[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Maybe Not Glugea or Pleco



Are all Pathologists from Australia ;}

David


><{{{>-----Original Message-----
><{{{>From: owner-killietalk at aka_org [mailto:owner-killietalk at aka_org]On
><{{{>Behalf Of Bill Phillips
><{{{>Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 3:30 PM
><{{{>To: killietalk at aka_org
><{{{>Subject: Re: Maybe Not Glugea or Pleco
><{{{>
><{{{>
><{{{>I feel that I must comment on Barry's notes regarding 
><{{{>histopathological
><{{{>examination of tissues and the possibility of informed 
><{{{>amateurs being able
><{{{>to do such examination and diagnosis.
><{{{>
><{{{>As a human pathologist I could not agree more with what Barry 
><{{{>says. One
><{{{>thing that Barry forgot to mention is the preservation of the 
><{{{>sample for
><{{{>histopathological examination - if the sample isnt preserved 
><{{{>properly, you
><{{{>will face the problem of unrelated post-collection changes. 
><{{{>And if you think
><{{{>that an informed amateur should be readily capable of doing 
><{{{>it - ask any
><{{{>pathologist as to how many samples collected by professionals 
><{{{>in the field
><{{{>are useless because of the lack of proper preparation.
><{{{>
><{{{>And samples for histopathology are best collected from living 
><{{{>tissue (or as
><{{{>soon as possible post-mortem). How many hobbyists are willing 
><{{{>to sacrifice
><{{{>several fish.
><{{{>
><{{{>Barry also refers to specialised knowledge about examining 
><{{{>specimens. I
><{{{>again agree completely. Even in my own area of expertise, 
><{{{>sometimes a sample
><{{{>has me scratching my head and asking for a second opinion. On 
><{{{>some other
><{{{>areas of human pathology, I can of course say it is such and 
><{{{>such but I
><{{{>would be floundering with a total differential diagnosis.
><{{{>
><{{{>With fish, if there is obvious pathology I can say that there 
><{{{>is obvious
><{{{>pathology but that is as far as I can go (after 24 years of 
><{{{>experience in
><{{{>pathology). To take one example, a few months ago I was shown 
><{{{>some slides of
><{{{>fish kidney tissue - I was told that it was kidney tissue and 
><{{{>I opened my
><{{{>mouth and concluded that the fish must have been terribly 
><{{{>sick (based on
><{{{>human experience). It was normal tissue.
><{{{>
><{{{>An amatuer pathologist friend of mine (he is a science 
><{{{>teacher) did a ZN
><{{{>stain on some fish tissue and on microscopic examination 
><{{{>found the presence
><{{{>of acid fast rods. Therefore his fish were suffering from 
><{{{>Mycobacterium
><{{{>tuberculosis? What are people's thoughts on this as a final 
><{{{>differential
><{{{>diagnosis?
><{{{>
><{{{>I think that the best thing to do with fish is to help keep 
><{{{>their immune
><{{{>system as intact as possible (you know, all the best 
><{{{>fish-keeping practices)
><{{{>and learn how to recognise easily treatable disases.  If a 
><{{{>fish or tank of
><{{{>fish come down with a "nasty" disease which does not respond 
><{{{>readily to
><{{{>readily available medication, it is easiest to destroy the 
><{{{>fish and properly
><{{{>sterilise the tank and environment.
><{{{>
><{{{>One final comment - there are wonderful photos in text books of every
><{{{>conceivable disease. Unfortunately diseases have not studied 
><{{{>these textbooks
><{{{>and their appearance in real life can take on a vast variety 
><{{{>of different
><{{{>forms.
><{{{>
><{{{>
><{{{>Bill Phillips
><{{{>Melbourne
><{{{>Australia
><{{{>
><{{{>---------------
><{{{>See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
><{{{>Join the AKA at http://www.aka.org/AKA/Applic.htm
><{{{>
---------------
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
Join the AKA at http://www.aka.org/AKA/Applic.htm

Follow-Ups: References: