well, there is caution and then there is hand ringing. Research and experimentation is not about emotional responses. It is just science. And science can be carried out by any thoughful person with adequate educational background.
Everyday, food carp are selectively bred for size, meat, disease resistance etc. Knowing the breeder community, I do think my theory is not realistic. But it is fun to talk about.
In the case of tests, I have seen a disturbing titilation with the idea that tests are NOT reliable and that the disease is a menance that has no bounds. It seems exciting and somehow singularly important for many of us amateurs that we see this as a disease that can't be stopped, hides for years, leaves no trail of evidence and siliently and methodically seeks out ponds to wipe out. Something like a science fiction movie. If you stop and think for a minute, these worries are emotionally driven and often seen as 'unique and brand new problems' to the beginner trying to get their head around this huge body of information. Yet , as you know Steve, herpes strains are downright common in the fish world. SVC is probably worse in terms of world danger than KHV. It is a disease that can be carried and it is a disease that absolutely will be passed onto the offspring of infected fish during spawning. Yet no commercial breeder has jumped out an eight story window to the best of knowledge?
I was a manager (for seven years) of a certified Vet lab employing 30 lab techs. We did CBCs, heart worm tests, parasite tests, blood profiles and all the other common stuff. I worshipped the EM in those days. I trust tests. But I also know how fallible they are. Assuming no human/tech error, these tests are influenced by age of materials, accuracy of equipment, sample size and quality and also the nature of the test itself. A test with many steps for instance is less reliable than one with no steps. In truth the old fashioned vet researchers will rely on a physical exam under EM to SEE the virus along with test results. As one old timer told me while I was on the AKCA steering committee for KHV research, " how do I know it is herpes? When we see it, we recognize it"! Hardly the stuff of a Noble prize winner but I believed that this old fella could work his way backwards and re-enforce his test results. ( By the way, that guy was THE FIRST to discover, identify and document herpes in ornamental cat fish from imports into florida)
IF I were a dealer, I would do BOTH nested PCR and ELISA to bracket results. One might even send a set of samples to two ,or even three, different labs. And in the case of a shipment, collecting from 3- 5 fish randomly and/or suspicious individual fish is also a good idea.
The point is, you overcome the inherent flaws in the path by redundancy and bracketing with bookend tests.
Beyond this? Well I'm not sure what would convince one not to be looking out that eighth floor window?
Turn away from the ledge.
JR