KJ>BH>Except that polyoma isn't going to adversely affect adult birds.
KJ>It might not AFFECT them, but even an adult who is exposed CAN
The bird does not automatically become a carrier of the disease if
exposed, and because he developes immunities. An Adult bird that has
immunities will pass them on to their young. It is the same as though
they were vaccinated. A bird has to "catch" the disease as a neonate and
"seroconvert",ie survive and outbreak, to possibly become a carrier.
This bird would have a constantly high blood titer. low blood titres
simply indicate exposure or somple presence of antibodies in a bird or
are not conclusive. High blood titers are not proof positive but are
indicators of a carrier if they are consistently high. The probe/swab
will only indicate if a particular bird is shedding at that particular
moment in time, such as under extreme stress. Such as just after babies
are pulled from a pair.
However, an absolutely negative blood titre indicates absolutely NO
presence of antibody, which means a bird is absolutely clean.
KJ>potentially become a polyoma carrier and spread the disease into other
KJ>aviaries and/or nurseries.
KJ>BH>sell locally if possible. I also have been informed of some new 
esearch
KJ>BH>data that might blow old theories about polyoma out of the water. Do 
ou
KJ>BH>by any chance have access to the AAV Journal? I think there might be an
KJ>BH>interesting article appear there soon.
KJ>I'd be VERY interested in this--I don't have access to AAV journals,
KJ>however. Who is producing this article? I'd be happy if you could either
KJ>mail or e-mail me a copy when it is released-- kjohnson@ddc.com.
A vet at a nearby university vet school is faxing over a copy to a
friend of mine as soon as published. Also my vets get it. i am not at
liberty at this time to say too much about it right now.
KJ>BH>I tested randomly for polyoma and specifically the macaws. Macaws are
KJ>BH>particularly susceptible to polyoma,which is a species specific virus
KJ>BH>and is more viscious in nature when it jumps species (Like when 
ovebird
KJ>BH>polyoma hits macaws, etc).
KJ>Who told you it's species specific? Dr. Ritchie, to my knowledge, has
KJ>not proven this to be true...
Dr Ritchie is not the only Avian virology researcher at this time! Just
a famous one.
KJ>>Anyway the macaws were negative. Never even KJ>BH>been EXPOSED to
the virus. Totally clean, Which also translates that KJ>BH>their parents
are clean too.
See above reference....
KJ>How did you test? Do you know that just swabbing a bird and getting a
Tested with blood serology, the value of which is to show whether or not
the bird has ever been exposed. if positive, test again in three months,
then swab during stress to check for shedding. If negative, then
exposure has not occurred.
KJ>negative result means close to nothing? The bird MUST be actively
I fully understand swabbing and think the serology is better first line
information. Too many swab and accept false negatives.
KJ>shedding virus at the time the swab is taken--if it isn't passing
virus KJ>at that second, then even if the bird is rampantly infected,
you will KJ>still get a negative result. To get a good result from a
Right!
test, you KJ>should collect some fecal samples over a 5-7 day period,
mix them KJ>together, and swab THAT. To get a REALLY good sample, you
should KJ>preferably collect the samples during a period of high stress,
such as KJ>during breeding, incubating eggs, feeding new babies, other
illness, or KJ>moving.
I have never found moving birds to be stressful enough, as I have had
them hatch and feed babies in a moving van!
KJ>>Anyway, randomly tested some pet birds, and KJ>BH>a pair of small
conures turned up with high titre numbers, highly KJ>BH>positive for the
virus. At best this means they have the antibody, have KJ>BH>been
exposed. At worst they are carriers of the virus and were shedding.
KJ>Who did titre tests for you? That test is also not commercially
KJ>available, specifically because the titre test doesn't tell WHY the bird
Don't need commercially available. Got connections...He necropsies for
me too as I have a very varied collection. Helps with research.
KJ>has antibodies, as you commented. Many birds were unnecessarily
KJ>destroyed when this test was being used in the early '80s as a
detection KJ>test for the virus. It's not supposed to BE used anymore,
Much wasn't known in the '80's. Had a baby Nanday die of it then. Back
when we mixed babies without knowing why not to. Back when we cleaned
with Nolvasan. Back when we called it Papovavirus. Back when we didn't
understand that mixing lovebirds with conures or macaws probably mixed
carriers with uninfected babies and caused their deaths. Back when
people thought nothing of French Molt and thought it was a nutritional
deficiency rather than the probability that it is actually PBFD. I know
not long ago a trend of thought was that it was a secondary form or
symptom of polyoma in lovebirds and budgies.
As far as I know no-one has de-authorized the use of a serology test for
this or other viruses. Makes sense to me to use it... as a health care
provider we use serology for many viruses, such as measles and rubella,
just to show if you have the antibody so you won't have to be
re-vacinated. You have either had the disease or the vacination. Doesn't
matter which. Either way you're safe and are not a carrier...
KJ>BH>These conures were pets at the time
and were living in the bedroom where KJ>BH>I had the babies. All the
while,with me not knowing it, they had high KJ>BH>titres. YET, the
babies, macaws included, tested negative for the KJ>BH>polyoma even
though less than 10 feet away across the room were these KJ>BH>conures
from the babies. Lucky? Definitely. Perhaps polyoma is not as
KJ>BH>easily contracted as is often insinuated? Probably.
KJ>If this was my flock, I would re-test at random, during breeding season,
KJ>and see what I found then. I'd be very interested to see how the conures
KJ>would test if given a nestbox.
Have done so. Will continue to do so.
KJ>BH>Did I use good clean technique when handling babies?
KJ>BH>was a nurse, so it helped. I used Oxyfresh on my hands and
Kennelsol to KJ>BH>clean instruments and feeding implements with.
KJ>This probably helped a lot more than relying on the virus not being
KJ>easily transmissable on its own! 
Viruses are actually very delicate in nature. Many only live a few
minutes out of the host. I believe that PBFD is one of the ones that is
very fragile while polyoma is heartier.
KJ>BH>But the point is, unwittingly, there the virus was just across the room
KJ>BH>and it didn't cross those few feet! I walked past that cage around the
KJ>BH>bed to get to the babies. I think we are going to learn a lot more soon
KJ>BH>about polyoma. Don't get me wrong. It is a very serious disease and I
KJ>BH>highly respect and hate it.
KJ>Antibodies do NOT equal presence of virus. I went through a polyoma
Correct!!!
KJ>problem in 1993, which I'm sure I've mentioned out here too many times
KJ>already.  (If you haven't heard the story, I'll tell it again
Didn't see it but I commiserate!!!
>>> Continued to next message
 * SLMR 2.1a * "Bother," said Pooh as he puked on Christopher Robin.
--- GEcho 1.00
---------------