Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

New Blood Test for the human form of mad cow's disease (vCJD)

2 replies

Beaaware · 03/02/2011 09:45

Watching the news this morning and a new blood test for the human form of mad cow's disease has been developed by UK scientists. Although this is welcome news the test is unlikely to be introduced just yet as annonymous trials are to be done on blood donors to assess how much of the population are carriers of this fatal disease.
Currently there is no test in use to prevent the spread of vCJD via blood or surgical/dental instruments. According to the National Prion Clinic in Feb 2009 a Faster, stronger test to detect prions on metal surfaces has also been developed, this test is much faster and a hundred times more sensitive than the existing rodent test. It also makes it possible to test many samples at once at a relatively low cost and, importantly, could replace the use of rodents in many aspects of research. Finding a way to decontaminate delicate surgical tools to ensure they are free of prions is a public health priority according to Professor John Collinge.

So there we have it, a new blood test is available capable of screening blood which 'may' be introduced at some time in the future to prevent the spread of vCJD.
And a new test to detect prions on medical/dental instruments.

I suppose the questions we need to ask next time we visit the dentist or operating theatre are: will the instruments being used be free from infectious prions & has the donated blood which may be used been tested for vCJD? We have the tests they should be in use now.

OP posts:
A1980 · 04/02/2011 00:20

FFS you again with this same post?

Give it a break would you.

larrygrylls · 04/02/2011 10:32

This is a disease where referrals peaked at 179 in 2001 and deaths peaked at 108 in 2003. As of last year there were 146 referrals and 80 deaths.

Although this is an extremely nasty and fatal illness, do these extremely low (and declining numbers) really justify much NHS expense?

New posts on this thread. Refresh page