Since this started here, I'll followup here, but perhaps anything further
should be taken offlist, as it's not exactly relevant to ferrets at this
point.
 
>>As someone who actually had Guillain-Barre, I find your scare tactics to
>>try to convince people not to feed raw to be intellectually dishonest.
 
>Personally, I find the debate on raw feeding vs. kibble to be
>disingenious on this forum and most others.  Personally, I find this
>issue more compelling on FHL, as there it it seems to play out more based
>on research data (or the need therefor) and less on personal-anecdotal
>evidence or perceived authority.
 
I don't disagree with you in the slightest.  However, when you're
discussing an issue that has heavy medical implications, sometimes
personal anecdotes are easier for people with less education in that
arena to understand than an all-out discussion full of things that
mean very little to those who aren't more intimately familiar with the
verbiage, much like readin a contract where the legalese is heavy and
can be difficult to understand.  Minute differences in meanings of words
between what most people see and what the professionals see make a HUGE
difference.
 
>I've looked at the research and I've found little conclusive evidence to
>justify the claim that one feeding method is better than another.  There
>are risks with both methods.  The question becomes a personal issue of
>what risks is the person willing to accept & which method is the person
>more comfortable with.
 
I agree.  I actually don't feed my ferrets raw, except for on rare
occasion.  Those that are willing to eat meat get it cooked.  Those that
don't eat meat, just eat kibble.  Personally, I feel comfortable in
feeding raw human-grade foods to my animals, but my ferrets don't tend
to want to eat raw and I don't force the issue with them.
 
>In the U.S., everyone who gets the flu vaccine is asked to sign a waiver
>stating they've been informed it may cause GBS, however rare that is.
>Does that "scare tactic" mean nobody should get the vaccine?
 
Most people aren't even aware of what GBS is, let alone how bad it can
be.  I'm lucky to be alive, honestly, given that I was 3 at the time I
contracted it.  We believe that it is the cause of some of my more
serious health issues now.  Given that I have had GBS, the risks of me
getting a flu shot are heightened considerably (even though it's still
a fairly low percentage).  I don't get the flu shot anymore, but that
doesn't make it the right choice for others.  Given the option of
potentially life-long paralyzation or a one-to-two week flu, I'll take
the flu.
 
>GBS certainly is not necessarily "for a short period of time".  GBS can
>kill... in my sister's case, it left her permanently totally blind & deaf
>and lame in one leg.  For 2 yrs the only way to talk to her was to spell
>out capital letters on her cheek & listen for her response, though now
>she uses braille & sign-languare alphabet.  And she's now on her 4th yr
>of treatment with plasmapheresis & IV-IG, though she is no longer in the
>excrutiating pain she was in when she 1st got it (lying in the hospital
>screaming "if you love you you'll kill me").
 
I am very sorry to know this.  You are, perhaps, the first person outside
of the other kid I was hospitalized with GBS who even knows what it is or
what it can do.  In general, it is fairly short-lived (months to a
handful of years) compared with the lifespan of those who contract it.
Most people will make a full recovery within a few years, even if their
health is never again as stable as it once was.
 
>The point I'm making, and that I believe Sukie was making, is that many
>diseases are mysterious.  We can't definatively tell people what will or
>won't happen.  We can only tell what COULD happen and let the individual
>make the decision they are most comforatable.  I don't consider that
>"scare tactics".
 
"Scare tactics" is taking some unknown and highly improbable illness with
horrid effects, trying to make it sound much more probable, and using it
to try to convince people that your way of thinking is the right one.
 
>Life, itself, is unpredictable - all we know is potential, not factual.
 
Exactly.  Some things are more likely than others.  Using things that
are so incredibly improbable to try to convince others not to feed raw,
regardless of what that person says their intent is, is what I'm calling
intellectually dishonest and scare tactics.
 
--
What are they going to do, stupid me to death?
[Posted in FML issue 5161]