Science has lost a lot of credibility over the last few decades and the last two years in particular. Based solely on some personal experiences I have very little faith in science these days. Now this:

Was There Ever a Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD)?
Horace Gore, Wildlife Biologist
Was there ever a chronic wasting disease (CWD)? Science says “N0.” If not, then what is CWD? Researchers at USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Ames, Iowa using the Western Blot test say that CWD is “indistinguishable” from scrapie, a sheep disease that was first found in sheep in 1732, but not known in cervids (deer, elk, moose, etc).Their work shows that CWD has the same molecular profile as scrapie. In essence, “Chronic Wasting Disease” per se never has existed, and scrapie is not an insidious disease of cervids, having existed in Texas and U.S. environs for 300 years.
In a continuing study by a team headed by Dr. Justin Greenlee to determine if scrapie can be transmitted to white-tailed deer, and returned from deer to sheep, researchers learned that deer are 100 % susceptible to scrapie. The study also determined that standard IHC and Elisa tests are not adequate for differentiating CWD and scrape. This indicates that past CWD surveillance work in Texas, using these two tests, has shown a false hypothesis. The molecular profiles of CWD and scrapie (PrPSc), using the Western Blot test, show to be one in the same.
Research on CWD and scrapie goes even further. Dr. Greenlee’s USDA team has looked into the molecular profiles of scrapie in three genotypes of sheep, and compared them to CWD in mule deer. One of the sheep genotypes is “indistinguishable” from CWD. Two sheep genotypes show differences in profile, but when tested separately, they show a lot of overlap with mule deer CWD.
The USDA team believes that CWD came from sheep (scrapie) to mule deer; then to elk, and then to whitetails and other cervids. Like all research teams, they say that “Another study is needed……..” However, to date they believe, based on a combination of research factors, that CWD did come from sheep, which means that CWD is either scrapie, or a variant of scrapie.
Let’s sum it up: A transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) that was discovered 55 years ago, and called “Chronic Wasting Disease” (CWD) has now been determined to have the same molecular profile as scrapie, which has been known for 300 years. It would seem prudent then, to assume that CWD is simply scrapie, or a variant of scrapie, which has been a part of our environment for three centuries or more.
The discovery of “CWD” in 1967 was a scientific blunder! The entire scenario that Dr. Elizabeth Williams, a veterinary pathologist from Wyoming, faced at Colorado State was simply a mule deer, mixed with sheep and elk, that became ill in the research pen. She took this illness as being a new TSE, and labeled It “Chronic Wasting Disease”, when in truth the disease of the mule deer was simply scrapie.
All of the animals, according to the literature, were being fed a crude diet as part of the research. The diet, along with scrapie, may have been the cause of debilitation in the mule deer. At the time, Dr. Williams had no way of knowing that the malady was scrapie, because the sheep disease was not known in cervids, and she relied on test methods of that time that could not distinguish between the molecular profiles of scrapie and her new “CWD.” Dr. William’s discovery was a false hypothesis that has spread across the deer hunting World and academic circles, with no proof or accountability.
It seems that the research team at Colorado State made an honest mistake, brought about by an academic desire to find a new TSE—Chronic Wasting Disease. However, Dr. Williams hung a bell on her false CWD that has been followed by sheep- like state and federal authorities—most not knowing exactly why they are following the bell. However,Texas state agencies have used CWD, with no legislated authority, in their agenda to control and harass landowners, deer hunters, and deer breeders for the last 10 years.
Truth is, Texas Animal Health Commission has absolutely no authority over white-tailed or Mule deer in Texas, and Texas Parks and Wildlife has no authority to depopulate (Kill) breeder deer without a demand for such action from TAHC. So, depopulation of thousands of breeder deer over the last 10 years has been illegal.
Is CWD/scrape a deadly disease? Not hardly. Dr. James Kroll, white-tailed deer specialist, author, and past Czar of Wisconsin’s deer program puts it rather bluntly in two questions. 1) Does CWD/scrape have any effect on deer herds? The answer is NO. White-tailed deer are thriving in Texas, and expanding their range. Not a single whitetail is known to have died from CWD. 2) Does CWD/scrape have any effect on human health? The answer is NO. Texans annually consume about 15 million pounds of deer meat, and a loop on the human protein prevents the rogue prions of CWD/scrapie from engaging with human proteins. The summation to these two questions is “No”, and that CWD/scrapie is not a problem to cervids or human health.
Dr. Williams “jumped the gun,” as they say, and was probably anxious to get academic notoriety, and possibly some good grants. However, from what is known today, the "Chronic Wasting Disease" that Williams found is nothing but scrapie, and there never was a chronic wasting disease!
Remember, CWD didn't come from the Bible—it was derived by Dr. Beth Williams and a research team at Colorado State! The “deadly” and “insidious” disease has been over-blown, and the 206,000 tests in Texas ($10 million) are worthless. Not one whitetail is known to have died ANYWHERE from CWD/scrapie, and the entire Texas fiasco has been aimed at landowners, hunters, and deer breeders.
There is good reason to consider CWD as being scrapie. This, from Dr. Justin Greenlee, USDA, Ames, Iowa using the Western Blot test, is significant:
“In our study, 100% of whitetails were susceptible to scrape”
"Scrapie transmits to white-tailed deer by the oral route, and has a molecular profile similar to CWD, and is distinct from the scrapie inoculum.''
"While scrapie is not known to occur in wild deer, experimental cases are difficult to differentiate from CWD."
“Some molecular profiles of CWD and scrapie are indistinguishable using the Western blot test.”
"We have previously demonstrated that scrapie has a 100% attack rate in white-tailed deer after either intracranial or oral inoculation. Samples that developed scrapie had TWO distinct Western Blot test patterns: Samples developed from cerebellum had a banding pattern similar to the scrapie inoculum, WHEREAS, samples from brainstem and lymph nodes had a banding pattern similar to CWD."
“The results of this study suggest MANY similarities in the manifestations of CWD and scrapie in white-tailed deer.”
“We believe that CWD came from sheep to mule deer; then to elk, and then to white-tailed deer and other cervids.” (Sheep are infected by only one TSE—scrapie)
There were 55 million sheep in the U.S in 1940, and prions of scrapie could be anywhere. That might explain why “CWD” shows up without any pattern of distribution.
Street talk would say that CWD and scrapie are one in the same, with” CWD” simply being a variant of scrapie. But regardless of the similarity of CWD and scrapie, the thousands of IHC and Elisa tests performed in Texas are useless, and Western Blot test was never used. The CWD Control Program has followed a false hypothesis based on inadequate testing methods, and in some cases, questionable agendas.
Based on the new evidence that CWD and scrapie are “indistinguishable” using Western Blotting, state agencies should follow the science, and stop all surveillance of CWD using IHC and Elisa tests until continued research using Western Blotting, shows a distinct molecular profile for both CWD and scrapie. Texas landowners, deer breeders and hunters have been harassed by the false CWD hypothesis long enough!
Why is it that every day I find something erratic about the leadership of Texas Parks and Wildlife, and the hypocrisy in support for various programs? Is it because I worked there for 33 years, and can see under the cover?
The Share a Lunker vs. the Texas Deer Breeders programs are prime examples of leadership that is hypocritical, and short on the needs of the people of Texas. The Fisheries Division loves one, and the Wildlife Division hates the other, and Law Enforcement is somewhere in between.
I was in Wildlife Division leadership for 27 years, in close relationship to headquarters operations. I know how TPWD works, and there is plenty of room for hypocrisy.
A good example of 30 years ago was the Texas Big Game Awards, which was designed after the Share a Lunker program to recognize outstanding big game harvested in Texas. The Wildlife Division leadership rejected it because it promoted trophy deer, but Chairman Chuck Nash backed it, and it became a reality. It was continually opposed by the Wildlife Division, and I had to transfer it to David Langford and the Texas Wildlife Association, which administers the awards today.
Texas fishermen and deer hunters have a keen interest in big bass and trophy whitetails. Two programs are now underway to provide the best in bass fishing and deer hunting--The Share a Lunker program to get the best genetically superior bass into the hatcheries to provide fingerlings for stocking Texas lakes--and private deer breeding facilities that provide genetically superior deer for stocking habitat to make available trophy whitetails for deer hunters The programs are identical in purpose, but Texas Parks and Wildlife Department praises the trophy bass program, and demonizes the trophy deer program! In fact, the department has done everything possible to discourage deer breeding, from permit harassment to depopulating (killing) complete deer herds where a positive of "Chronic Wasting Disease" is found. The interest of TPWD for the programs are exactly opposite, even though both programs are designed to provide the best in fishing and hunting. It is pure hypocrisy.
I was reminded of these programs when two 14-plus pound black bass were recently caught in Lake Ivey, a 30-year-old lake on the Colorado and Concho rivers in Concho, Coleman and Runnels counties. The two trophy fish got national attention and were taken to a Parks and Wildlife fish hatchery to be used for breeding to provide superior fingerlings for stocking Texas lakes. The Share a Lunker program is highly publicized and favored by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, while the department despises the deer breeder program, even though both have the same objective for deer hunters and bass fisherman.
Deer breeders have been harassed for years by two state agencies that have used a farce deer disease to make it hard for a breeder to stay in business. They have never known exactly what the disease was, but they used it to demoralize deer breeding, and sometimes kill all of the breeder's valuable deer. The disease was labeled "Chronic Wasting Disease" by the Colorado State research team that discovered it back in 1967, and publicized it as "an insidious, deadly deer disease that was contagious and probably deadly for human consumption". All of these assumptions were false, along with the finding of a new deer disease.
Now, 55 years later the USDA at Ames, Iowa has found, through Western Blot testing, that the insidious malady is nothing more than scrapie, a disease of sheep that has been known for over 300 years, but was not known to be susceptible to cervids (deer, elk, moose, etc). But the die was cast, and Texas continues testing for CWD/scrapie using old standard tests which are worthless, rather than Western Blotting. The fiasco of CWD could have been prevented had TVMDL used Western Blotting, which would have revealed the common molecular profile between CWD and scrapie, and saved $10 million and thousands of breeder deer. Oh, Well!
A Texas mule deer tested positive in 2012. Since then, TPWD has checked all deer breeding facilities and found CWD/scrapie using IHC and Elisa tests. The result was a depopulation (killing) of thousands of suspect deer by a wildlife agency that really didn't know what CWD was, or what affect it really had on deer. The deadly nature of CWD/scrape was a sham, and not one deer has ever been confirmed to have died from the disease. But, regardless of the science that revealed no CWD--only scrapie, TPWD and TAHC still harass deer breeders with the nonexistent CWD. Their desire to place hardships on deer breeders surpasses the science that shows the molecular profile of PrPSc being the same for CWD and scrapie. There lies the hypocrisy.
The bottom line is that trophy bass breeding has been praised and promoted over the years, while deer breeding has been demonized and discouraged. The hypocritical actions of Texas Parks and Wildlife, and the Texas Animal Health Commission are shameful and should be corrected. The differences in support of trophy bass breeding and trophy deer breeding should be curtailed immediately, and both programs should receive the best efforts of Texas Parks and Wildlife.
On a lighter note, the whitetail buck photos are superb, and some will likely appear on the cover of the TTHA Journal. We appreciate you sharing them with us, and of course, we want you to take more! Muy bueno, mi amigo! (I'm practicing for all the illegal immigrants coming across the river. I hope they don't bring something that is contagious to old wildlife biologists).
Horace Gore
Retired Wildlife Biologist

I didnt read all of that but its long been known that CWD is scrappie. USDA genius's penned up deer and elk with infected sheep at CSU in Ft. Collins Co. years ago.

I concur.
Missouri has wasted many millions of taxpayers dollars, killed thousands of deer in “culling operations “, and alienated themselves with a few thousand landowners and sportsmen.
The bizarre thing is from the start they said very little is known about CWD. How stupid is that?

Reading the article I was reminded of the similarity we have lived through the past couple years with all the virus testing that many scientists say are wildly inaccurate...

Next is Deer masks

Lmao!

While the premise of CWD=scrapie may be correct the author reveals a gross bias that discredits the point he is trying to make.

So the author is just complaining about the name?

And they need to stay at least 6 feet apart

Seems like it.

"Why is it that every day I find something erratic about the leadership of Texas Parks and Wildlife, and the hypocrisy in support for various programs? Is it because I worked there for 33 years, and can see under the cover?"

Yep.

And regularly be using "hoof sanitizers"

I think you guys missed his point. I believe he’s shedding light on the needless waste of money and resources by carrying out the culling of deer herds for no reason.

It also says that CWD isnt something hunters should worry about.

https://www.themeateater.com/hunt/b...hould-care-about-chronic-wasting-disease

Whatever it’s called it does have an impact on herd makeup and average age of deer. We can test for cwd or scrapie(name doesn’t matter) it has the same impact on deer herds.

Dr. Krysten Schuler is likely the most knowledgable person (top three anyway) on the topic of CWD in North America, she says they are different and until she tells me otherwise I am going with Dr. Schuler over Horace Gore.

https://www.vet.cornell.edu/news/20...ommittee-dangers-chronic-wasting-disease

https://naturalresources.house.gov/...0O&I%20Ov%20Hrg%2006.25.19%20CWD.pdf

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047228/

https://veterinaryresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1297-9716-42-107

Yeah he isn't anywhere near an authority on CWD.

When I find out your friends with democrats, chase beaver with your pants on, chip a tooth setting footholds and that you drive a Ford pickup it causes me to lose complete faith in our formerly rugged American men. But then you say something like this above and I am once again renewed in spirit by the fact that such a liberal can state something that makes so much sense!

Right, his name appears nowhere in those published papers, one of which was published a decade ago...And the second paper says exactly what Dr. Schuler says in her paper; that for CWD to develop in a sheep's brain (so far) it (CWD) needs to be placed there by direct inoculation...So I have no idea whatsoever what you are trying to imply here wytex, except what I wrote is correct...