Search

OBJECTIVE To determine whether prophylactic administration of valacyclovir hydrochloride versus initiation of treatment at the onset of fever would differentially protect horses from viral replication and clinical disease attributable to equine herpesvirus type-1 (EHV-1) infection. ANIMALS 18 aged mares. PROCEDURES Horses were randomly assigned to receive an oral placebo (control), treatment at detection of fever, or prophylactic treatment (initiated 1 day prior to viral challenge) and then inoculated intranasally with a neuropathogenic strain of EHV-1. Placebo or valacyclovir was administered orally for 7 or 14 days after EHV-1 inoculation or detection of fever (3 horses/group). Effects of treatment on viral replication and clinical disease were evaluated. Plasma acyclovir concentrations and viremia were assessed to determine inhibitory concentrations of valacyclovir. RESULTS Valacyclovir administration decreased shedding of virus and viremia, compared with findings for control horses. Rectal temperatures and clinical disease scores in horses that received valacyclovir prophylactically for 2 weeks were lower than those in control horses. The severity of but not the risk for ataxia was decreased by valacyclovir administration. Viremia was decreased when steady-state trough plasma acyclovir concentrations were > 0.8 μg/mL, supporting the time-dependent activity of acyclovir. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Valacyclovir treatment significantly decreased viral replication and signs of disease in EHV-1-infected horses; effects were greatest when treatment was initiated before viral inoculation, but treatment was also effective when initiated as late as 2 days after inoculation. During an outbreak of equine herpesvirus myeloencephalopathy, antiviral treatment may be initiated in horses at various stages of infection, including horses that have not yet developed signs of viral disease.

Noise from firearms is well known to be harmful to human hearing. This problem has been addressed by various military units through the use of muzzle suppressors. However, as suppressor technology has advanced, shooters report hearing the mechanical action of gas-operated semi-automatic rifles (ArmaLite Rifle Model 15 style aka AR-15) as being louder than the suppressed muzzle noise. This study aims to evaluate if harmful noise is present in the shooter's ear, even when impulse noise emanating from the muzzle is suppressed. To characterize the impulse noise of the firearm action caused by the reciprocation of the bolt carrier group (BCG) and subsequent impact when it returns to battery (the forward locked position), the muzzle of a rifle was placed through a constructed plywood wall, and the noise of the action/breech was measured independently from the muzzle noise. This research finds that the impact of the BCG returning to battery (132 dBZ) has the potential to be harmful to the shooter's hearing even when the noise from the muzzle is effectively suppressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]