What Happened Next?
We spoke to Sean Adams, as per the recommendation.He had no idea what we were talking about.
What is most interesting to note is that during the outbreak many of us spoke directly with APHIS officials. Some seemed downright friendly. In fact, as late as August of 2000, we were still talking with APHIS regarding future policy. The consensus seemed to be that until the Rabbit Community at large, (HRS, ARBA, The Coalition and online mailing groups), came together with a solid voice, nothing would be done.
The following letter was sent to the CDC. It took two mailings to recieve a response.
May 11, 2001Center For Disease Control
1600 Clifton Rd.
Atlanta GA
Dear Sirs,
In researching various issues, including the threats imposed upon human health by RHD after the outbreak confirmed by the USDA in March of 2000, we have found some alarming information. The following excerpt is taken directly from the article Calicivirus Emergence from Ocean Reservoirs: Zoonotic and Interspecies Movements, published within the CDC's online publication, Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol 4 No 1, January through March 1998.
The extent of human disease is not known because test reagents are not readily available and diagnosticians are not alerted to caliciviral causes of human disease, except for diarrhea and occasionally hepatitis. However, evidence of human exposure was shown when 150 serum specimens from normal blood destined for donor use were tested. The samples were antibody-negative for hepatitis B surface and core antigen, HIV-1 and -2, HIV P-24 antigen, human T-cell lymphotropic virus Type 2, and hepatitis C virus. Approximately 19% had antibodies reactive to a polyvalent antigen made up of equal quantities of cesium chloride-banded SMSV-5, 13, and 17. To demonstrate that these reactions were not cross-reactions to the human Norwalk calicivirus antibody, serum samples from eight persons with Norwalk virus-induced diarrhea were also tested. Both acute- and convalescent-phase serum specimens were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with the same SMSV antigens and Norwalk capsid protein Although cross-reactivity was not detected, the serum samples may still have been able to cross-react with the calicivirus causing hepatitis E or Sapporo calicivirus, which were not tested. However, sera typed to all 40 marine caliciviruses reacted negatively when tested against Sapporo antigen (data not shown). These results suggest possible human exposure and antigenic response to marine caliciviruses. If that is not the case, such results present a confusing diagnostic picture of calicivirus exposure and diagnosis of human disease.
Although the above does not clearly indicate human disease, the changing nature of the viral family in question, caliciviruses, does call for some concern. For example, the calicivirus RHD appeared suddenly in China and within a ten year period spread across Asia, Europe, and found it's way to both Cuba and Mexico, killing 90% of it's hosts within 48 hours of contact. Caliciviruses are now known to affect over 20 species, including primates, causing a range of disease symptoms. The Calicivirus family is obviously dangerous. With evidence of human exposure it would seem, especially in light of the fact that they are RNA virus and therefore constantly mutating, concerns for human health would call for research.
Because Caliciviruses are endemic in U.S. livestock, this according to research conducted by the USDA, we contacted that agency and in response they stated that concerns for human health should be directed to the CDC. We are hereby following their advice. Unfortunately, this will not answer questions regarding how the USDA plans on dealing with the spread of the viruses through our livestock and food products to humans. It does give us an opportunity to ascertain how the CDC views this "emerging" threat, Caliciviruses, to human health.
We would specifically like to know what measures are in place to safeguard the U.S. blood supply. It is our understanding that the CDC plays an indispensable role in protecting our nation's health by acting as the nation's early warning system for threats to the health of the public.
Although the research that we are currently aware of does not seem to indicate a need for pulling blood off the shelves, it certainly calls for additional research. We therefore would like to know what research, if any, the CDC is conducting.
We would also like to know what steps the CDC may be considering to safeguard the U.S. from RHD. It is our opinion that the research in Australia that claims that RHD is not a threat to human health is extremely suspect. The very article cited above includes evidence that the research actually suggests a very different picture. Interpretations of the studies by Dr. Neil Cherry of New Zealand, give a very different view of the effect on human health by Rabbit Hemorrhagic Disease. The two responses published in the next edition of the journal do nothing to assuage these concerns.
The USDA claims to have no jurisdiction in regards to rabbits. We do not know if this holds up as they do have jurisdiction over the approval of meat products shipped to the United States.
Certainly, the CDC has some jurisdiction over the importation of live rabbits that may be carrying a disease that could affect human health. Were rabbits possibly infected with tularemia imported, it seems the CDC would stop the activity. The CDC claims to be concerned with emerging diseases. Does the Calicivirus family fall under this category in the agency's opinion? If not, why? If so, what research is the agency presently doing? What reagents do the CDC have in house to diagnose infection by any calicivirus should a dramatic jump to humans occur? A calicivirus has been known to jump to other species, as we have noted above, with fatal consequences.
The Laboratory for Calicivirus Studies has informed us that the CDC has requested and obtained several viable calicivirus samples of various serotypes of these viruses. What research has the CDC conducted utilizing these samples? What are the results of such research, and finally what conclusions have been drawn from those results?
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
Sincerely,
diane of The Sanctuary
Their Response
The RHD In The Us Website Is Sponsored By Kind Planet