understanding of HIV. Forgive us our concern, but we watched patients die.

We would choose to have our vet put down any animal that comes up CAE positive, but fortunately we haven't had to do that. But we do respect others who have entirely different opinions than we do, so please no flaming.

billooo2 · #17 07/27/12, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grandmajo

I look at it this way. Let's say that a woman that you were very interested in had tested positive for HIV. You know that she is HIV positive, but she is not showing any symptoms. Would you be willing to take an unprotected "roll in the hay" with her, just because she was symptom free?

Personally, I would cull, as in the animal is butchered. I'm with Pony on this, even if I sell the animal with full disclosure, there's no way to know what happens to it after it leaves my farm.

Apparently, I was not clear. One of my frustrations is that there is no test to find out it the animal has the disease......as opposed to just being exposed to CAE.

I don't believe that I said a single thing that advocated assuming that an asymptomatic animal being regarded as negative.

dosthouhavemilk · #18 07/27/12, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pony

I will cull, as I do not have control over what happens when the animal leaves my farm, and while some here obviously view it as tossing the baby with the bathwater, I see it as taking appropriate precautions given what we know of the disease.

If this is directed at me, it is clear I was misunderstood. All of our positives end up culled to a slaughter auction. I do not sell them onto other people. When we cull them.
There are situations where breeding and pulling kids for prevention does not work. I know that. I happen to be lucky. We have a lot of land and we are able to attend births. The ones we miss (I think since we started testing it has been two deliveries in 5 or so years now)? Those doelings end up going for slaughter with their brothers...or I use them in the positive herd. We are not passing the disease onto others.
I guess I wonder why someone would keep a positive doe alive doing nothing but dismiss those that go ahead and actually breed them to further quality genetics. The animal is still at risk of having bad days whether they are bred or not. If you worry about the potential bad days the animal might experience then they should be killed simply for having a couple of positive tests...which, as was the point of this thread, is questionable at best since it tests for the antibodies and not the virus itself.

Ah well. This isn't worth worrying myself over. We made a decision based on the misfortune of actually having positives in our herd and did not have the money to simply start over. Since then, we have been removing the disease from our herd, one generation at a time. As the older positives die off or are culled, we have clean daughters and granddaughters to replace them. Over 200+ goats on the place...I believe we have 7 test positives?

Everyone can make their own decisions. Frankly, I didn't have the heart to kill Snow White. I don't regret it...at 10 1/2 she kidded with twin doelings. She gave us 10 1/2 years with no symptoms... she wasn't the first and she won't be the last.
My Frustration with CAE - Goats

Snow White a couple of weeks after kidding at 10+ years old. Her udder was soft and she had no signs of CAE to the day she died.

KrisD · #19 07/27/12, 11:53 PM

I've never had a positive goat so my opinion is just speculation. I would only keep a positive doe around if she were an absolute favorite goat. If she showed any signs of being in pain she would be euthanized immediately. I would most likely cull any positives immediately. Just an FYI though many goat rescues purposely buy the slaughter goats because they are trying to save them from death. They then put them in pens all together and adopt out to uneducated owners. Before I got my does 2 years ago I called 4 rescues and everyone of them said they pull from the slaughter auctions to save their lives. I also know horse rescue that do his regularly as well. Years ago I purposely put a crazy horse through the slaughter barn think that problem solved he will go for meat. WRONG some stupid horse rescue bought him and then adopted him out. He dang near killed someone! He eventually was shot but not before he reared up fell over backwards on a girl then got up and stomped on her breaking her ribs and knocking out her teeth.

dosthouhavemilk · #20 07/28/12, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrisD

I've never had a positive goat so my opinion is just speculation. I would only keep a positive doe around if she were an absolute favorite goat. If she showed any signs of being in pain she would be euthanized immediately. I would most likely cull any positives immediately. Just an FYI though many goat rescues purposely buy the slaughter goats because they are trying to save them from death. They then put them in pens all together and adopt out to uneducated owners. Before I got my does 2 years ago I called 4 rescues and everyone of them said they pull from the slaughter auctions to save their lives. I also know horse rescue that do his regularly as well. Years ago I purposely put a crazy horse through the slaughter barn think that problem solved he will go for meat. WRONG some stupid horse rescue bought him and then adopted him out. He dang near killed someone! He eventually was shot but not before he reared up fell over backwards on a girl then got up and stomped on her breaking her ribs and knocking out her teeth.

Thankfully the guy that hauls our goats stays through the auction. They go to slaughter buyers (one is his buyer). It is why I prefer not to send them through the local sale barn. If I did, I would mark them slaughter only and our hauler would likely buy them for his meat buyer. We have only had the one line that showed symptoms. The other positive lines don't go symptomatic, thank goodness. The doe above is the one who has a 10 year old daughter who has never tested positive. Her dam raised daughter, Snickers, on the other hand, has tested positive. Go figure. It is why Milky Way is treated as positive even though she has never had a positive test in her life yet.