$&*^:"><

團長

在論壇討論這個疫苗的原因
1.E2好
2.E2不好
3.哪家E2好

問題是   在這邊討論的結果是否公允客觀
如果難以公允  是否討論的優點大於缺點?

重點是  飼養戶很難對疫苗了解透澈
如果要拿學術報告做指標   不用討論   看報告做決定就OK了
   

蘇少儀

Live attenuated vaccines were demonstrated to be very efficient at preventing disease.
The first immunisation experiments with live attenuated lapinised strains (attenuated after serial passages in rabbits) were performed over 60 years ago (Koprowski et al., 1946). Since then, little progress has been made in this field. CSFV attenuated vaccines are safe, induce high levels of neutralising antibodies and are capable of protecting against highly virulent strains of CSFV, even in pregnant sows as early as 5 days after vaccination.
雖然，各個兔化豬瘟減毒疫苗株（經由兔子連續繼代進行減毒）首度進行免疫試驗距今已60多年了，但是，豬瘟減毒疫苗經驗證對疾病預防上具有非常好的效果，而且即便田間使用兔化豬瘟疫苗，從那個年代起迄今其間的進展有限，然而豬瘟減毒疫毒仍是安全，誘發高度中和抗體而且能夠保護疫苗接種豬隻；即便是懷孕母豬在接種疫苗後的五天後即能夠產生對抗各個高毒力豬瘟病毒株的保護效果．
Attenuated CSFV vaccines remain the method of choice to control the disease, especially in areas in which CSF remains enzootic.
The mechanisms mediating the protection conferred by attenuated strains of CSFV are not fully understood. Vaccinated animals are protected against disease before neutralizing antibodies are detected (Suradhat et al., 2001).
After vaccination with the C strain, antibodies are detectable as early as 12 days post-immunisation, reaching a peak at 4–12 weeks (Precausta et al., 1983; Terpstra et al., 1990). Antibodies can persist for life in animals that have received a single dose of vaccine (Terpstra and Tielen, 1976).
接種減毒豬瘟疫苗仍為控制豬瘟的方法之一，尤其是仍然發生豬瘟病例的區域．接種減毒豬瘟疫苗後，豬隻在中和抗體被檢出之前即具有保護效果，雖然此一保護效果的機制仍待釐清．接種豬瘟C株疫苗（註：類似臺灣使用的LPC株）後，最早可在接種後12天測得抗體，抗體力價在第4至12週時達到高峰．曾有文獻指出，豬隻在免疫適期接種一劑兔化豬瘟減毒疫苗，抗體可持續終身．
Two vaccines licensed by the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA) are commercially available (Bayovac CSF, Bayer; Porcilis Pestis, Intervet).  Vaccinated animals develop specific antibodies that exclusively recognize the E2 glycoprotein, whereas pigs infected with field strains of CSFV also develop antibodies against the Erns protein, which can be distinguished with a specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (de Smit et al., 2001). Despite the advantages of using subunit vaccines, their protective efficacy is still under evaluation (Paton and Greiser-Wilke, 2003; Greiser-Wilke and Moennig, 2004).
Bayovac CSF, Bayer及Porcilis Pestis, Intervet等二種經歐盟醫療產品評估機構（EMEA）核准上市的疫苗，使用此二種疫苗接種豬隻後產生的抗體只與豬瘟病毒結構上特定的E2醣蛋白（E2 glycoprotein）結合，而豬隻感染野外病毒株後，除對E2醣蛋白產生抗體外，亦對Erns蛋白質產生抗體，因此可應用此一差異，使用檢測Erns蛋白質的酵素連結免疫吸附法（ELISA）作為區別疫苗接種或野外病毒感染之用．估不論次單位疫苗的優點，其保護效力仍在評估之中．
Compared with classical attenuated vaccines, the protection conferred with subunit vaccines is much more limited, especially among pregnant sows, and there is a higher risk of establishment of persistently infected individuals (Ahrens et al., 2000; Depner et al., 2001; de Smit et al., 2001; Paton and Greiser-Wilke, 2003; van Oirschot, 2003b; Greiser-Wilke and Moennig, 2004; Vannier, 2004).
相較於傳統的減毒疫苗，接種次單位疫苗所產生的保護效果相當有限；尤其是懷孕母豬，而且發生豬隻持續性感染方面具有比較高的風險．
Two final reasons, both related to the lack of efficient differential diagnostic methods, have contributed to the non-implementation of these vaccine strategies as an emergency measure in the field (Vannier, 2004). Firstly, specific antibodies against Erns are not developed until 3–6 weeks after natural infection with field strains of CSFV (depending on the virulence of the CSFV strain), which makes the differential diagnosis at early stages of infection difficult (de Smit et al., 2000). Secondly, the available Erns based ELISAs are still far from being as sensitive and specific as the E2 based ELISAs (Greiser-Wilke and Moennig, 2004).
最後二個與現今仍缺乏有效區別診斷方法有關，而無法使用次單位疫苗作為田間緊急接種的疫苗接種策略的理由．其一是豬隻自然感染野外病瘟病毒株時，需要3到6週（依豬瘟病毒的毒力而定）才可測得抗Erns蛋白的抗體，這造成感染早期階段，區別診斷上的困難．其次為現有檢測Erns抗體的酵素連結免疫吸附法（ELISA）試劑的敏感性及特異性距離實用階段仍有很大的改良空間．

蘇少儀

團長 發表於 2011-12-28 00:16
在論壇討論這個疫苗的原因
1.E2好
2.E2不好

這個問題
我想答案很明確
就豬瘟而言，活毒一定比較好
全世界只要是用疫苗控制豬瘟的國家絕大多數仍在用活毒，所謂的C-株

題目太大了，當作聊天吧......................

蘇少儀

兔化疫苗也很棒沒人說不好，大家也用几十年，好比是家用電話，現出了行動電話（E2)提供大家多一選擇如此而以

這樣比喻不對，活毒疫苗應該是4G而次單位疫苗只是電報，連電話都不是

用客觀的態度去看待新科學新發展，若新科學是有效的那對產業是福氣，若是無效的我們產業也無害，損失的是投入的研發會血本無歸

研發本來就是一種投資，有投資就有風險
如果次單位好的話，我一定會極力推薦
就像我推荐某家的疫苗一樣．工藝好就是好．沒話說
他們APP類毒素疫苗及AR類毒素疫苗好就是好，無其他廠商能及．PR那更是產業界的典範
真的看這家公司歐洲廠出產的產品，那是藝術..................

而有些廠商想以豬瘟次單位疫苗取代兔化豬瘟疫苗的原因在
新台幣七元的產品和二十五元（假設）的產品，就以毛利率10%來說．這筆帳才是最大的誘因吧...............更何況價格愈高，利潤率就.........
並不是為產業著想，有的錢可以賺．有時候為了產業，不該賺的就別賺了吧.................

"若新科學是有效的那對產業是福氣，若是無效的我們產業也無害"

"無害"，母豬懷孕期間發生垂直感染，搞得全場疫情混亂
花7元的疫苗和25元的疫苗，中間的差價誰吸收.......................

蘇少儀

寫這樣的帖子
去賣飼料添加劑好了

蘇少儀

很多國家撲滅豬瘟都是在次單位疫苗上市前撲滅的．也沒有一個國家撲滅豬瘟是用次單位疫苗撲滅的．而且歐盟國家在發生豬瘟，例如2007年德國（拜耳的母國），也沒有用次單位疫苗（還是2006年就把產品銷售權賣給了輝瑞就不用了）．
這樣可以看得出來，豬瘟清除與次單位疫苗沒有關係．

台灣的政府還是產業團體有要清除豬瘟嗎？

你提到活毒疫苗的問題，如果你懂的話，就知道那都可以解決．
母豬不論用活毒還是死毒，仔豬的移行抗體都不會一致．
次單位疫苗也會受到移行抗體的干擾

你如果連豬瘟疫苗死毒(次單位)與活毒的優缺點都弄不清楚，你就不用賣豬瘟疫苗．因為豬瘟疫苗對豬場是滋事體大的事情．

資訊片段是你資訊片段．我有全套的而且做了很多場的分析

很多話都是別人幫你編劇的吧！！！這些消息不像是你自己找得到的
我的資料是中和抗體，你測的大概是ELISA吧.......................
不用說是你了，外國來的專家也都一樣
連豬瘟活毒和次單位疫苗那一個的保護效力好都不知道
那根本就不必談

蘇少儀

這沒有情緒
只是連豬瘟活毒疫苗和次單位疫苗和豬免疫系統之間的作用都............
那還談什麼
去賣藥吧！！！這對你來說太專業了

蘇少儀

另外我有一個問題想請教蘇兄，如果用LPC疫苗或是C-株來清除豬瘟，那要如何與野外毒感染做區別，因為這些疫苗病毒株，所產生的抗體，應該與野外毒一樣，這是我不了解，且想知道的地方！

現階段並沒有說要來清除豬瘟喔！

蘇少儀

Compared with classical attenuated vaccines, the protection conferred with subunit vaccines is much more limited, especially among pregnant sows, and there is a higher risk of establishment of persistently infected individuals (Ahrens et al., 2000; Depner et al., 2001; de Smit et al., 2001; Paton and Greiser-Wilke, 2003; van Oirschot, 2003b; Greiser-Wilke and Moennig, 2004; Vannier, 2004).
相較於傳統的減毒疫苗，接種次單位疫苗所產生的保護效果相當有限；尤其是懷孕母豬，而且發生豬隻持續性感染方面具有比較高的風險．

蘇少儀

Live attenuated vaccines were demonstrated to be very efficient at preventing disease.
The first immunisation experiments with live attenuated lapinised strains (attenuated after serial passages in rabbits) were performed over 60 years ago (Koprowski et al., 1946). Since then, little progress has been made in this field. CSFV attenuated vaccines are safe, induce high levels of neutralising antibodies and are capable of protecting against highly virulent strains of CSFV, even in pregnant sows as early as 5 days after vaccination.
雖然，各個兔化豬瘟減毒疫苗株（經由兔子連續繼代進行減毒）首度進行免疫試驗距今已60多年了，但是，豬瘟減毒疫苗經驗證對疾病預防上具有非常好的效果，而且即便田間使用兔化豬瘟疫苗，從那個年代起迄今其間的進展有限，然而豬瘟減毒疫毒仍是安全，誘發高度中和抗體而且能夠保護疫苗接種豬隻；即便是懷孕母豬在接種疫苗後的五天後即能夠產生對抗各個高毒力豬瘟病毒株的保護效果．
Attenuated CSFV vaccines remain the method of choice to control the disease, especially in areas in which CSF remains enzootic.
The mechanisms mediating the protection conferred by attenuated strains of CSFV are not fully understood. Vaccinated animals are protected against disease before neutralizing antibodies are detected (Suradhat et al., 2001).
After vaccination with the C strain, antibodies are detectable as early as 12 days post-immunisation, reaching a peak at 4–12 weeks (Precausta et al., 1983; Terpstra et al., 1990). Antibodies can persist for life in animals that have received a single dose of vaccine (Terpstra and Tielen, 1976).
接種減毒豬瘟疫苗仍為控制豬瘟的方法之一，尤其是仍然發生豬瘟病例的區域．接種減毒豬瘟疫苗後，豬隻在中和抗體被檢出之前即具有保護效果，雖然此一保護效果的機制仍待釐清．接種豬瘟C株疫苗（註：類似臺灣使用的LPC株）後，最早可在接種後12天測得抗體，抗體力價在第4至12週時達到高峰．曾有文獻指出，豬隻在免疫適期接種一劑兔化豬瘟減毒疫苗，抗體可持續終身．