Homestead mailing list

["Marie McHarry" <mmcharry AT gmail.com>]

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:43 AM, roxann <roxann AT ancientearthwisdom.com> wrote:
> Lynda,
>
> I wonder if these statistics are run based only on the amount of foxes 
> turned in for testing, or is it a random selection of the wild population?

Without other information, I'm betting that this is based on confirmed
cases. The money just isn't available to trap and test animals in the
wild (and the last I heard, the only confirmation was examining the
brain of infected animals).

>Fox, coon, skunk, bat are all carriers and can have the virus without 
>displaying symptoms. >Does the animal need to be 'rabid' as in, mad, to be 
>contagious? I thought not.

I don't know about foxes, but bats and skunks don't have to be symptomatic.

>...AFter that, will the shots confer a lifetime immunity to subsequent 
>exposures? Out here, our most probably method of contracting rabies would be 
>from domestic animals who have been bitten by the wild animals.

No, you would still have to have booster shots, but you wouldn't have
to have the gamma globulin, and you would only need a couple -- as
opposed to five -- injections.

>At least there you have a canary to watch and base a decision on. Still, it 
>seems that a debt >of $2000 would be a lesser burden on my system
>  than the stress of wondering how it will all turn out with the gamble of 
> not getting the shots.

The longer the shots are delayed, the less likely they'll be effective.

Marie