I just read the preliminary bat study results posted by Beth Comarow and I have one question: Is anyone else mad as hell about this?? To my knowledge there is currently documented studies on the following rabies variants: European vole [Foerster NIH-92-36 Zbl Vet Med B 1979; 26:26-38] Unknown Rodent (possibly hamster) [Foerster NIH-92-36 Zbl Vet Med B 1979; 26:26-38] Fox [Blancou, Aubert, & Artois NIH 91-444 Rev Med Vet 1982; 133(8-9): 553-557] Bat (via oral route) [Bell & Moore American Journal of Epidemiology Vol.93, No. 3 1971] and then the current domestic studies on the variants: Skunk Raccoon Coyote/Dog 2 Different bat variants (Big Brown and Brazilian Free Tailed) And yet Dr. Ruprecht has the gall to write: "Although the first licensed rabies vaccine was approved for use in domestic ferrets in 1990, healthy vaccinated ferrets that bite human beings may, based on review of the case report, be routinely euthanatized and examined for rabies, rather than be held and observed. Current recommendations result largely from the lack of information on ferret response to rabies virus infection. Neither clinical signs nor a determination of virus secretion in salvia prior to clinical signs are well documented." Lack of information? Clinical signs not well documented?? Later in this same piece he goes into the clinical signs not once, but several times. "Ten of 12 ferrets were euthanized with severe clinical signs. " (The ones you said you didn't know how to recognize?) "Common clinical signs of rabies included ataxia, paresis, paraparesis, and paralysis." (These are common but they really don't know yet) "2 of 9 ferrets euthanatized with severe clinical signs and one of these shed virus in their saliva (concomitant with clinical signs)," (Again, the clinical signs that they don't have enough data to recognize." And after all this comes the punchline: "To adequately ensure the publics health, continuing studies must be completed before any changes in ferret rabies control recommendations can be considered." Wake up and taste the reality, people!! These studies are a waste of time and are never going to lead to a recommended quarantine period as long as we patiently wait and trust these people. How many studies are going to be enough? The answer is simple. As many as we are willing wait for. And every new study which is done is going to carry some kind of quote like the ones at the beginning and end of this fax by Dr. Ruprecht which can, and will, be used by public health officials as an excuse to invalidate the entire volume of data available because the official CDC position, as stated in the very documents we quote, is that it is too soon to make any kind of policy change until more studies are done. These people are not interested in establishing a shed period towards the goal of a quarantine. They are only interested in doing research. That is their job. And to insure their job security they have to throw out a little teaser at the end of each study to insure that there is a need or desire for the next one or else they are out of work and have to go looking for some other project like arthritis in cats. It has been stated many times that rabies in ferrets is simply not an important public health issue. They only way interest can be generated in doing the next study is by getting the ferret community all worked up that this could be the one which ends all the unnecessary killing (admit it, most of you thought that the bat strains would be the end). The ferret community gets all riled up and puts pressure to get the study done and someone has a grant for another few months. Face it, people, you are being used. If the intent of these studies is actually the furthering of knowledge about rabies in the domestic ferret for the welfare of the public, then why don't they publish their data in a timely manner? This idea of introducing the information at a convention and then not following it up with immediate publication in a peer review journal is highly suspect (at least to me). And when the information IS released, why must it always inclide some form of disclaimer? Look back. Every time we think we have won a point there is soem kind of statement to invalidate it. The best example of this is the disclaimer on the IMRAB3 vaccine. How many more lies are we going to let them get away with? I guess the answer is up to us. From my point of view it looks like we are letting a few more slide in regards to this study. After all, haven't I pointed out several places where Dr. Ruprecht contradicts himself? They'll stop playing games when we pick up our ball (funding support) and go home. Which brings me to another point. Almost every day I receive mail, email, or read a post on the FML where someone is calling for us to rally and raise funds to complete these studies. I hate to be the one to burst these naive bubbles but this is not the way studies like this get funded. At the Reno conference when the skunk study results were announced (I don't think they have been published yet but I may be wrong) I had a long talk with Dr. Briggs about funding the studies. She told me that the funds raised by the ferret community were pretty much insignificant. The purpose they do serve is to show that there is enough public support for a project to make it easier to sell the project to the organizations who actually do hand out grants large enough to get something done. So, if you think that by pushing these studies and working real hard at your raffles and donation drives you are making a big difference, maybe you should stop and take a good hard look at the way things actually are going down. Step back and look at things, not as a ferret lover trying to protect your fur kids, but with a cold, logical, anaylitical mind. Are you really getting the results you want? Are your efforts really bringing you any closer to your goal? If not, maybe it's time to try something else. [Posted in FML issue 2103]