The Evolution of Atlas: A Breeding (and Chat) Thread

[speckledhen]

It is a complicated disease with so many different thoughts on it. It doesn't help that it comes in many strains and forms.

Agreed.

 

[1muttsfan]

It is not possible to tell asympomatic carriers from uninfected birds. It is very likely though, that any bird exposed to the virus becomes a carrier, and is not immune. They are just not showing sign of illness right now. As Cyn said, developing immunity would be the work of many generations, with many many losses along the way.

 

[getaclue]

The thing is, it's not really about choice. When it hits, it hits. You either cull, and disinfect your land, and wait almost a year to have chickens again, only to find out if you disinfected well enough, or you continue dealing with what has been dealt to you. If you decide to continue, it take about 4 years to have a flock that is immune, and not carriers.

 

[getaclue]

It's also my understanding, that once you've bred for resistance like that, they are immune to all strains of it.

 

[seminolewind]

1muttsfan, thankyou for sharing that! " Vaccines train the immune system to recognize pathogens"- your quote. Exactly right. It's unfortunate that there's so much confusion and misinformation about vaccines like Marek's. The vaccine does not prevent a bird from being exposed and carrying the virus and the ability to spread it. It only saves a bird from not dying from the symptoms. Nothing more. I do believe in Marek's exposed birds not leaving the premises. This is why I now have 6 silkie roos. When I hatched them I knew they would all be staying even the roos. And silkie roos had the best chance of living in a bachelor pad.

 

[h2oratt]

It's also my understanding, that once you've bred for resistance like that, they are immune to all strains of it.

I Dont think anyone understands mareks. We all just try to learn and take an educated guess. I have lost a few chickens to mareks like symptoms. I don’t vaccinate and doubt I ever will. I would rather lose them than use a vaccine that I don’t believe they understand. IT makes no sense to me that only a few died. Plus we’re in i bought chicks from they do not vaccinate by the time I got them it would be too late. I just don’t buy expensive chicks.

 

[seminolewind]

It's also my understanding, that once you've bred for resistance like that, they are immune to all strains of it.

That's a tough one. Scientists have had over 100 years to breed for resistance and it hasn't happened. Resistance can only be gotten by exposure. A vaccine is like a "safe" exposure that builds resistance. Older chickens seem to have enough resistance due to the years they've spent building their "general" resistance that seems to cover Marek's as well.

A lot of people think strains are like different viruses. The strains in Marek's are like Virulent, very virulent, very very virulent, etc. It's all the same virus just differences in strengths.

 

[seminolewind]

I Dont think anyone understands mareks. We all just try to learn and take an educated guess. I have lost a few chickens to mareks like symptoms. I don’t vaccinate and doubt I ever will. I would rather lose them than use a vaccine that I don’t believe they understand. IT makes no sense to me that only a few died. Plus we’re in i bought chicks from they do not vaccinate by the time I got them it would be too late. I just don’t buy expensive chicks.

I think Marek's is kind of a mystery in why it affects some birds and not others. There is a lot we don't understand. It can mimic other illnesses and this makes it hard to diagnose. I think the best diagnosis is by sending a (dead) chicken to an animal disease lab for necropsy.

h2oratt, I've had a whole hatch die from Marek's at 6-10 weeks old before I realized what I had. Prior to that I've had hatches that weren't affected. My first victim was an 18 month old silkie roo that developed paralysis. Then the paralysis seemed to spread up his body to where he couldn't control his wings or head movements. He had one "gray" eye and also had lack of depth perception. He was living on my patio and the little bugger actually crowed in the morning! I cried for weeks. The vet euthanized him. Even the vet said it was not Marek's because he didn't find any tumors inside him. My next victim was a 2 year old hen that I treated for a broken leg! At the same time I started treating a chick for a broken leg. When the 2nd chick appeared to have a broken leg, that's when I knew I had Marek's. They all had leg paralysis, not broken legs.

I try to stay away from sites that talk about Marek's but they haven't done any real research like reading the best research written by scientists and doctors .

I wish I had kept a closed flock and would have never had to vaccinate.

 

[getaclue]

seminolewind, It all depends on which scientists are researching what, or did. The information about breeding IS scientifically proven research. Why isn't it common knowledge? At one time, it actually was more commonplace knowledge. The decision boiled down to heavy culling, to prevent the spread, OR breeding for immunity. Some of the Amish communities chose to breed for immunity. They sustained heavy losses too, but used the survivors, bred them, kept the offspring, bred them, and so on. It took them several years, but eventually got Marek's immune stock. It's not like they advertise it, or anything.

In the meantime, another group of scientists began researching for a pharmaceutical way to handle it. The pharmaceutical companies invested quite a bit into the research for a chemical cure, or vaccine. There was no cure. Instead, the decided to try following the pattern of some of the more successful human vaccines. Administer the dead, or almost dead virus, and build immunity. For the most part, it was a failure.

The FDA does not do any of it's own laboratory testing. It relies on the pharmaceutical company to provide the laboratory test results. There are different rules, regulations, and standards for human vaccines, and animal vaccines. Human vaccines are called closed vaccines. TB, Tetanus, Polio, etc., vaccines work on the vast majority of the population, with over 75% efficiency, with a lesser percentage of failures, and risks to the majority of the recipients. That's part of the requirements for it to be called a vaccine, for humans. It's not the same for animals, and some word play is used in regards to animals.

Unlike the criteria for a human vaccine, an animal vaccine does not have to meet any of those standards. In fact, the term open vaccine was coined, so the term vaccine could be used for certain animal drugs. There is a good bit of money spent trying to develop a cure, or vaccine, even if it fails. There is a heck of a lot more money to be made, if the pharmaceutical company can show it's even slightly effective, since the standards for animals are different.

To break it down, in a flock of 100 chickens hit by Marek's, up to 80% will die, leaving a 20% survival rate. That does not mean it is always 80% that die. Some flocks may be healthier than others, so only 70% die, and 30% live. The maximum average of 80% mortality, and 20% survival rate were the standards used for the purposes of showing the proposed drug worked. The Marek's vaccine presented their best results from testing, and showed that compared to the given standards of 80% mortality rate, 20% survival rate, in some instances it may increase the survival rate up to 35%. The thing is, there have been unvaccinated flocks with that high of a survival rate too. The vaccine does not prevent Marek's at all, nor does it claim to. It does not claim to increase the survival rate. It claims that it may. The only claim that makes it better than water, is that it may slow the rate of progression so your flock doesn't die out as fast if it survives, and even that is questionable. BTW, the virus that was used, was from the strain found in turkeys. It wasn't, nor is it even the strain found in chickens.

So why would the consumer base want to spend lots of money on this useless vaccine? In come the advertisers. The phrase breeding for immunity was replaced by breeding for resistance. Resistance sounds a bit more vague than immunity. That levels the playing field some in peoples' minds, since the pharmaceutical company can't offer any immunity. Why breed for resistance, which takes a long time, when you can buy a vaccine that may provide resistance now? Let's not forget the public's association with the use of the word vaccine either. The pharmaceutical companies sure didn't.

 

[speckledhen]

The thing is, it's not really about choice. When it hits, it hits. You either cull, and disinfect your land, and wait almost a year to have chickens again, only to find out if you disinfected well enough, or you continue dealing with what has been dealt to you. If you decide to continue, it take about 4 years to have a flock that is immune, and not carriers.

It is a choice. What you just said is the choice I'm talking about. If it hits, you make that choice. You can cull them all. You can keep them and let the ones that die, die. You can cull symptomatic ones and vaccinate the rest, etc, etc. There are several choices here. I don't have it in me to "breed for resistance". I don't believe it's truly possible to come back up from a full blown Marek's outbreak and have a perfectly 100% resistant flock that you can go back to "business as usual", selling chicks and adult birds to others without fear they'll take it elsewhere. And if it is, I don't want to. I'm not breeding anything now anyway, period. It's exhausting just thinking about a project like that. I'm letting mine die out now anyway and they're all healthy, as far as ancient birds who've lived way past their expiration dates can be healthy.