Quote:
That's my opinion as well, and one expressed by some of the main researchers studying this disease.
There's a LOT of unknowns pertaining to IBD.
Including how long it can lie dormant in a collection, and exactly how it's transmitted.
I think you guys are expecting IBD would have just wiped out her pythons in a short period of time, and completely relying on the viability of her pythons to give her collection a complete bill of clean health.
I don't think it's responsible to rely on "well my Pythons are still alive so it wasn't IBD" as a proof positive.
She's lost 3 or 4 snakes in this past year's time. There are reports of snakes not showing ANY signs of IBD, being asymptomatic and lacking the presence of inclusion bodies in necropsies. These are discrepancies in her claim that she hasn't lost any more snakes. Personally, I think further testing should be done on ALL the snakes in the collection.. I think it should have been done IMMEDIATELY after the FIRST report.
I don't know for sure that she does or does not have IBD because SHE doesn't know without a shadow of a doubt if she does or doesn't have IBD.
What IS known is that there is Ashley's admission she had IBD and the necropsy to back it up followed with 3-4 dead snakes within the past year.
She stated she was NOT to sell the snakes she thought might be exposed, but her posts show she did before having any further testing and receiving a proven clean bill of health in the collection.
|
amercnwmn said it waaaay better than I did.
