Talk:Pseudorabies

Suspect information
18:57, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Viggo Bitsch (talk)

You cite a reference here by a Viggo Bitsch DVM where the author claims that pseudorabies can be transmitted sexually from humans to cattle.

"Vaginal infection of bovines, which regularly show pruritus of the hindquarters, has been found to be associated with a concurrent genital infection in swine on the same premises, and investigations have evidenced that the vaginal infection of cattle had been sexually transmitted by man from genitally infected sows (animal sodomy, zoophilia, bestiality"

He asserts and so does this article that the transmission to cattle was via humans having sex with them. Has anyone actually read the article? You'll find if you do that (1) It's a blog and (2) the author has absolutely NO scientific information to back his claims up. He lists his "evidence" in anecdotal form, writing that since cows acquired a vaginal infection on the same farm as pigs that got it from an infected boar, it "must be" that humans spread it from pigs to cattle sexually. He gives absolutely NO evidence and conducts absolutely NO scientific investigation to support his claim. It's ludicrous and this "information" should be removed from the article. There is also that fact that the info is from a blog. It is NOT from a peer-reviewed journal and as such its accuracy is immediately suspect. Wikipedia should really have a care as to what articles it cites and be absolutely sure that the information is accurate and scientifically sound. You guys wind up looking like complete morons.


 * Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, and unless a page has been protected, anyone can edit it. On the whole, this produces good results, but in relatively obscure articles, it can let crackpots run wild. In this case, the edits were pretty clearly by Bitsch himself. I'll revert it when I get the chance. 2601:400:8000:6A78:EC72:EE2F:32D:10E1 (talk) 19:44, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming this guy is able to claim that because he's a veterinarian and saw this. The reference looks reliable enough to me. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 20:31, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry not to have seen earlier the harsh comments by the skeptic above. First about the reference by VB cited: it is not a blog but an open-access review article registered officially and internationally with date and ISBN number as a particular web-publication based upon scientifically recognized articles, the most important of which are personal, but the Google blog was used as a template. And about the author of the review article (mentioned here in third person): he is a researcher/scientist awarded the honorary degree Dr. of veterinary Sciience; he was the very first to document and publish important epidemiological features of Aujeszky's disease such as (1) respiratory and (2) genital infection in cattle, (3) the correlation between site of infection and site of pruritus, (4) genital infection in swine, (5) nature of transmission of respiratory infection in swine, (6) airborne infection transmission among swine herds, and he was the central person behind the first successful, nation-wide eradication undertaken of this infection (and of infecious bovine rhinotracheitis and bovine viral diarrhoea as well). So it is difficult to conclude anything but the fact that he is a true expert on the epidemiology of Aujeszky's disease. And Wikipedia articles should be written/edited by real experts. It is not unusual that important progress in science is met with opinions as expressed above. If you should want to see more innovative research results by VB, you may use this link: http://reviewsviggobitsch.blogspot.com/. Readers should always have in mind the three commandments of "The law of research": (1) Practice reflective thinking, speaking, and writing, (2) Acquire the skills of unbiased thinking and logical deduction, and (3) Be respectful to others and their works. The author's e-mail address is shown in the reference given. (Viggo Bitsch)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 03:30, 30 April 2016 (UTC)