Southwest Farm Press
Tue, February 2, 2010 12:00:00 AM CST
Agriculture advocacy groups have reacted with a flurry of unhappy responses to President Obama's Feb. 1 release of his proposed 2011 budget.
The proposed budget "reflects the serious challenges facing the country," said Obama the day of its release. "We're at war. Our economy has lost 7 million jobs over the last two years. And our government is deeply in debt after what can only be described as a decade of profligacy." Read Obama's full statement on page 2
Obama's attempt to control government spending (pegged at over $1.5 trillion for this year) would mean payment cuts not only to large farmers (more than $2 billion over a decade) and agriculture-related insurance (some $8 billion over a decade) - but also, to the consternation of some environmental groups, would reduce the growth of conservation programs.
For the full budget proposal, see USDA 2011 Budget.
Crop insurance has been on the Obama administration's radar for months. The latest budget comes after the December release of a proposal for a new Federal Crop Insurance Program. According to the budget proposal "crop-insurance companies currently benefit from huge windfall profits due to the structure and terms of the government's contract with the companies, called the Standard Reinsurance Agreement."
In the budget proposal, the USDA would receive $26 billion. Of that total, over $8 billion would be targeted for nutrition programs and more than $400 million would go to building broadband networks in rural areas.
Two other proposals sure to draw growers' ire:
• Cotton and/or grain farmers, despite market prices, would collect $30,000 or less annually in direct-payment subsidies. That would mean a potential drop of $10,000.
• Current farm payment eligibility caps of $750,000 (for farm income) and $500,000 (for non-farm income) would drop to $500,000 and $250,000, respectively.
Such actions, according to the budget proposal, "would allow USDA to target payments to those who need and can benefit from them most, while at the same time preserving the safety net that protects farmers against low prices and natural disasters."
Like the advocacy groups, prominent farm-state lawmakers - many facing re-election fights in 2010 - were unswayed by the Obama administration's effort and arguments.
"Put simply the president's proposal picks winners and losers," said Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. "By targeting policies that rural America relies upon, this proposal places a disproportionate burden on the backs of farmers and rural communities. While I too believe we must reduce the federal deficit, we must all share in this responsibility."
The latest farm bill "contained over $4 billion worth of cuts to farm programs, was completely paid for and did not contribute to the deficit. … Changing the rules in the middle of the game would be detrimental to their operations and would cost us even more jobs in rural America."
Obama's 2010 budget called for similar cuts in agriculture, which were derailed by Congress. Lincoln was ready to remind him of that. "I thank the president for his recommendations," she said, "but Congress writes the budget. I intend to support measures to reduce the deficit but fight many of the president's proposed cuts that will harm farmers, ranchers and rural communities."
Tom Vilsack, USDA secretary, defending Obama's budget, said problems in the United States' rural areas "have grown more acute, which is why the Obama administration is committed to new approaches to strengthen rural America." Read Vilsack's full statement on page 3.
As a reflection of needed financial constraint, Vilsack said, the proposed budget "essentially (freezes) funding for discretionary programs at the FY 2010 level. However, limits we placed on select programs and efforts to eliminate earmarks and one-time funding actually result in a bottom line reduction to our discretionary budget authority of over $1 billion."
Further, "we care deeply about farmers and ranchers and have worked hard to maintain the agricultural safety net, while instituting some targeted reductions in farm program payments."
Walking a tightrope between his state's farmers and his party's recent mantra of controlled spending, Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, ranking Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, commended Obama's "effort to reign in government spending," but said "we need to examine where resources are truly needed. As with last year, the (Obama) administration unfairly targets farmers and ranchers to achieve savings and fund Washington-based programs.
"I will continue to examine the budget along with my colleagues to ensure we are spending hard earned taxpayer dollars efficiently and effectively. In the weeks and months ahead, we will have to make some hard choices. It is my hope we can produce a budget that mirrors what Americans have to struggle with every day."
The National Cotton Council (NCC) warned that cotton will be a loser under Obama's proposal. If it is adopted, not only would farmers lose payments but storage and marketing issues would arise.
"The financing demands of commercial agriculture require a high level of confidence by lenders in program availability," said Jay Hardwick, a Louisiana farmer and NCC chairman. "In the midst of a credit crisis, it makes no sense to threaten a vital component of the borrower's cash flow."
The NCC said further proposals to eliminate upland cotton storage credits and reduce funding for the Market Access Program fails to take the whole picture into account. Read the NCC's full statement on page 5.
The American Soybean Association (ASA) "opposed similar proposals by the (Obama) administration last year that would have reopened the 2008 farm bill and undercut long-term economic decisions by soybean producers," said Rob Joslin, Ohio soybean producer and ASA president.
"They were bad ideas then, and they are bad ideas now. Agriculture spending, not including nutrition programs, is projected to account for just over one-half of one percent of next year's $3.8 trillion budget. Cutting the farm safety net to achieve minimal savings would jeopardize an industry that continues to be a key driver for U.S. economic recovery and export growth." Read the full ASA statement on page 4.
President Obama's Feb. 1 statement on his budget proposal
"This morning, I sent a budget to Congress for the coming year. It's a budget that reflects the serious challenges facing the country. We're at war. Our economy has lost 7 million jobs over the last two years. And our government is deeply in debt after what can only be described as a decade of profligacy.
"The fact is, 10 years ago, we had a budget surplus of more than $200 billion, with projected surpluses stretching out toward the horizon. Yet over the course of the past 10 years, the previous administration and previous Congresses created an expensive new drug program, passed massive tax cuts for the wealthy, and funded two wars without paying for any of it -– all of which was compounded by recession and by rising health care costs. As a result, when I first walked through the door, the deficit stood at $1.3 trillion, with projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade.
"If we had taken office during ordinary times, we would have started bringing down these deficits immediately. But one year ago, our country was in crisis: We were losing nearly 700,000 jobs each month, the economy was in a free fall, and the financial system was near collapse. Many feared another Great Depression. So we initiated a rescue, and that rescue was not without significant cost; it added to the deficit as well.
"One year later, because of the steps we've taken, we're in a very different place. But we can't simply move beyond this crisis; we have to address the irresponsibility that led to it. And that includes the failure to rein in spending, as well as reliance on borrowing –- from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street –- to fuel our growth. That's what we have to change. We have to do what families across America are doing: Save where we can so that we can afford what we need.
"Now, I think it's very important to understand: We won't be able to bring down this deficit overnight, given that the recovery is still taking hold and families across the country still need help. We will continue, for example, to do what it takes to create jobs. That's reflected in my budget; it's essential. The budget includes new tax cuts for people who invest in small businesses, tax credits for small businesses that hire new workers, investments that will create jobs repairing roads and bridges, and tax breaks for retrofitting homes to save energy.
"We also continue to lay a new foundation for lasting growth, which is essential as well. Just as it would be a terrible mistake to borrow against our children's future to pay our way today, it would be equally wrong to neglect their future by failing to invest in areas that will determine our economic success in this new century.
"That's why we build on the largest investment in clean energy in history, as well as increase investment in scientific research, so that we are fostering the industries and jobs of the future right here in America.
"That's why I've proposed a more than 6 percent increase in funding for the Education Department. And this funding is tied to reforms that raise student achievement, inspire students to excel in math and science, and turn around failing schools which consign too many young people to a lesser future - because in the 21st century there is no better anti-poverty program than a world-class education.
"And that's why we eliminate a wasteful subsidy to banks that lend to college students, and use that money to revitalize community colleges and make college more affordable. This will help us reach the goal I've set for America: By 2020 we will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.
"These are the investments we must make to create jobs and opportunity now and in the future. And in a departure from the way business had been done in Washington, we actually show how we pay for these investments while putting our country on a more fiscally sustainable path.
"I've proposed a freeze in government spending for three years. This won't apply to the benefits folks get through Social Security, Medicaid, or Medicare. And it won't apply to our national security –- including benefits for veterans. But it will apply to all other discretionary government programs. And we're not simply photocopying last year's budget; freezing spending does not mean we won't cut what doesn't work to pay for what does.
"We have gone through every department's spending line by line, item by item, looking for inefficiency, duplication, and programs that have outlived their usefulness. That's how we freeze discretionary spending. Last year, we found $17 billion in cuts. This year, we've already found $20 billion.
"Now, some of these cuts are just common sense. For example, we cut $115 million from a program that pays states to clean up mines that have already been cleaned up. We're also cutting a Forest Service economic development program that strayed so far from any mission that it funded a music festival. And we're saving $20 million by stopping the refurbishment of a Department of Energy science center that the Department of Energy does not want to refurbish.
"Other cuts, though, are more painful, because the goals of the underlying programs are worthy. We eliminate one program that provides grants to do environmental cleanup of abandoned buildings. That's a mission I support, but there are other sources of private and public funds to achieve it. We also eliminated a $120 million program that allows folks to get their Earned Income Tax Credit in advance. I am a big supporter of the Earned Income Tax Credit. The problem is 80 percent of people who got this advance didn't comply with one or more of the program's requirements.
"So I'm willing to reduce waste in programs I care about, and I'm asking members of Congress to do the same. I'm asking Republicans and Democrats alike to take a fresh look at programs they've supported in the past to see what's working and what's not, and trim back accordingly.
"Like any business, we're also looking for ways to get more bang for our buck, by promoting innovation and cutting red tape. For example, we consolidate 38 separate education programs into 11. And last fall, we launched the "SAVE Awards" to solicit ideas from federal employees about how make government more efficient and more effective. I'm proud to say that a number of these ideas - like allowing Social Security appointments to be made online - made it into our budget.
I also want to note even though the Department of Defense is exempt from the budget freeze, it's not exempt from budget common sense. It's not exempt from looking for savings. We save money by eliminating unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us safe. One example is the $2.5 billion that we're spending to build C-17 transport aircraft. Four years ago, the Defense Department decided to cease production because it had acquired the number requested - 180. Yet every year since, Congress had provided unrequested money for more C-17s that the Pentagon doesn't want or need. It's waste, pure and simple.
"And there are other steps we're taking to rein in deficits. I've proposed a fee on big banks to pay back taxpayers for the bailout. We're reforming the way contracts are awarded, to save taxpayers billions of dollars. And while we extend middle-class tax cuts in this budget, we will not continue costly tax cuts for oil companies, investment fund managers, and those making over $250,000 a year. We just can't afford it.
"Finally, changing spending-as-usual depends on changing politics-as-usual. And that's why I've proposed a bipartisan fiscal commission: a panel of Democrats and Republicans who would hammer out concrete deficit reduction proposals over the medium and long term, but would come up with those answers by a certain deadline. I should point out, by the way, that is an idea that had strong bipartisan support, was originally introduced by Senators Gregg on the Republican side and Conrad on the Democratic side; had a lot of Republican cosponsors to the idea. I hope that, despite the fact that it got voted down in the Senate, that both the Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and the Republican Leader in the House John Boehner go ahead and fully embrace what has been a bipartisan idea to get our arms around this budget.
"That's also why we're restoring pay-as-you-go: a simple rule that says Congress can't spend a dime without cutting a dime elsewhere. This rule helped lead to the budget surpluses of the 1990s, and it's one of the most important steps we can take to restore fiscal discipline in Washington.
You can read more about the budget at budget.gov - very easy to remember - budget.gov. But the bottom line is this: We simply cannot continue to spend as if deficits don't have consequences; as if waste doesn't matter; as if the hard-earned tax dollars of the American people can be treated like Monopoly money; as if we can ignore this challenge for another generation. We can't.
"In order to meet this challenge, I welcome any idea, from Democrats and Republicans. What I will not welcome -– what I reject -– is the same old grandstanding when the cameras are on, and the same irresponsible budget policies when the cameras are off. It's time to hold Washington to the same standards families and businesses hold themselves. It's time to save what we can, spend what we must, and live within our means once again."
Statement from Tom Vilsack, USDA Secretary on the proposed 2011 budget
"I don't need to tell the American people that in 2009, America struggled through the most serious economic recession since the Great Depression. Families were forced to make difficult decisions. And more and more Americans had to rely on USDA to help put food on the table.
"The challenges facing rural communities for decades have grown more acute, which is why the Obama Administration is committed to new approaches to strengthen rural America. Rural Americans earn less than their urban counterparts, and are more likely to live in poverty. More rural Americans are over the age of 65, they have completed fewer years of school, and more than half of America's rural counties are losing population.
"This year, President Obama took steps to bring us back from the brink of a depression and grow the economy again. But with the unsustainable debt accumulated over the past decade, it's time to get our fiscal house in order.
"Our proposed FY 2011 budget is a reflection of that reality, essentially freezing funding for discretionary programs at the FY 2010 level. However, limits we placed on select programs and efforts to eliminate earmarks and one-time funding actually result in a bottom line reduction to our discretionary budget authority of over $1 billion.
"This budget uses taxpayer dollars wisely, taking common-sense steps that many families and small businesses have been forced to take with their own budgets. We are investing in American agriculture and the American people without leaving them a mountain of debt.
"We care deeply about farmers and ranchers and have worked hard to maintain the agricultural safety net, while instituting some targeted reductions in farm program payments. Just as importantly, this budget pursues priorities that will have the greatest impact in our efforts to address the challenges facing rural America and lay a new foundation for growth and prosperity.
"This budget will assist rural communities create prosperity so they are self-sustaining, economically thriving, and growing in population. We have already taken important steps in this effort. With help from the Recovery Act, we supported farmers and ranchers and helped rural businesses create jobs. We made investments in broadband, renewable energy, hospitals, water and waste water systems, and other critical infrastructure that will serve as a lasting foundation to ensure the long-term economic health of families in rural America. This budget includes almost $26 billion to build on that down payment and focuses on new opportunities presented by producing renewable energy, developing local and regional food systems, capitalizing on environmental markets and generating green jobs through recreation and natural resource restoration, conservation, and management.
"We will promote the production of food, feed, fiber, and fuel, as well as increased exports of food and agricultural products, as we work to strengthen the agricultural economy for farmers and ranchers. America's farmers and ranchers are the most productive and efficient in the world, and this budget maintains the policies that help maintain our nation's food security. This budget increases our funding for export promotion as part of President Obama's National Export Initiative and provides more support than ever before for competitive research, which can lead to gains in agricultural productivity.
"We will ensure that all of America's children have access to safe, nutritious, and balanced meals. The budget fully funds the expected requirements for the Department's three major nutrition assistance programs - WIC, the National School Lunch Program, and SNAP - and proposes $10 billion over 10 years to strengthen the Child Nutrition and WIC programs. It also invests over $1 billion for efforts to reduce food-borne illnesses from USDA-inspected food products.
"We will ensure our national forests and private working lands are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate change, while enhancing our water resources. This budget will enroll more than 300 million acres into Farm Bill conservation programs, an increase of 10% over 2010. It will support our efforts to strategically target high priority watersheds. And it focuses efforts on forest restoration and hazardous fuels reduction in the wildland-urban interface, where they will offer job-creation opportunities and reduce the chance of catastrophic wildfires.
"There is no doubt that these tough times call for shared sacrifice. The American people have tightened their belts and we have done so as well. We made tough decisions, but this budget reflects our values, and common sense solutions to the problems we face. It makes critical investments in the American people and in the agricultural economy to set us on a path to prosperity as we move forward in the 21st century."
ASA opposes proposed cuts in farm programs, crop insurance, export promotion
The American Soybean Association (ASA) "expressed disappointment in the Obama administration's proposals to cut funding for key farm programs, federal crop insurance, and the Market Access Program (MAP).
"‘ASA opposed similar proposals by the administration last year that would have reopened the 2008 farm bill and undercut long-term economic decisions by soybean producers,' said ASA president Rob Joslin, a soybean producer from Sidney, Ohio. ‘They were bad ideas then, and they are bad ideas now. Agriculture spending, not including nutrition programs, is projected to account for just over one-half of one percent of next year's $3.8 trillion budget. Cutting the farm safety net to achieve minimal savings would jeopardize an industry that continues to be a key driver for U.S. economic recovery and export growth.'
"Joslin's comments followed release of the President's Budget for FY-2011, which proposes to reduce the cap on Direct Payments to farmers by 25 percent, from $40,000 to $30,000. The President's budget also proposes to reduce by $250,000 each, the Adjusted Gross Income limits that can be earned from farm and non-farm sources in order to be eligible for farm and conservation payments.
The (Obama) administration is also proposing changes in the federal crop insurance program that would reduce its cost by $8 billion over 10 years.
"‘Congress already considered these proposals during debate on the 2008 Farm Bill, and rejected them again last year,' Joslin said. ‘While there may be need for reform in crop insurance administrative payments to companies, any savings should be reinvested to make the program more widely accepted in parts of the country where farmers don't participate.'
"Another proposal would cut spending under MAP, which funds export promotion activities, by 20 percent, or $40 million per year. Noting the Administration's proposed increase in funding for other export activities, including the Foreign Market Development (FMD) program, Joslin stated that ‘ASA would support increasing funding for FMD, but not at the expense of MAP.'
"ASA strongly endorses the proposed increase in funding for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), from $262 million this year to $429 million in FY2011.
"‘Agriculture research was left out of last year's economic stimulus package, while other research sectors received billions of federal dollars,' Joslin said. ‘Research is the driving force behind innovation in American agriculture, and this proposed increased in AFRI funding is needed for long-term economic growth of the agricultural and food sectors of our economy.'
"ASA represents all U.S. soybean farmers on domestic and international issues of importance to the soybean industry. ASA's advocacy efforts are made possible through the voluntary membership in ASA by over 22,500 farmers in 31 states where soybeans are grown."
NCC: budget proposal undermines farm safety net
"The National Cotton Council said President Obama's FY2011 USDA budget ignores the extensive changes to production agriculture support that were embodied in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. In addition, the NCC noted, USDA already has announced unwarranted restrictions in program eligibility during the legislation's implementation.
"NCC Chairman Jay Hardwick, a Louisiana cotton producer, said, ‘The President's proposal on phasing down direct payments and limiting total payments affects the farms that produce more than three-fourths of all agricultural products marketed in the United States. The safety net for America's farm families must be maintained. Congress spoke clearly to ensure sound agricultural policy that is fiscally responsible in the passage of the last farm law. Direct payments are compliant with the direction being taken in the World Trade Organization to reduce trade distorting support. The financing demands of commercial agriculture require a high level confidence by lenders in program availability. In the midst of a credit crisis, it makes no sense to threaten a vital component of the borrower's cash flow.'
"The 2008 farm law includes provisions for the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to pay a portion of the storage costs during periods of low prices. These provisions' costs were completely offset by changes in the upland cotton counter-cyclical target price.
"The NCC emphasized that the Administration's proposal to eliminate the upland cotton storage credits is a failure to discern critical differences between commodities.
"‘Baled upland cotton lint is an identity-preserved commodity that requires off-farm storage in facilities approved by CCC while under loan,' Hardwick said. ‘Further, loan eligible cotton must comply with a number of CCC regulations stipulating bale wrapping and packaging.'
The NCC also is truly puzzled by the proposed reduction in Market Access Program (MAP) funding.
"‘While the Department of Commerce is announcing new programs for export promotion and job creation, the administration proposes to cut support for agricultural export promotion,' Hardwick stated. ‘Foreign sales account for one-third of U.S. agricultural production's total value. Solid export performance is essential for the economic health of rural America and agricultural exports warrant aggressive support.'"
NFU statement on proposed FY2011 budget
"National Farmers Union (NFU) President Roger Johnson made the following statement on the proposed fiscal year (FY) 2011 budget.
"‘NFU understands the nation is faced with a difficult financial situation and we commend the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for increases in important programs in its proposed budget. However, the cut in crop insurance at $8 billion over 10 years comes as a disappointment, as crop insurance is part of the vital safety net for farmers and ranchers providing a safe and secure food supply.
"‘NFU is supportive of USDA's significant investment in rural development and the allocation of funds toward bringing broadband access to rural America.
"‘NFU is committed to working with Congress to find solutions to the growing hunger problem in America. USDA's full funding of its food and nutrition programs is a step toward expanding access and improving quality of nutrition programs.
"‘Increased funding for the Food Safety and Inspection Service will help USDA maintain a safe food supply and implement the interstate shipment of state-inspected meat, as intended by Congress.
"‘Funding for the Agricultural and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) is at its highest level. NFU strongly supports agricultural research, as it is the key to helping agriculture adapt to the challenges of a changing world.
"‘NFU supports the funding for technology in the Farm Service Agency offices, allowing the agency to upgrade its systems.
"‘NFU will continue to work with the president and Congress to ensure the interests of producers are prioritized and represented in the final budget.'
"With a membership of 250,000 farm and ranch families, NFU has for more than 100 years continued its original mission to protect and enhance the economic well-being and quality of life for family farmers and ranchers and their rural communities."
NSAC comments on Obama agriculture budget
Comments of Ferd Hoefner, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition policy director:
"The Obama administration budget for food and agriculture is a mixed bag.
"In the dreadful category, the President proposes to turn his back on the widely acclaimed 2008 Farm Bill deal to ramp up support for farmers and ranchers investing in natural resource conservation and environmental enhancement.
"Obama is asking Congress to whack over $500 million in the short term and over $1 billion long term from the mandatory funding for farm conservation programs in the 2008 farm bill.
"The conservation cuts include $380 million from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP); 770,000 acres or $70 million (and $700 million over ten years) from the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP); over 15,000 acres or $35 million from the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP); $15 million from the Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP); $12 million from the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP), and additional amounts from the Grasslands Reserve (short and long term), and other conservation programs.
"The silver lining for NSAC is that Congressional appropriators rejected proposed cuts to mandatory farm bill funding for conservation programs the past two years, with the exception of a $270 million EQIP cut, and we urge them to reject this new proposal in exactly the same fashion. Now is not the time to turn our backs on environmental improvement on the 50 percent of the continental U.S. that is agricultural land.
"Turning his back on his campaign promises to fully back the new Conservation Stewardship Program, the budget President Obama submitted today proposes to start chipping away at contracts between USDA and farmers to comprehensively improve soil and water quality, use climate-friendly farming systems, improve wildlife habitat, and reduce water and energy consumption.
"At his confirmation hearing, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack had this to say about the CSP: ‘I recognize that this is not only an opportunity to expand income opportunities for producers but it is also great for the environment, and for water quality in particular, and it also provides jobs, rural jobs… (T)his is a job creator, it's great for the environment, and it's an income opportunity for marginal land. I'm very supportive of this.'
"For her part, Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan at her confirmation hearing called the CSP ‘a jewel among many wonderful USDA programs. What I like about CSP…is that it recognizes farmers as environmental stewards and rewards their contributions to healthy food, land, water, and wildlife.'
"We agree with the sentiments of then candidate Obama and the then Secretary and Deputy Secretary nominees. We strongly suspect that Congress will reject this ill-advised cut to the only comprehensive working-lands conservation program in the country.
"We support the proposed cut to the per-farm cap for commodity program direct payments from $80,000 a year (married couple) to $60,000 a year, though such a change would obviously require new legislation. The proposed change to reduce the Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) caps, however, leaves us scratching our heads.
"Reducing the means-test for receiving commodity production subsidies to $250,000 ($500,000 for married couples) in non-farm income is a noble sentiment, but an ineffective policy. If it were to become law, the most immediate effects would be negative - encouraging crop share landlords to switch to cash rents (and thus avoid the cap) and encouraging investors to plow back subsidies into more land and equipment (and thus reduce AGI). Ironically, both would increase farm consolidation.
"The irony is further heightened by the President's decision earlier this month to issue a final rule on commodity program payment limitation law in which he did a complete about face on his campaign promise to close the regulatory loopholes that allow mega farms to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in subsidy checks. Unlike the new, ineffectual AGI proposal which would require Congressional approval and take several years to implement, the payment limit final rule required only the President's sign off to effectively and immediately halt farm subsidy abuse.
"On the plus side, sustainable agriculture farmers and researchers are cheering the near 50 percent increase proposed by the President for the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) competitive grants program. The $30 million proposed for SARE in FY2011 represents the largest proposed increase in the 22 year history of the program. Most of the increase would help fund a federal-state matching grant program to build long-term sustainability into state and land grant university agricultural programs. Winning congressional passage of the long overdue increase will be a priority of the sustainable agriculture community.
"Two new proposals in the USDA budget sound promising and the local and regional food system farm and business community will be anxiously awaiting further details as they emerge.
"One would build on a NSAC proposal included in the 2008 farm bill to set-aside 5 percent of Rural Business and Industry loans for local and regional food system enterprise development. The President's new proposal would set-aside up to 5 percent of a wide range of rural development, marketing, and conservation programs for projects in areas in which strategic regional planning is building a stronger rural economic foundation, including the redevelopment of local and regional food and agricultural systems.
"The other is a proposed $35 million for a Healthy Food Financing Initiative that would provide loans for new grocery stores to increase access to healthy foods in urban and rural food "deserts." That proposal would also target an additional $15 million from other marketing and rural development programs to support the initiative."
American Farmland Trust on proposed budget
"‘At a time when we most need to invest in our strategic natural resources and keep them healthy for the future, the President has proposed cuts to key farmland preservation, conservation, and water quality programs,' says Jon Scholl, American Farmland Trust (AFT) President. ‘The fact of the matter is, slashing these programs will do nothing significant to address our nation's budget problems while it will dramatically reduce our ability to protect the resources that supply abundant food and a cleaner environment. So we're concerned that it is penny-wise now, and will be very pound foolish in the future.'
"Despite the administration's rhetorical desire to support conservation and agriculture, and address such issues as climate change and renewable energy, ‘reductions of over one-half a billion dollars in mandatory conservation program spending will make it much more difficult for farmers and ranchers to make changes necessary to protect our air, land and water,' adds Scholl. ‘These cuts represent nearly a 20% cut to working-lands conservation programs, yet agriculture is the most cost-effective solution to these very real environmental challenges.'
"The President's proposed budget would cut hundreds of millions of dollars from working lands conservation programs that was promised under the 2008 Farm Bill. Some of the key cuts concerning AFT include:
• Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program (FRPP)-A cost-share program that helps farmers keep their land in agriculture in perpetuity has been slated for $55 million in cuts over the next two years. Typically in this program every $1 the government invests in conservation easements is matched by $3 from farmers, local and state programs.
• Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP)-The conservation program that encourages landowners to install buffer strips between fields and streams, fence livestock out of waterways, and more, would be slashed by $380 million, or by 31 percent in 2011.
• The Conservation Security Program (CSP) is to be cut by hundreds of millions of dollars. Depending on the final reimbursement rate per acre used, this could be as high as a $331 million loss. CSP is a program that provides cost-share monies to farmers to assist in implementing on-farm stewardship practices on working farm and ranchland.
"‘On a more positive note, the administration is building on new programs for producers by developing local and regional food systems through new programs under the 2008 farm bill. During the last year, we've been excited by the USDA's Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative and its potential. AFT believes that new economic opportunities that connect farmers with local consumers have numerous benefits, and especially when programs underscore the fact that food comes from farmland nearby, and how without land there would be no food,' notes Scholl.
"‘During the last year, USDA has moved forward in conservation and environmental programs. They have worked to make programs more efficient, and make constructive policy changes to improve programs. More generally, the administration has acknowledged and defended agriculture's role in improving the environment, and that's a good thing,' says Scholl. ‘However, we were very disappointed today that the administration has undercut the work that they've begun by not recognizing that the environmental benefits to society gained over the long run through agriculture far outweigh the investments made by the public now. That's why we believe this 2011 budget proposal is penny-wise and pound foolish.
"‘We look forward to working with members of Congress and the administration to highlight our concerns, reexamine the President's budget and recalibrate the priorities for agriculture. We simply must address loss of farmland, and the potential of farms and ranches to maximize their production of environmental benefits like cleaner water and air, sequestering carbon, renewable energy, and more. This is a critical time to invest even more cost-share money, not less,' concludes Scholl.
BEST BUDGET MOVE of 2010 - KUDOs ObombA - 70% of all available cropland is used for cattle-feed production.
Next is an END to the Public Lands Welfare Ranching System;
Click on title above to read and entire BOOK about that Agri-Socialist-Culture Club
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Birth Defects May Be Linked to Agriculture
Spike in Birth Defects in Kettleman Prompts EPA, State Health Probe
Kettleman, CA: A spike in birth defects and miscarriages that has occurred since 2007in the California city of Kettleman will be investigated, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced this week.
Furthermore, the administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Pacific South West region has promised to visit the city to make enquiries, and ensure that regulations are being followed.
The city of Kettleman is located near Interstate 5, midway between San Francisco and Los Angeles, a key trucking corridor within California. Some people believe that diesel emissions from the trucks and pesticides used on agricultural crops grown nearby may be contributing to the spate of facial defects seen in the past few years.
However, the West's largest hazardous waste facility, operated by Waste Management, is also located nearby, and many residents believe that it may be the cause of their health problems.
According to media reports, both the EPA and California Department of Public Health will be conducting an investigation which will involve taking soil samples, reviewing medical records, and interviewing the residents of Kettleman City. The findings will be presented at a meeting on February 9th.
According to a report on MSNBC.com five of 20 children born in the town of 1500 between September 2007 and November 2008 were born with facial defects
FEB-01-10: California to probe birth defects spike [MSNBC: KIDS AND PARENTING]
Legal Help
If you or a loved one has suffered health problems or an adverse health event related to this issue, please click on the title above and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.
Kettleman, CA: A spike in birth defects and miscarriages that has occurred since 2007in the California city of Kettleman will be investigated, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced this week.
Furthermore, the administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Pacific South West region has promised to visit the city to make enquiries, and ensure that regulations are being followed.
The city of Kettleman is located near Interstate 5, midway between San Francisco and Los Angeles, a key trucking corridor within California. Some people believe that diesel emissions from the trucks and pesticides used on agricultural crops grown nearby may be contributing to the spate of facial defects seen in the past few years.
However, the West's largest hazardous waste facility, operated by Waste Management, is also located nearby, and many residents believe that it may be the cause of their health problems.
According to media reports, both the EPA and California Department of Public Health will be conducting an investigation which will involve taking soil samples, reviewing medical records, and interviewing the residents of Kettleman City. The findings will be presented at a meeting on February 9th.
According to a report on MSNBC.com five of 20 children born in the town of 1500 between September 2007 and November 2008 were born with facial defects
FEB-01-10: California to probe birth defects spike [MSNBC: KIDS AND PARENTING]
Legal Help
If you or a loved one has suffered health problems or an adverse health event related to this issue, please click on the title above and your complaint will be sent to a lawyer who may evaluate your claim at no cost or obligation.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Korea Kulls Cloven-Hooved Livestock / F&M Disease
FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE, BOVINE - SOUTH KOREA (06): (GYEONGGI-DO),
SIXTH OUTBREAK
********************************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Sat 30 Jan 2010
Source: YONHAP via MCOT.NET [edited]
Gov't confirms 6th outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease
-----------------------------------------------------
The government said Saturday [30 Jan 2010] it has confirmed the
country's 6th outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease [FMD] this year at a
dairy cattle farm in Pocheon north of Seoul. The farm, located 3.8 km
[2.3 miles] away from where the 1st outbreak was confirmed on 7 Jan
2010, reported blisters on some of its animals on Friday, the
agriculture ministry said.
On-site quarantine officials had ordered the culling of all 81 head
of milk cows on the farm as a preventive measure while cloven-hoofed
livestock within a 500 meter radius of the outbreak are being
slaughtered and buried to contain the spread of the highly contagious disease.
The latest case is the 5th FMD cased confirmed in the Pocheon region,
located about 45km [28 miles] from Seoul. One other case was
confirmed in nearby Yeoncheon, 62 km [38.5 miles] north of Seoul. It
is also the 1st outbreak to be reported in the country since 18 Jan 2010.
The animal disease affects all cloven-hoofed animals such as cattle,
hogs, goats and deers causing blisters on the feet and mouths of
livestock and sometimes leading to death. It can be spread via air,
feed and imported farm products that have not been sterilized.
Humans, though not affected by the disease, can be [mechanical] carriers.
South Korea was hit twice before by the FMD disease in 2000 and 2002.
Losses from the 2000 outbreak centered on cattle and reached 300.6
billion won (USD 259.8 million), while the 2002 outbreak cost 143.4
billion won as the disease spread through pigs. The government
declined to give the exact size of damages incurred in the latest
outbreak, although over 3500 cows, pigs, goats, deers have been culled so far.
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[Korea's official reports to the OIE on the 1st 5 outbreaks,
including a map, can be found at
.
- Mod.AS]
[see also:
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (05): (KG) 20100119.0213
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (04): (KG) 20100116.0188
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - China: (XJ) OIE, serotype A, RFI 20100115.0187
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (03): (KG) 20100114.0161
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (02): serotype A 20100111.0130
Foot & mouth disease - worldwide: 2009, update 20100109.0099
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea: (KG), OIE 20100108.0089]
....................arn/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at.
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
############################################################
SIXTH OUTBREAK
********************************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Sat 30 Jan 2010
Source: YONHAP via MCOT.NET [edited]
Gov't confirms 6th outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease
-----------------------------------------------------
The government said Saturday [30 Jan 2010] it has confirmed the
country's 6th outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease [FMD] this year at a
dairy cattle farm in Pocheon north of Seoul. The farm, located 3.8 km
[2.3 miles] away from where the 1st outbreak was confirmed on 7 Jan
2010, reported blisters on some of its animals on Friday, the
agriculture ministry said.
On-site quarantine officials had ordered the culling of all 81 head
of milk cows on the farm as a preventive measure while cloven-hoofed
livestock within a 500 meter radius of the outbreak are being
slaughtered and buried to contain the spread of the highly contagious disease.
The latest case is the 5th FMD cased confirmed in the Pocheon region,
located about 45km [28 miles] from Seoul. One other case was
confirmed in nearby Yeoncheon, 62 km [38.5 miles] north of Seoul. It
is also the 1st outbreak to be reported in the country since 18 Jan 2010.
The animal disease affects all cloven-hoofed animals such as cattle,
hogs, goats and deers causing blisters on the feet and mouths of
livestock and sometimes leading to death. It can be spread via air,
feed and imported farm products that have not been sterilized.
Humans, though not affected by the disease, can be [mechanical] carriers.
South Korea was hit twice before by the FMD disease in 2000 and 2002.
Losses from the 2000 outbreak centered on cattle and reached 300.6
billion won (USD 259.8 million), while the 2002 outbreak cost 143.4
billion won as the disease spread through pigs. The government
declined to give the exact size of damages incurred in the latest
outbreak, although over 3500 cows, pigs, goats, deers have been culled so far.
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[Korea's official reports to the OIE on the 1st 5 outbreaks,
including a map, can be found at
- Mod.AS]
[see also:
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (05): (KG) 20100119.0213
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (04): (KG) 20100116.0188
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - China: (XJ) OIE, serotype A, RFI 20100115.0187
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (03): (KG) 20100114.0161
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea (02): serotype A 20100111.0130
Foot & mouth disease - worldwide: 2009, update 20100109.0099
Foot & mouth disease, bovine - South Korea: (KG), OIE 20100108.0089]
....................arn/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
############################################################
Public Health Alert: Drug Resistant TB
TUBERCULOSIS, DRUG RESISTANCE - MARSHALL ISLANDS: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
*************************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Sat 30 Jan 2010
Source: Top News [edited]
A public health emergency has been declared in Marshall Islands. This
has happened following an outbreak of drug-resistant tuberculosis
(TB). The government is thinking of calling upon special powers of quarantine.
In less than 2 months the number of people with the drug-resistant
disease has risen from 6 to 10 in the western Pacific nation.
Everyone now fears that the situation would escalate and will reach
to 500. Majuro Hospital chief of staff Marie Lanwi-Paul, said, "We
are in the process of doubling the bed capacity" in the TB isolation unit."
Rachel Powel who is working with the World Health Organisation said,
"Drug resistance poses a serious threat to our ability to treat and
control TB." Marshall Islands Health Minister Amenta Matthew said she
was in the process of forming legislation that would give power to
the director of health to quarantine people who were not complying
with TB prevention requirements. Matthew felt that the drug-resistant
TB evolved because of people not following advice of taking medicines
despite physicians counseling them. It was reported that one patient
was taken to the court by health authorities for failing to take
treatment and remain in isolation.
[Byline: Anjali Singh]
--
Communicated by:
M. Randolph Kruger
[It is stated in the news release that the outbreak of drug resistant
TB in the Marshall Islands is secondary to improper management of the
TB cases, i.e., the TB drugs were not taken by patients as
recommended by the physicians. However, the exact drugs to which the
_Mycobacterium tuberculosis_ isolates are resistant and the extent of
the drug resistance is not specified in the above news release. Also
it is not specified if there is any epidemiological linkage among the
patients, if the isolates have similar drug resistance patterns, or
if they have been genotyped. Detailed discussions of drug-resistant
TB can be found in prior ProMED posts below.
The Marshall Islands is an island nation with a population of about
62 000 in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, just west of the
International Date Line and just north of the Equator
(). From 1946 to 1958,
the USA tested 67 nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands.
Independence was completed in 1990, when the UN officially ended its
Trusteeship status. In 1986, the Compact of Free Association with the
USA provides for aid and USA defense of the islands in exchange for
continued USA military use of a missile testing range
(). The location of the
Marshall Islands in relation to other countries in the South Pacific
can be found on a map at
[see also:
2009
----
Tuberculosis, XXDR - USA: FL ex Peru 20091230.4387
Tuberculosis, MDR - China 20090114.0151
2008
---
Tuberculosis, XDR - Austria ex Romania 20080803.2373
Tuberculosis, MDR, XDR - Peru 20080412.1337
Tuberculosis, XDR - Namibia 20080403.1231
Tuberculosis, XDR - UK (Scotland) ex Somalia 20080322.1094
Tuberculosis, MDR, XDR - Worldwide: WHO 20080228.0813
Tuberculosis, MDR - South Africa 20080208.0521
Tuberculosis, MDR - Papua New Guinea 20080206.0478
Tuberculosis, XDR - Botswana, South Africa 20080118.0222
2007
----
Tuberculosis, XDR, MDR: genome sequences 20071122.3780
Tuberculosis - Uganda (02): MDR, susp. RFI 20071004.3284
Tuberculosis - Uganda: deadly strain, RFI 20071002.3255
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (11): fugitives 20071002.3251
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (10): Western Cape 20070627.2071
Tuberculosis, XDR - worldwide (02) 20070623.2034
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (09): Western Cape 20070604.1805
Tuberculosis, XDR, airplane exposure - multicountry (03) 20070601.1778
Tuberculosis, XDR, airplane exposure - multicountry (USA, France,
Canada, Czech Rep.) 20070529.1738
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (08): Western Cape 20070425.1349
Tuberculosis, XDR, 2003-2006 - Europe (Germany, Italy) 20070403.1132
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (07): Eastern Cape 20070326.1044
Tuberculosis, XDR, 1993-2006 - USA 20070322.1005
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (06) 20070319.0959
Tuberculosis, XDR, 1991-2003 - Spain 20070302.0738
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (05) 20070228.0717
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (04) 20070220.0638
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (03) 20070209.0504
Tuberculosis, XDR - worldwide 20070205.0456
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (02) 20070128.0375
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa: interventions 20070126.0349]
............................................ml/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at.
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
############################################################
*************************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Sat 30 Jan 2010
Source: Top News [edited]
A public health emergency has been declared in Marshall Islands. This
has happened following an outbreak of drug-resistant tuberculosis
(TB). The government is thinking of calling upon special powers of quarantine.
In less than 2 months the number of people with the drug-resistant
disease has risen from 6 to 10 in the western Pacific nation.
Everyone now fears that the situation would escalate and will reach
to 500. Majuro Hospital chief of staff Marie Lanwi-Paul, said, "We
are in the process of doubling the bed capacity" in the TB isolation unit."
Rachel Powel who is working with the World Health Organisation said,
"Drug resistance poses a serious threat to our ability to treat and
control TB." Marshall Islands Health Minister Amenta Matthew said she
was in the process of forming legislation that would give power to
the director of health to quarantine people who were not complying
with TB prevention requirements. Matthew felt that the drug-resistant
TB evolved because of people not following advice of taking medicines
despite physicians counseling them. It was reported that one patient
was taken to the court by health authorities for failing to take
treatment and remain in isolation.
[Byline: Anjali Singh]
--
Communicated by:
M. Randolph Kruger
[It is stated in the news release that the outbreak of drug resistant
TB in the Marshall Islands is secondary to improper management of the
TB cases, i.e., the TB drugs were not taken by patients as
recommended by the physicians. However, the exact drugs to which the
_Mycobacterium tuberculosis_ isolates are resistant and the extent of
the drug resistance is not specified in the above news release. Also
it is not specified if there is any epidemiological linkage among the
patients, if the isolates have similar drug resistance patterns, or
if they have been genotyped. Detailed discussions of drug-resistant
TB can be found in prior ProMED posts below.
The Marshall Islands is an island nation with a population of about
62 000 in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, just west of the
International Date Line and just north of the Equator
(
the USA tested 67 nuclear weapons in the Marshall Islands.
Independence was completed in 1990, when the UN officially ended its
Trusteeship status. In 1986, the Compact of Free Association with the
USA provides for aid and USA defense of the islands in exchange for
continued USA military use of a missile testing range
(
Marshall Islands in relation to other countries in the South Pacific
can be found on a map at
[see also:
2009
----
Tuberculosis, XXDR - USA: FL ex Peru 20091230.4387
Tuberculosis, MDR - China 20090114.0151
2008
---
Tuberculosis, XDR - Austria ex Romania 20080803.2373
Tuberculosis, MDR, XDR - Peru 20080412.1337
Tuberculosis, XDR - Namibia 20080403.1231
Tuberculosis, XDR - UK (Scotland) ex Somalia 20080322.1094
Tuberculosis, MDR, XDR - Worldwide: WHO 20080228.0813
Tuberculosis, MDR - South Africa 20080208.0521
Tuberculosis, MDR - Papua New Guinea 20080206.0478
Tuberculosis, XDR - Botswana, South Africa 20080118.0222
2007
----
Tuberculosis, XDR, MDR: genome sequences 20071122.3780
Tuberculosis - Uganda (02): MDR, susp. RFI 20071004.3284
Tuberculosis - Uganda: deadly strain, RFI 20071002.3255
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (11): fugitives 20071002.3251
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (10): Western Cape 20070627.2071
Tuberculosis, XDR - worldwide (02) 20070623.2034
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (09): Western Cape 20070604.1805
Tuberculosis, XDR, airplane exposure - multicountry (03) 20070601.1778
Tuberculosis, XDR, airplane exposure - multicountry (USA, France,
Canada, Czech Rep.) 20070529.1738
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (08): Western Cape 20070425.1349
Tuberculosis, XDR, 2003-2006 - Europe (Germany, Italy) 20070403.1132
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (07): Eastern Cape 20070326.1044
Tuberculosis, XDR, 1993-2006 - USA 20070322.1005
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (06) 20070319.0959
Tuberculosis, XDR, 1991-2003 - Spain 20070302.0738
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (05) 20070228.0717
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (04) 20070220.0638
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (03) 20070209.0504
Tuberculosis, XDR - worldwide 20070205.0456
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa (02) 20070128.0375
Tuberculosis, XDR - South Africa: interventions 20070126.0349]
............................................ml/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
############################################################
Death Linked to Avian Flu / Indonesia
AVIAN INFLUENZA, HUMAN (08): INDONESIA (SOUTH JAKARTA), SUSPECTED
*****************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Sun 31 Jan 2010
Source: Bird Flu Information Corner [edited]
Suspected human case of avian influenza (H5N1) virus infection in South Jakarta
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Livestock and Fishery Sub-service of South Jakarta stopped about 17
[of] 26 units trucks [transporting] chicken meat from outside
Jakarta. These 17 chicken meat trucks could not show animal health
certificates.
This action, Healthy Chicken Transport Operation (Operasi
Transportasi Ayam Sehat/OTAS), was carried out at Jl. Raya Kebayoran
Lama and Jl. Ciledug Raya. In particular in the case of Kebayoran
Lama, the trucks were carrying chicken carcass to be delivered to
traditional markets, said Chaidir Taufik an official of Livvestock
and Fishery Service of South Jakarta. The number of bird carcasses
loaded in those 26 trucks [amounted to] about 19 180 chickens and 800
ducks, [despatched] from Subang, Bogor, Serpong and Sukabumi. The
OTAS action was [undertaken] to [prevent] bird flu outbreaks in
Jakarta, in particular South Jakarta.
Chaidir also mentioned, the OTAS action was [connected with] the
death of a suspected bird flu [avian influenza (H5N1)] patient. The
victim, a resident of Jl. Pengadegan Barat V, died on 26 Jan 2010 in
Pasar Rebo hospital. It was reported that the victim had brought 4
chickens from Cibitung Tangerang [in the previous] month. One chicken
was slaughtered and then victim developed sickness in the following
days. The victim was then treated and tested positive for bird flu
[avian influenza (H5N1) virus] infection. The remaining three
chickens were sent back to Cibitung.
(The source of this report is the Indonesia local newspaper -- Pos
Kota, 29 Jan 2010
.)
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail Rapporteur Mary Marshall
[Reports of human cases of avian influenza (H5N1) virus infection
published in the local media in Indonesia are rarely if ever
confirmed. According to the the WHO Table of human cases of avian
influenza (H5N1) virus infection, updated to 28 Jan 2010, no cases
have been confirmed during 2010, and only 20 throughout 2009 (see:
).
Official confirmation of the 2010 South Jakarta case is awaited.
A map of Java showing the location of Jakarta can be accessed at:
HealthMap/ProMED-mail interactive map of Indonesia can be accessed at:
. - Mod.CP]
[see also:
Avian influenza, human (02): Indonesia (RI) 20100112.0145
2009
----
Avian influenza, human (103): Indonesia, S. Jakarta, susp. 20090621.2279]
..................cp/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at.
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
##########################################################
*****************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Sun 31 Jan 2010
Source: Bird Flu Information Corner [edited]
Suspected human case of avian influenza (H5N1) virus infection in South Jakarta
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Livestock and Fishery Sub-service of South Jakarta stopped about 17
[of] 26 units trucks [transporting] chicken meat from outside
Jakarta. These 17 chicken meat trucks could not show animal health
certificates.
This action, Healthy Chicken Transport Operation (Operasi
Transportasi Ayam Sehat/OTAS), was carried out at Jl. Raya Kebayoran
Lama and Jl. Ciledug Raya. In particular in the case of Kebayoran
Lama, the trucks were carrying chicken carcass to be delivered to
traditional markets, said Chaidir Taufik an official of Livvestock
and Fishery Service of South Jakarta. The number of bird carcasses
loaded in those 26 trucks [amounted to] about 19 180 chickens and 800
ducks, [despatched] from Subang, Bogor, Serpong and Sukabumi. The
OTAS action was [undertaken] to [prevent] bird flu outbreaks in
Jakarta, in particular South Jakarta.
Chaidir also mentioned, the OTAS action was [connected with] the
death of a suspected bird flu [avian influenza (H5N1)] patient. The
victim, a resident of Jl. Pengadegan Barat V, died on 26 Jan 2010 in
Pasar Rebo hospital. It was reported that the victim had brought 4
chickens from Cibitung Tangerang [in the previous] month. One chicken
was slaughtered and then victim developed sickness in the following
days. The victim was then treated and tested positive for bird flu
[avian influenza (H5N1) virus] infection. The remaining three
chickens were sent back to Cibitung.
(The source of this report is the Indonesia local newspaper -- Pos
Kota, 29 Jan 2010
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail Rapporteur Mary Marshall
[Reports of human cases of avian influenza (H5N1) virus infection
published in the local media in Indonesia are rarely if ever
confirmed. According to the the WHO Table of human cases of avian
influenza (H5N1) virus infection, updated to 28 Jan 2010, no cases
have been confirmed during 2010, and only 20 throughout 2009 (see:
Official confirmation of the 2010 South Jakarta case is awaited.
A map of Java showing the location of Jakarta can be accessed at:
HealthMap/ProMED-mail interactive map of Indonesia can be accessed at:
[see also:
Avian influenza, human (02): Indonesia (RI) 20100112.0145
2009
----
Avian influenza, human (103): Indonesia, S. Jakarta, susp. 20090621.2279]
..................cp/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
##########################################################
Swine Flu Found in Turkeys
INFLUENZA PANDEMIC (H1N1), ANIMAL (04): GLOBAL, UPDATE
******************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Fri 29 Jan 2010
Source: USAgNet via wisconsinagconnection.com [edited]
France Confirms H1N1 Flu Outbreak in Turkeys
--------------------------------------------
Turkeys in a farm for Turkey Breeder Hens in
northwestern France were infected with the H1N1
flu virus, authorities in Cote d'Armor department
announced Thursday [28 Jan 2010]. Laboratory
tests have confirmed the virus in turkeys on the
farm, and the infected turkeys have been
quarantined, authorities said in a statement.
If no further spread of the virus was spotted,
the quarantine would be lifted in 7 days, and
there was no need for massive slaughter, the
statement said, citing relevant guidelines issued
by the European Union and the World Health
Organization in case of animal H1N1 flu infection.
Local health officials warned people with flu
symptoms against close contact with any animals.
The virus has been found in animals including
pigs, turkeys, cats, ferrets and dogs in a dozen
of countries [For the actual number of countries,
see commentary]. The possibility for
animal-to-animal transmission of the virus is
very limited with proper preventive measures,
said the World Organization for Animal Health.
According to the [French notification to the OIE, see
],
there have been 3000 cases [in the affected farm,
out of ] 8500 birds [which] have been found susceptible to the disease.
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[France has become 20th country in the list of
those which have notified to the OIE, since May
2009, the identification of "Pandemic A/H1N1
virus (2009)" in their respective animal
populations. In all the cases, the source of
infection in animals, mostly subclinical or
manifested by mild clinical signs, was regarded
or suspected to be human patients. Since the
submission of the French notification on 20 Jan
2010, 2 additional countries, namely Japan and
Serbia, have notified their 1st detected animal
cases. In Serbia, there were, reportedly, 20
cases among 10 830 "susceptible" domestic pigs;
the epidemiological comment further said: "The
disease has been detected on a commercial pig
breeding farm during regular epidemiological
control performed by the veterinary inspection.
Affected animals showed respiratory signs of the
disease and therefore, samples were taken and
sent to the laboratory for further investigation.
The source of infection is unknown."
In Japan, there were, reportedly, 164 cases
among 2445 "susceptible" domestic pigs; the
epidemiological comment said: "A worker found the
animals, which showed poor appetite, fever and
cough in the farm occasionally, and reported them
to the Livestock Hygiene Service Centre in
Yamagata prefecture on 12 Jan 2010. 10 animals
which showed clinical signs were sampled. 5 of 10
samples were found to be influenza A positive by
rapid test on 12 Jan 2010 and 7 of 10 samples
were influenza A positive by PCR on 13 Jan 2010.
There were some workers who had been infected
with influenza A virus before the outbreak. On 20
Jan 2010, the virus strains detected from 4
samples were confirmed as pandemic influenza H1N1
2009 by the National Institute of Animal Health
(NIAH). The affected farm is being under
voluntary movement restraint. Epidemiological investigation is continuing."
The full, accumulated list of countries which
have sent at least one notification to the OIE
since May 2009, counts -- as of 31 Jan 2010 --
includes 22 countries. The dates of their 1st notifications are as follows:
1. 5 May 2009: A/H1N1 influenza, Canada (Immediate notification)
2. 31 Jul 2009: Influenza A subtype H1, Australia (Immediate notification)
3. 21 Aug 2009: Influenza A H1N1, Chile (Immediate notification)
4. 18 Sep 2009: Pandemic Influenza A H1N1
(2009), United Kingdom, North Ireland (Immediate notification)
5. 29 Sep 2009: Pandemic A/H1N1 2009 virus, Ireland, (Immediate notification)
6. 12 Oct 2009: Pandemic A/H1N1 2009 virus, Norway, (Immediate notification)
7. 21 Oct 2009: Pandemic Influenza H1N1 (2009),
Japan, (Immediate notification)
8. 23 Oct 2009: Pandemic H1N1 2009, Canada, (Immediate notification)
9. 27 Oct 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 virus,
Iceland, (Immediate notification)
10. 26 Nov 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1, Indonesia, (Immediate notification)
11. 30 Nov 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009,
Finland, (Immediate notification)
12. 30 Nov 2009: 2009 pandemic A/H1N1 influenza
virus, United States of America, (Immediate notification)
13. 04 Dec 2009: Pandemic A/H1N1 virus, Italy, (Immediate notification)
14. 07 Dec 2009: 2009 Pandemic H1N1 influenza, Mexico, (Immediate notification)
15. 14 Dec 2009: Pandemic Influenza H1N1 2009,
Thailand, (Immediate notification)
16. 23 Dec 2009: Pandemic influenza H1N1, Korea
(Rep. of), (Immediate notification)
17. 23 Dec 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009,
Russia, (Immediate notification)
18. 09 Jan 2010: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1
(2009), Denmark, (Immediate notification)
19. 12 Jan 2010: Pandemic A/H1N1 virus, Italy, (Immediate notification)
20. 20 Jan 2010: Pandemic A/H1N1 virus (2009), France, (Immediate notification)
21. 20 Jan 2010: Pandemic influenza H1N1 (2009),
Japan, (Immediate notification)
22. 25 Jan 2010: Pandemic Influenza A H1N1
(2009), Serbia, (Immediate notification).
A Joint statement of the FAO, WHO and OIE,
originally issued on 30 Apr 2009, said:
"Influenza viruses are not known to be
transmissible to people through eating processed
pork or other food products derived from pigs.
"Heat treatments commonly used in cooking meat
(e.g., 70 C/160 F core temperature) will readily
inactivate any viruses potentially present in raw meat products.
"Pork and pork products, handled in accordance
with good hygienic practices recommended by the
WHO, Codex Alimentarius Commission, and the OIE,
will not be a source of infection.
"Authorities and consumers should ensure that
meat from sick pigs or pigs found dead are not
processed or used for human consumption under any circumstances."
The OIE encouraged members to carry out
surveillance and reporting of the presence of all
epidemiologic events of significance in animals
due to influenza viruses, as well as any other
emerging pathogen.It further stated that "it was
indicated that no evidence has suggested that
animals play any particular role in the
epidemiology or the spread of the pandemic H1N1
2009 virus among humans. Instead, investigations
led by competent national authorities point to
possible humantoanimal transmission in most
cases. For this reason, the OIE considers that it
is sufficient to certify the healthy state of
animals for international trade during the
relevant period before their exportation and
maintains its position that no specific measures,
including laboratory tests, are required for
international trade in live pigs and other
susceptible animal species and/or their products." - Mod.AS]
[see also:
Influenza pandemic (H1N1), animal (03): Denmark, porcine 20100111.0128
Influenza pandemic (H1N1), animal (02): USA, turkey 20100108.0087
Influenza pandemic (H1N1), animal (01): China, porcine, canine 20100101.0014
2009
----
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (42): USA (NC) swine 20091228.4372
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (41):
Russia (CV) swine, OIE 20091226.4353
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (40): USA (NY) canine 20091222.4305
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (39): Germany, swine, OIE 20091211.4220
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (38): Mexico, swine, OIE 20091211.4214
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (37): USA (OR, CA) feline 20091211.4213
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (36): USA (CO) 20091209.4192
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (35): Italy, swine, OIE 20091205.4144
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (34): UK (England) 20091204.4141
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (33): USA (VA, CA) 20091204.4139
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(31): Finland, swine, OIE 20091201.4106
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(29): Indonesia, swine 20091127.4071
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (24): USA, OIE 20091107.3857
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (23): Taiwan, OIE 20091106.3840
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (22): USA, swine 20091106.3834
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (19): Iceland swine, OIE 20091028.3737
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (17):
Japan (OS) swine, OIE 20091022.3635
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (13): USA swine, conf. 20091020.3600
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (12): USA swine, susp 20091019.3592
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health (11): Norway 20091019.3589
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health (10): Ireland 20091002.3427
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (09): UK (NI) swine, OIE 20090918.3280
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(08): Singapore, swine 20090904.3114
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(06): Canada, swine 20090828.3027
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(05): Austr., swine 20090826.2999
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(02): Austr., swine 20090820.2951
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health: Canada (QC) 20090729.2661
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (17), Argentina, OIE 20090703.2401
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (16), Argentina, swine, OIE 20090626.2322
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (13) swine,
Canada, origin, RFI 20090615.2215
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (12) swine trial inf. 20090605.2088
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (11) swine trial inf. 20090604.2067
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (10) swine, Canada, cull 20090514.1813
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (09), swine, Canada 20090513.1790
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (08), food safety, FAO/OIE/WHO 20090507.1710
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (07), swine, Canada, OIE 20090506.1691
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (06), Canada, OIE 20090505.1683
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (05), swine, Canada, FAO 20090505.1680
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (04), infected swine, Canada 20090502.1653]
....................arn/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at.
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
############################################################
******************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
Date: Fri 29 Jan 2010
Source: USAgNet via wisconsinagconnection.com [edited]
France Confirms H1N1 Flu Outbreak in Turkeys
--------------------------------------------
Turkeys in a farm for Turkey Breeder Hens in
northwestern France were infected with the H1N1
flu virus, authorities in Cote d'Armor department
announced Thursday [28 Jan 2010]. Laboratory
tests have confirmed the virus in turkeys on the
farm, and the infected turkeys have been
quarantined, authorities said in a statement.
If no further spread of the virus was spotted,
the quarantine would be lifted in 7 days, and
there was no need for massive slaughter, the
statement said, citing relevant guidelines issued
by the European Union and the World Health
Organization in case of animal H1N1 flu infection.
Local health officials warned people with flu
symptoms against close contact with any animals.
The virus has been found in animals including
pigs, turkeys, cats, ferrets and dogs in a dozen
of countries [For the actual number of countries,
see commentary]. The possibility for
animal-to-animal transmission of the virus is
very limited with proper preventive measures,
said the World Organization for Animal Health.
According to the [French notification to the OIE, see
there have been 3000 cases [in the affected farm,
out of ] 8500 birds [which] have been found susceptible to the disease.
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[France has become 20th country in the list of
those which have notified to the OIE, since May
2009, the identification of "Pandemic A/H1N1
virus (2009)" in their respective animal
populations. In all the cases, the source of
infection in animals, mostly subclinical or
manifested by mild clinical signs, was regarded
or suspected to be human patients. Since the
submission of the French notification on 20 Jan
2010, 2 additional countries, namely Japan and
Serbia, have notified their 1st detected animal
cases. In Serbia, there were, reportedly, 20
cases among 10 830 "susceptible" domestic pigs;
the epidemiological comment further said: "The
disease has been detected on a commercial pig
breeding farm during regular epidemiological
control performed by the veterinary inspection.
Affected animals showed respiratory signs of the
disease and therefore, samples were taken and
sent to the laboratory for further investigation.
The source of infection is unknown."
In Japan, there were, reportedly, 164 cases
among 2445 "susceptible" domestic pigs; the
epidemiological comment said: "A worker found the
animals, which showed poor appetite, fever and
cough in the farm occasionally, and reported them
to the Livestock Hygiene Service Centre in
Yamagata prefecture on 12 Jan 2010. 10 animals
which showed clinical signs were sampled. 5 of 10
samples were found to be influenza A positive by
rapid test on 12 Jan 2010 and 7 of 10 samples
were influenza A positive by PCR on 13 Jan 2010.
There were some workers who had been infected
with influenza A virus before the outbreak. On 20
Jan 2010, the virus strains detected from 4
samples were confirmed as pandemic influenza H1N1
2009 by the National Institute of Animal Health
(NIAH). The affected farm is being under
voluntary movement restraint. Epidemiological investigation is continuing."
The full, accumulated list of countries which
have sent at least one notification to the OIE
since May 2009, counts -- as of 31 Jan 2010 --
includes 22 countries. The dates of their 1st notifications are as follows:
1. 5 May 2009: A/H1N1 influenza, Canada (Immediate notification)
2. 31 Jul 2009: Influenza A subtype H1, Australia (Immediate notification)
3. 21 Aug 2009: Influenza A H1N1, Chile (Immediate notification)
4. 18 Sep 2009: Pandemic Influenza A H1N1
(2009), United Kingdom, North Ireland (Immediate notification)
5. 29 Sep 2009: Pandemic A/H1N1 2009 virus, Ireland, (Immediate notification)
6. 12 Oct 2009: Pandemic A/H1N1 2009 virus, Norway, (Immediate notification)
7. 21 Oct 2009: Pandemic Influenza H1N1 (2009),
Japan, (Immediate notification)
8. 23 Oct 2009: Pandemic H1N1 2009, Canada, (Immediate notification)
9. 27 Oct 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 virus,
Iceland, (Immediate notification)
10. 26 Nov 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1, Indonesia, (Immediate notification)
11. 30 Nov 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009,
Finland, (Immediate notification)
12. 30 Nov 2009: 2009 pandemic A/H1N1 influenza
virus, United States of America, (Immediate notification)
13. 04 Dec 2009: Pandemic A/H1N1 virus, Italy, (Immediate notification)
14. 07 Dec 2009: 2009 Pandemic H1N1 influenza, Mexico, (Immediate notification)
15. 14 Dec 2009: Pandemic Influenza H1N1 2009,
Thailand, (Immediate notification)
16. 23 Dec 2009: Pandemic influenza H1N1, Korea
(Rep. of), (Immediate notification)
17. 23 Dec 2009: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1 2009,
Russia, (Immediate notification)
18. 09 Jan 2010: Pandemic influenza A/H1N1
(2009), Denmark, (Immediate notification)
19. 12 Jan 2010: Pandemic A/H1N1 virus, Italy, (Immediate notification)
20. 20 Jan 2010: Pandemic A/H1N1 virus (2009), France, (Immediate notification)
21. 20 Jan 2010: Pandemic influenza H1N1 (2009),
Japan, (Immediate notification)
22. 25 Jan 2010: Pandemic Influenza A H1N1
(2009), Serbia, (Immediate notification).
A Joint statement of the FAO, WHO and OIE,
originally issued on 30 Apr 2009, said:
"Influenza viruses are not known to be
transmissible to people through eating processed
pork or other food products derived from pigs.
"Heat treatments commonly used in cooking meat
(e.g., 70 C/160 F core temperature) will readily
inactivate any viruses potentially present in raw meat products.
"Pork and pork products, handled in accordance
with good hygienic practices recommended by the
WHO, Codex Alimentarius Commission, and the OIE,
will not be a source of infection.
"Authorities and consumers should ensure that
meat from sick pigs or pigs found dead are not
processed or used for human consumption under any circumstances."
The OIE encouraged members to carry out
surveillance and reporting of the presence of all
epidemiologic events of significance in animals
due to influenza viruses, as well as any other
emerging pathogen.It further stated that "it was
indicated that no evidence has suggested that
animals play any particular role in the
epidemiology or the spread of the pandemic H1N1
2009 virus among humans. Instead, investigations
led by competent national authorities point to
possible humantoanimal transmission in most
cases. For this reason, the OIE considers that it
is sufficient to certify the healthy state of
animals for international trade during the
relevant period before their exportation and
maintains its position that no specific measures,
including laboratory tests, are required for
international trade in live pigs and other
susceptible animal species and/or their products." - Mod.AS]
[see also:
Influenza pandemic (H1N1), animal (03): Denmark, porcine 20100111.0128
Influenza pandemic (H1N1), animal (02): USA, turkey 20100108.0087
Influenza pandemic (H1N1), animal (01): China, porcine, canine 20100101.0014
2009
----
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (42): USA (NC) swine 20091228.4372
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (41):
Russia (CV) swine, OIE 20091226.4353
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (40): USA (NY) canine 20091222.4305
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (39): Germany, swine, OIE 20091211.4220
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (38): Mexico, swine, OIE 20091211.4214
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (37): USA (OR, CA) feline 20091211.4213
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (36): USA (CO) 20091209.4192
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (35): Italy, swine, OIE 20091205.4144
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (34): UK (England) 20091204.4141
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (33): USA (VA, CA) 20091204.4139
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(31): Finland, swine, OIE 20091201.4106
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(29): Indonesia, swine 20091127.4071
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (24): USA, OIE 20091107.3857
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (23): Taiwan, OIE 20091106.3840
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (22): USA, swine 20091106.3834
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (19): Iceland swine, OIE 20091028.3737
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (17):
Japan (OS) swine, OIE 20091022.3635
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (13): USA swine, conf. 20091020.3600
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (12): USA swine, susp 20091019.3592
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health (11): Norway 20091019.3589
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health (10): Ireland 20091002.3427
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal (09): UK (NI) swine, OIE 20090918.3280
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(08): Singapore, swine 20090904.3114
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(06): Canada, swine 20090828.3027
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(05): Austr., swine 20090826.2999
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health
(02): Austr., swine 20090820.2951
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009, animal health: Canada (QC) 20090729.2661
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (17), Argentina, OIE 20090703.2401
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (16), Argentina, swine, OIE 20090626.2322
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (13) swine,
Canada, origin, RFI 20090615.2215
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (12) swine trial inf. 20090605.2088
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (11) swine trial inf. 20090604.2067
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (10) swine, Canada, cull 20090514.1813
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (09), swine, Canada 20090513.1790
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (08), food safety, FAO/OIE/WHO 20090507.1710
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (07), swine, Canada, OIE 20090506.1691
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (06), Canada, OIE 20090505.1683
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (05), swine, Canada, FAO 20090505.1680
Influenza A (H1N1): animal health (04), infected swine, Canada 20090502.1653]
....................arn/ejp/dk
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
############################################################
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler
HERE’S THE BEEF This feed lot in in California can accommodate up to 100,000 head of cattle.
Gary Kazanjian for The New York Times
Published: January 27, 2008
A SEA change in the consumption of a resource that Americans take for granted may be in store — something cheap, plentiful, widely enjoyed and a part of daily life. And it isn’t oil.
The two commodities share a great deal: Like oil, meat is subsidized by the federal government. Like oil, meat is subject to accelerating demand as nations become wealthier, and this, in turn, sends prices higher. Finally — like oil — meat is something people are encouraged to consume less of, as the toll exacted by industrial production increases, and becomes increasingly visible.
Global demand for meat has multiplied in recent years, encouraged by growing affluence and nourished by the proliferation of huge, confined animal feeding operations. These assembly-line meat factories consume enormous amounts of energy, pollute water supplies, generate significant greenhouse gases and require ever-increasing amounts of corn, soy and other grains, a dependency that has led to the destruction of vast swaths of the world’s tropical rain forests.
Just this week, the president of Brazil announced emergency measures to halt the burning and cutting of the country’s rain forests for crop and grazing land. In the last five months alone, the government says, 1,250 square miles were lost.
The world’s total meat supply was 71 million tons in 1961. In 2007, it was estimated to be 284 million tons. Per capita consumption has more than doubled over that period. (In the developing world, it rose twice as fast, doubling in the last 20 years.) World meat consumption is expected to double again by 2050, which one expert, Henning Steinfeld of the United Nations, says is resulting in a “relentless growth in livestock production.”
Americans eat about the same amount of meat as we have for some time, about eight ounces a day, roughly twice the global average. At about 5 percent of the world’s population, we “process” (that is, grow and kill) nearly 10 billion animals a year, more than 15 percent of the world’s total.
Growing meat (it’s hard to use the word “raising” when applied to animals in factory farms) uses so many resources that it’s a challenge to enumerate them all. But consider: an estimated 30 percent of the earth’s ice-free land is directly or indirectly involved in livestock production, according to the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization, which also estimates that livestock production generates nearly a fifth of the world’s greenhouse gases — more than transportation.
To put the energy-using demand of meat production into easy-to-understand terms, Gidon Eshel, a geophysicist at the Bard Center, and Pamela A. Martin, an assistant professor of geophysics at the University of Chicago, calculated that if Americans were to reduce meat consumption by just 20 percent it would be as if we all switched from a standard sedan — a Camry, say — to the ultra-efficient Prius. Similarly, a study last year by the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Japan estimated that 2.2 pounds of beef is responsible for the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the average European car every 155 miles, and burns enough energy to light a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days.
Grain, meat and even energy are roped together in a way that could have dire results. More meat means a corresponding increase in demand for feed, especially corn and soy, which some experts say will contribute to higher prices.
This will be inconvenient for citizens of wealthier nations, but it could have tragic consequences for those of poorer ones, especially if higher prices for feed divert production away from food crops. The demand for ethanol is already pushing up prices, and explains, in part, the 40 percent rise last year in the food price index calculated by the United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization.
Though some 800 million people on the planet now suffer from hunger or malnutrition, the majority of corn and soy grown in the world feeds cattle, pigs and chickens. This despite the inherent inefficiencies: about two to five times more grain is required to produce the same amount of calories through livestock as through direct grain consumption, according to Rosamond Naylor, an associate professor of economics at Stanford University. It is as much as 10 times more in the case of grain-fed beef in the United States.
The environmental impact of growing so much grain for animal feed is profound. Agriculture in the United States — much of which now serves the demand for meat — contributes to nearly three-quarters of all water-quality problems in the nation’s rivers and streams, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Because the stomachs of cattle are meant to digest grass, not grain, cattle raised industrially thrive only in the sense that they gain weight quickly. This diet made it possible to remove cattle from their natural environment and encourage the efficiency of mass confinement and slaughter. But it causes enough health problems that administration of antibiotics is routine, so much so that it can result in antibiotic-resistant bacteria that threaten the usefulness of medicines that treat people.
Those grain-fed animals, in turn, are contributing to health problems among the world’s wealthier citizens — heart disease, some types of cancer, diabetes. The argument that meat provides useful protein makes sense, if the quantities are small. But the “you gotta eat meat” claim collapses at American levels. Even if the amount of meat we eat weren’t harmful, it’s way more than enough.
Americans are downing close to 200 pounds of meat, poultry and fish per capita per year (dairy and eggs are separate, and hardly insignificant), an increase of 50 pounds per person from 50 years ago. We each consume something like 110 grams of protein a day, about twice the federal government’s recommended allowance; of that, about 75 grams come from animal protein. (The recommended level is itself considered by many dietary experts to be higher than it needs to be.) It’s likely that most of us would do just fine on around 30 grams of protein a day, virtually all of it from plant sources.
Click on title above for rest of article;
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?pagewanted=2&fta=y
Mark Bittman, who writes the Minimalist column in the Dining In and Dining Out sections, is the author of “How to Cook Everything Vegetarian,” which was published last year. He is not a vegetarian.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
FDA Announces Class I Recall of Certain Infusion Set Needles
Huber needles used in implanted ports to withdraw blood, inject medications, and other solutions.
Washington, DC: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced a Class I recall of Exel/Exelint Huber needles, Exel/Exelint Huber Infusion Sets and Exel/Exelint “Securetouch+” Safety Huber Infusion Sets, manufactured by Nipro Medical Corporation for Exelint International Corporation.
Huber needles are used to access ports implanted under the skin of chronically ill patients for repeated access to veins for the withdrawal of blood and infusion of medication, nutritional solutions, blood products, and imaging solutions. These needles should be designed to penetrate the port without cutting and dislodging any silicone cores (or slivers) from the ports into which they are inserted.
Inspections conducted in October 2009 of Nipro facilities in Japan found that their needles “cored” in 60 to 72 percent of tests. The reason for this coring is related to design and manufacturing processes, which the FDA continues to investigate.
There are more than 2 million units impacted by this recall in distribution nationwide. Recalled needles were manufactured from January 2007 to August 2009. Units subject to recall have a lot number that begins with “07,” “08,” “09,” ; for a complete list of product codes or catalog numbers see the link below.
Following hospital reports to the FDA of leakage after accessing the port with a Huber needle (labeled to be non-coring), the agency conducted it own laboratory testing of Huber needles from multiple manufacturers. This testing showed that certain Huber needles produced cores when inserted into ports. However, at this time only needles manufactured by Nipro have shown a high frequency for coring. The agency is continuing its investigation and will update the public if there are new developments.
At this time, the FDA has not received any adverse event reports related to silicone foreign bodies released in patients from Huber needle coring.The agency received only reports of port leakage. However, because it may be very difficult for clinicians to associate adverse patient outcomes with the use of defective Huber needles, there may be under-reporting of events.
JAN-26-10: FDA Announces Class I Recall of Certain Infusion Set Needles [FDA: RECALLS]
Legal Help
If you or a loved one has suffered an adverse health event resulting from the use of this product; click on title above for legal help and a free evaluation of your possible case;
https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/submit_form.html?label=exel-exelint-huber-needles
Washington, DC: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced a Class I recall of Exel/Exelint Huber needles, Exel/Exelint Huber Infusion Sets and Exel/Exelint “Securetouch+” Safety Huber Infusion Sets, manufactured by Nipro Medical Corporation for Exelint International Corporation.
Huber needles are used to access ports implanted under the skin of chronically ill patients for repeated access to veins for the withdrawal of blood and infusion of medication, nutritional solutions, blood products, and imaging solutions. These needles should be designed to penetrate the port without cutting and dislodging any silicone cores (or slivers) from the ports into which they are inserted.
Inspections conducted in October 2009 of Nipro facilities in Japan found that their needles “cored” in 60 to 72 percent of tests. The reason for this coring is related to design and manufacturing processes, which the FDA continues to investigate.
There are more than 2 million units impacted by this recall in distribution nationwide. Recalled needles were manufactured from January 2007 to August 2009. Units subject to recall have a lot number that begins with “07,” “08,” “09,” ; for a complete list of product codes or catalog numbers see the link below.
Following hospital reports to the FDA of leakage after accessing the port with a Huber needle (labeled to be non-coring), the agency conducted it own laboratory testing of Huber needles from multiple manufacturers. This testing showed that certain Huber needles produced cores when inserted into ports. However, at this time only needles manufactured by Nipro have shown a high frequency for coring. The agency is continuing its investigation and will update the public if there are new developments.
At this time, the FDA has not received any adverse event reports related to silicone foreign bodies released in patients from Huber needle coring.The agency received only reports of port leakage. However, because it may be very difficult for clinicians to associate adverse patient outcomes with the use of defective Huber needles, there may be under-reporting of events.
JAN-26-10: FDA Announces Class I Recall of Certain Infusion Set Needles [FDA: RECALLS]
Legal Help
If you or a loved one has suffered an adverse health event resulting from the use of this product; click on title above for legal help and a free evaluation of your possible case;
https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/submit_form.html?label=exel-exelint-huber-needles
Monday, January 25, 2010
New Report Calls For Radical Food Changes
Infographic April 1, 2009 | Issue 45•14
A joint report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Trust For America's Health calls for the appointment of a food czar and the creation of a food safety agency separate from the existing Food and Drug Administration. Here are some of the report's other food safety suggestions:
Indicating on packaging whether food came off the floor or was scraped off a roller
Banning the riding of horses in factories
Sniffing milk before deciding whether to drink it; if inconclusive, having others nearby also sniff milk
Animals must undergo psychological evaluation prior to slaughter to make sure meat will not taste angry
No more ingredients from giant bins with question marks on them will be allowed
Adding "unless it enhances flavor" to the end of all existing preventive measures
Pantsless food handlers required to wear a pubic net while working
Including a copy of Upton Sinclair's The Jungle in all packages of hot dogs
Article Tools
Digg Facebook Stumbleupon via @TheOnion - New Report Calls For Radical Food Changes Twitter Reddit Email
To: From:
Print Related Articles
'Please Don't Feed The Poor' Campaign Catching On
08.05.98
FDA Approves Salmonella
03.10.09
Recent Infographics
New GM-Segway Vehicle Coming
04.15.09 | Issue 45•16
Celebrity Tax Deductions
04.07.09 | Issue 45•15
The Controversial AIG Bonuses
Study Reports Deaths Due to H1N1 Vaccines Low in Number
INFLUENZA PANDEMIC (H1N1) (08): USA (VACCINE SAFETY), MONGOLIA
**************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
In this update:
[1] USA (vaccine safety)
[2] Mongolia
****
[1] USA (vaccine safety)
Date: Sat 16 Jan 2010
Source: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) [edited]
Summary of 2009 Monovalent H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Data � VAERS:
Data through 8 Jan 2010
-----------------------
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the FDA (Food
and Drug Administration) provide weekly updates on our vaccine safety
monitoring activities in an effort to put the data that are publicly
available through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
website,
() and the CDC's website, WONDER
() in context. The following
information summarizes adverse event reports to VAERS after the
administration of [pandemic] 2009 H1N1 monovalent influenza vaccine
(either by nasal spray or injection).
An adverse event is a health problem that is reported after someone
gets a vaccine or medicine. Note that persons may experience adverse
events shortly after vaccination which may or may not be caused by the
vaccine. While VAERS is an important system for helping to find
potential signs, VAERS is primarily used to detect signals that may
require further investigation, but is not able to determine if an
adverse event was caused by vaccination.
VAERS Summary:
--------------
- As of 8 Jan 2010, more than 110 million doses of [pandemic] 2009
H1N1 vaccine had been shipped to vaccination providers in the United
States, although the precise number of vaccines administered is unknown.
- As of 8 Jan 2010, VAERS had received 7814 adverse event reports
following 2009 monovalent H1N1 vaccination.
- The vast majority (94 percent) of adverse events reported to VAERS
after receiving the 2009 monovalent H1N1 vaccine are classified as
"non-serious" (e.g., soreness at the vaccine injection site).
- Of the 7814 reports, 477 (6 percent) were reports that were
classified as "serious" health events (defined as life threatening or
resulting in death, major disability, abnormal conditions at birth,
hospitalization, or extension of an existing hospitalization)*.
- The percentage of reports involving what would be considered serious
health events is not different between 2009 H1N1 and seasonal
influenza vaccines. Additionally, no new or unusual events or pattern
of adverse events have emerged.
- VAERS reports continue to be monitored as more vaccine is administered.
- Among the 477 reports of serious health events, there were 33
reports of death.
- As with all reports of serious adverse events and deaths, the 33
VAERS reports that involve deaths are under review by the CDC, the FDA
and the states where the reported deaths occurred. Preliminary
findings do not indicate a common cause or pattern (such as
similarities in age, gender, geographic location, illness surrounding
death, or underlying medical conditions) to suggest that these deaths
were associated with the vaccine. These cases are under further review
pending additional medical records (e.g., autopsy reports, medical
files).
- VAERS has received 46 reports of Guillian-Barre syndrome (GBS), for
which follow-up assessments are underway. In the United States, about
80-160 cases of GBS are expected to occur each week, regardless of
vaccination.
VAERS Limitations
-----------------
When reviewing data from VAERS, please keep in mind what the system is
designed to do and what it is unable to do:
- VAERS is a national reporting system, in which reports are submitted
voluntarily by people who think an adverse event occurred after
vaccination. VAERS does not solicit reports in any systematic way from
all people who have been vaccinated. Reports can be submitted by
anyone, including health-care providers, patients, or family members.
Because of this feature, VAERS reports may and often do include
incorrect and incomplete information. VAERS reports often lead to more
complete follow-up and review of medical records.
- VAERS staff follow-up on all serious and other selected adverse
event reports and obtain additional medical, laboratory, and/or
autopsy records when available. As a result of the follow-up/review
process, coding terms (e.g., serious or non-serious) for individual
VAERS reports may change based on the information received. These
changes are reflected in the weekly updates of VAERS data in the
WONDER database. VAERS data in WONDER should be used with caution
because numbers and conditions are often updated. Events reported in
VAERS should not be viewed as evidence that the vaccine directly
caused the event. Data does not infer causality. Further investigation
is warranted.
- Underreporting, or failure to report events, is also one of the main
limitations of VAERS. Serious medical events are more likely to be
reported than minor events.
- Most importantly, VAERS cannot determine cause-and-effect. VAERS
accepts all reports without regard to whether or not the event was
caused by the vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS does
not mean that a vaccine caused the event. It only indicates that the
event occurred some time after administration of the vaccine. Proof
that the event was caused by the vaccine is NOT required in order for
VAERS to accept the report.
- No reports are deleted from VAERS. Therefore, it is possible to have
more than one VAERS report on an individual case (e.g., a physician
and a patient may have filed separate reports for the same case).
- For all reports of serious adverse events, VAERS staff seeks
follow-up medical records on each case and medical officers review
them closely to determine if any additional action or studies may be
needed.
- The most reliable information about vaccine side effects can be
found in the manufacturers' vaccine package insert
vaccine information statements (VISs), or the Advisory Committee on
Immunizations Practices' (ACIP's ) statements on vaccines at
.
Actions taken by the CDC and the FDA
------------------------------------
- The CDC and the FDA take every adverse event report seriously and
individually review all reports of serious adverse events so that
potential problems can be quickly evaluated.
- The CDC, the FDA and their partners are using many systems to
monitor the safety of 2009 monovalent H1N1 influenza vaccine. Two
primary systems that are in use are VAERS, which is jointly operated
with the FDA, and the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Project
.
- Additionally, the CDC and the FDA are collaborating with various
agencies, departments (e.g., Departments of Defense and Veterans
Affairs), and other partners (e.g., professional organizations,
academic institutions) to conduct surveillance of adverse events
().
- These federal agencies and departments, in cooperation with state
and local health departments, healthcare providers, and other partners
work closely with the CDC to monitor the safety of all vaccines
licensed for use in the United States, including 2009 H1N1 and
seasonal influenza vaccines.
- In an effort to be able to provide accurate and timely data on the
safety of the [pandemic] 2009 monovalent H1N1 influenza vaccine, the
federal government, along with local, professional, and academic
partners, has enhanced the existing vaccine safety monitoring systems
().
- The National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) created the H1N1
Vaccine Safety Risk Assessment Working Group to review 2009 H1N1
vaccine safety data
. This working
group of outside experts will conduct regular, rapid reviews of
available data from the federal safety monitoring systems and present
them to the NVAC and federal leadership for appropriate policy action
and follow up.
- A summary of the Federal Plans to Monitor Immunization Safety for
the Pandemic 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccination Program is available at
.
Facts about VAERS
-----------------
- VAERS is a program that is jointly administered by the CDC's
Immunization Safety Office and the FDA. VAERS receives information
from different sources (vaccine recipients, parents, other family
members, doctors, other health-care workers, and the vaccine
manufacturer) across the United States who choose to report an adverse
event occurring after vaccination. VAERS is designed to identify
potential adverse events that warrant additional study.
- Serious adverse event and other selected reports are reviewed by
medical officers, nurses, and trained staff at both the FDA and the
CDC. VAERS receives reports of many events that occur following
immunization. It serves as an early warning system that can detect
patterns in reports and determine whether further investigation is
necessary.
- An adverse event is a health problem that is reported after someone
gets a vaccine or medicine. It may or may not have been caused by the
vaccine or medicine. Some of these events may occur by chance or
during the period following vaccination, while others may actually be
caused by vaccination.
- Anyone who thinks that they may have had an adverse event after
receiving 2009 monovalent H1N1 influenza vaccine (or any vaccine)
should file a VAERS report. This can be done online, by regular mail,
or by fax.
[An adverse event, as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations, is
considered serious if it is life threatening, or results in death, a
persistent or significant disability or incapacity, congenital anomaly
or birth defect, hospitalization, or prolongation of existing
hospitalization.]
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[Taking into consideration the caveats expressed in the preceding
document it is clear that the rate of vaccine adverse events (VAE)
during the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination campaign is comparable to
that observed during the course of seasonal influenza vaccination. The
number of Guillain-Barre syndrome cases recorded is less than the
weekly average expected in the USA irrespective of vaccination. There
is no evidence that the 33 deaths recorded had any connection to the
vaccine. During the course of vaccination of 100 million people there
are likely to be a small number of coincidental deaths. Although not
noted in this document, it must be presumed that the mode of
vaccination and the origin of the vaccine were not causes for concern.
- Mods.JW/CP]
******
[2] Pandemic (H1N1) - Mongolia
Date: Fri 15 Jan 2010
Source: UB Post, Ministry of Health statement [edited]
H1N1 Mongolian Update
---------------------
According to the Ministry of Health [of Mongolia], the number of
laboratory-confirmed cases of H1N1 has reached 1259. The death toll
caused by the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus has now reached 29. Of those
deaths, 15 were recorded in Ulaanbaatar City, 5 in Uvurkhangai, 2 in
Dornogobi and one in Arkhangai, Bulgan, Sukhbaatar, Dundgobi and
Bayan-ulgii provinces each.
As we previously reported, the WHO delivered 100 thousand doses of
[pandemic] H1N1 vaccine. In the 1st phase, vaccines were planned to be
provided to pregnant women. Accordingly, the districts' united
hospitals are currently providing vaccines to pregnant women. Children
were immunized with 60 thousand doses vaccine for A subtype
[pandemic?] influenza H1N1 virus.
32 thousand doses of vaccine were divided among public servants and
starting since yesterday [14 Jan 2010], the General Emergency Agency
and the State Professional Control Agency's staff were involved in the
vaccination.
And beginning today [15 Jan 2010], newsmen who are at constant risk of
infection because of their regular communication with the public are
now being vaccinated. According the Ministry of Health, 270
journalists will be involved in the vaccination.
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[Identification of journalists as a priority group for vaccination is
an unusual decision. A map of Mongolia showing the capital Ulaanbaatar
and the other cities can be accessed at:
[see also:
2009
----
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (123): vaccine safety 20091205.4152
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (112): Canada (MB), vaccine reaction
20091121.4009
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (67): vaccine delivery 20091011.3515
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (63): USA military vaccine 20091002.3437
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (55): vaccine formulation 20090925.3359
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (54): vaccine availability 20090921.3325
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (53): vaccine donation 20090919.3290
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (49): FDA vaccine update 20090917.3254
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (21): vaccine prioriities 20090730.2669
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (11): vaccine issues 20090722.2595
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (10): vaccine 20090720.2577
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (05): vaccine 20090716.2540
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (03): vaccine 20090713.2505]
......................cp/ejp/jw
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at.
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
**************************************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
In this update:
[1] USA (vaccine safety)
[2] Mongolia
****
[1] USA (vaccine safety)
Date: Sat 16 Jan 2010
Source: Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) [edited]
Summary of 2009 Monovalent H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Data � VAERS:
Data through 8 Jan 2010
-----------------------
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the FDA (Food
and Drug Administration) provide weekly updates on our vaccine safety
monitoring activities in an effort to put the data that are publicly
available through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
website,
(
(
information summarizes adverse event reports to VAERS after the
administration of [pandemic] 2009 H1N1 monovalent influenza vaccine
(either by nasal spray or injection).
An adverse event is a health problem that is reported after someone
gets a vaccine or medicine. Note that persons may experience adverse
events shortly after vaccination which may or may not be caused by the
vaccine. While VAERS is an important system for helping to find
potential signs, VAERS is primarily used to detect signals that may
require further investigation, but is not able to determine if an
adverse event was caused by vaccination.
VAERS Summary:
--------------
- As of 8 Jan 2010, more than 110 million doses of [pandemic] 2009
H1N1 vaccine had been shipped to vaccination providers in the United
States, although the precise number of vaccines administered is unknown.
- As of 8 Jan 2010, VAERS had received 7814 adverse event reports
following 2009 monovalent H1N1 vaccination.
- The vast majority (94 percent) of adverse events reported to VAERS
after receiving the 2009 monovalent H1N1 vaccine are classified as
"non-serious" (e.g., soreness at the vaccine injection site).
- Of the 7814 reports, 477 (6 percent) were reports that were
classified as "serious" health events (defined as life threatening or
resulting in death, major disability, abnormal conditions at birth,
hospitalization, or extension of an existing hospitalization)*.
- The percentage of reports involving what would be considered serious
health events is not different between 2009 H1N1 and seasonal
influenza vaccines. Additionally, no new or unusual events or pattern
of adverse events have emerged.
- VAERS reports continue to be monitored as more vaccine is administered.
- Among the 477 reports of serious health events, there were 33
reports of death.
- As with all reports of serious adverse events and deaths, the 33
VAERS reports that involve deaths are under review by the CDC, the FDA
and the states where the reported deaths occurred. Preliminary
findings do not indicate a common cause or pattern (such as
similarities in age, gender, geographic location, illness surrounding
death, or underlying medical conditions) to suggest that these deaths
were associated with the vaccine. These cases are under further review
pending additional medical records (e.g., autopsy reports, medical
files).
- VAERS has received 46 reports of Guillian-Barre syndrome (GBS), for
which follow-up assessments are underway. In the United States, about
80-160 cases of GBS are expected to occur each week, regardless of
vaccination.
VAERS Limitations
-----------------
When reviewing data from VAERS, please keep in mind what the system is
designed to do and what it is unable to do:
- VAERS is a national reporting system, in which reports are submitted
voluntarily by people who think an adverse event occurred after
vaccination. VAERS does not solicit reports in any systematic way from
all people who have been vaccinated. Reports can be submitted by
anyone, including health-care providers, patients, or family members.
Because of this feature, VAERS reports may and often do include
incorrect and incomplete information. VAERS reports often lead to more
complete follow-up and review of medical records.
- VAERS staff follow-up on all serious and other selected adverse
event reports and obtain additional medical, laboratory, and/or
autopsy records when available. As a result of the follow-up/review
process, coding terms (e.g., serious or non-serious) for individual
VAERS reports may change based on the information received. These
changes are reflected in the weekly updates of VAERS data in the
WONDER database. VAERS data in WONDER should be used with caution
because numbers and conditions are often updated. Events reported in
VAERS should not be viewed as evidence that the vaccine directly
caused the event. Data does not infer causality. Further investigation
is warranted.
- Underreporting, or failure to report events, is also one of the main
limitations of VAERS. Serious medical events are more likely to be
reported than minor events.
- Most importantly, VAERS cannot determine cause-and-effect. VAERS
accepts all reports without regard to whether or not the event was
caused by the vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS does
not mean that a vaccine caused the event. It only indicates that the
event occurred some time after administration of the vaccine. Proof
that the event was caused by the vaccine is NOT required in order for
VAERS to accept the report.
- No reports are deleted from VAERS. Therefore, it is possible to have
more than one VAERS report on an individual case (e.g., a physician
and a patient may have filed separate reports for the same case).
- For all reports of serious adverse events, VAERS staff seeks
follow-up medical records on each case and medical officers review
them closely to determine if any additional action or studies may be
needed.
- The most reliable information about vaccine side effects can be
found in the manufacturers' vaccine package insert
vaccine information statements (VISs), or the Advisory Committee on
Immunizations Practices' (ACIP's ) statements on vaccines at
Actions taken by the CDC and the FDA
------------------------------------
- The CDC and the FDA take every adverse event report seriously and
individually review all reports of serious adverse events so that
potential problems can be quickly evaluated.
- The CDC, the FDA and their partners are using many systems to
monitor the safety of 2009 monovalent H1N1 influenza vaccine. Two
primary systems that are in use are VAERS, which is jointly operated
with the FDA, and the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Project
- Additionally, the CDC and the FDA are collaborating with various
agencies, departments (e.g., Departments of Defense and Veterans
Affairs), and other partners (e.g., professional organizations,
academic institutions) to conduct surveillance of adverse events
(
- These federal agencies and departments, in cooperation with state
and local health departments, healthcare providers, and other partners
work closely with the CDC to monitor the safety of all vaccines
licensed for use in the United States, including 2009 H1N1 and
seasonal influenza vaccines.
- In an effort to be able to provide accurate and timely data on the
safety of the [pandemic] 2009 monovalent H1N1 influenza vaccine, the
federal government, along with local, professional, and academic
partners, has enhanced the existing vaccine safety monitoring systems
(
- The National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) created the H1N1
Vaccine Safety Risk Assessment Working Group to review 2009 H1N1
vaccine safety data
group of outside experts will conduct regular, rapid reviews of
available data from the federal safety monitoring systems and present
them to the NVAC and federal leadership for appropriate policy action
and follow up.
- A summary of the Federal Plans to Monitor Immunization Safety for
the Pandemic 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccination Program is available at
Facts about VAERS
-----------------
- VAERS is a program that is jointly administered by the CDC's
Immunization Safety Office and the FDA. VAERS receives information
from different sources (vaccine recipients, parents, other family
members, doctors, other health-care workers, and the vaccine
manufacturer) across the United States who choose to report an adverse
event occurring after vaccination. VAERS is designed to identify
potential adverse events that warrant additional study.
- Serious adverse event and other selected reports are reviewed by
medical officers, nurses, and trained staff at both the FDA and the
CDC. VAERS receives reports of many events that occur following
immunization. It serves as an early warning system that can detect
patterns in reports and determine whether further investigation is
necessary.
- An adverse event is a health problem that is reported after someone
gets a vaccine or medicine. It may or may not have been caused by the
vaccine or medicine. Some of these events may occur by chance or
during the period following vaccination, while others may actually be
caused by vaccination.
- Anyone who thinks that they may have had an adverse event after
receiving 2009 monovalent H1N1 influenza vaccine (or any vaccine)
should file a VAERS report. This can be done online, by regular mail,
or by fax.
[An adverse event, as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations, is
considered serious if it is life threatening, or results in death, a
persistent or significant disability or incapacity, congenital anomaly
or birth defect, hospitalization, or prolongation of existing
hospitalization.]
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[Taking into consideration the caveats expressed in the preceding
document it is clear that the rate of vaccine adverse events (VAE)
during the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination campaign is comparable to
that observed during the course of seasonal influenza vaccination. The
number of Guillain-Barre syndrome cases recorded is less than the
weekly average expected in the USA irrespective of vaccination. There
is no evidence that the 33 deaths recorded had any connection to the
vaccine. During the course of vaccination of 100 million people there
are likely to be a small number of coincidental deaths. Although not
noted in this document, it must be presumed that the mode of
vaccination and the origin of the vaccine were not causes for concern.
- Mods.JW/CP]
******
[2] Pandemic (H1N1) - Mongolia
Date: Fri 15 Jan 2010
Source: UB Post, Ministry of Health statement [edited]
H1N1 Mongolian Update
---------------------
According to the Ministry of Health [of Mongolia], the number of
laboratory-confirmed cases of H1N1 has reached 1259. The death toll
caused by the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus has now reached 29. Of those
deaths, 15 were recorded in Ulaanbaatar City, 5 in Uvurkhangai, 2 in
Dornogobi and one in Arkhangai, Bulgan, Sukhbaatar, Dundgobi and
Bayan-ulgii provinces each.
As we previously reported, the WHO delivered 100 thousand doses of
[pandemic] H1N1 vaccine. In the 1st phase, vaccines were planned to be
provided to pregnant women. Accordingly, the districts' united
hospitals are currently providing vaccines to pregnant women. Children
were immunized with 60 thousand doses vaccine for A subtype
[pandemic?] influenza H1N1 virus.
32 thousand doses of vaccine were divided among public servants and
starting since yesterday [14 Jan 2010], the General Emergency Agency
and the State Professional Control Agency's staff were involved in the
vaccination.
And beginning today [15 Jan 2010], newsmen who are at constant risk of
infection because of their regular communication with the public are
now being vaccinated. According the Ministry of Health, 270
journalists will be involved in the vaccination.
--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
[Identification of journalists as a priority group for vaccination is
an unusual decision. A map of Mongolia showing the capital Ulaanbaatar
and the other cities can be accessed at:
[see also:
2009
----
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (123): vaccine safety 20091205.4152
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (112): Canada (MB), vaccine reaction
20091121.4009
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (67): vaccine delivery 20091011.3515
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (63): USA military vaccine 20091002.3437
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (55): vaccine formulation 20090925.3359
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (54): vaccine availability 20090921.3325
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (53): vaccine donation 20090919.3290
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (49): FDA vaccine update 20090917.3254
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (21): vaccine prioriities 20090730.2669
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (11): vaccine issues 20090722.2595
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (10): vaccine 20090720.2577
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (05): vaccine 20090716.2540
Influenza pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (03): vaccine 20090713.2505]
......................cp/ejp/jw
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Corporate Threats to Our Food Supply
Looming Before Us: Corporate Threats to Your Food Supply
posted 1/23/2010 2:17:27 PM | 0 kudos what's this?
report abuse
moon_watcher53
Dr. Shiv Chopra was a drug company insider, and also worked for what is now Health Canada -- the Canadian equivalent of the FDA. He’s acquired an enormous amount of expertise about vaccines, which you can hear in the first part of our interview, and also about the food supply.
In this second interview, Dr. Chopra shares his knowledge about food issues that affect every single one of us.
Sources:
Dr. Shiv Chopra Interview Part 1
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
I am very excited to share this second interview with all of you. Dr. Chopra is an insider; he was hired by the drug companies and worked with vaccine development in Europe. He has also worked for the Canadian government, in the equivalent of the FDA. He was a senior scientific advisor for what is now Health Canada for 20 years, working primarily in vaccines and antibiotics.
However, Dr. Chopra is also very knowledgeable and passionate about the issues threatening the food supply, and his sentiments echo my own very closely.
As Small Farms Disappear, the Food System is Crumbling
Most “farming” today is nothing like the small farming of our ancestors. Food production on a massive, corporate level has taken over the natural farming practices that thrived for hundreds of years. As Dr. Chopra said:
“Look at our food supply in Canada and the United States since they were established 200-300 years ago until they started to turn into this intensive industrial farming.
Until then, they were the happiest lands anywhere on earth because food was pristine, pure and it was doing well -- and there was a lot of land and water. Everything was good.
And then came the mechanization -- the chemicalization -- and now it’s come to the elimination of the family farm. How has it happened? This last thing that I’m talking about: we now no longer have family farms left, very few and very far in between.”
Those of you who are new to the natural health scene may find it surprising that the modern food system is in danger of collapsing. The food system began its dramatic decline the second the world turned away from the farming practices of our ancestors, and began to attempt to outdo nature with technology.
Now, producing food on a massive scale at the lowest price possible has taken precedence over obeying the laws of nature. The system is pushing natural systems and organisms to their limit, forcing living creatures to function as machines.
Of course, “whatever we may gain in industrial efficiency, we sacrifice in biological resilience,” Michael Pollan pointed out in Our Decrepit Food Factories.
Animals Pumped Full of Hormones and Fed Unnatural Diets
As you might suspect, food that is raised using unnatural processes often leads to unnatural responses in those who eat it. Now we are facing the reality of meat and dairy products laced with cancer-causing hormones, super-bug-creating antibiotics and new manifestations like mad cow disease.
Dr. Chopra expands:
“It first started with chemical fertilizers, and then pesticides, and then they moved on. From the pesticides, they said, “We can feed animals back to animals because only half the animal is meat and then the rest of the animal has to be wasted.”
So they picked up slaughterhouse waste and they ground it up. They picked up dogs and cats -- road kill as well -- and ground it all up. They start to feed animals back to animals that we people eat. All the animals that people ate were herbivores. We didn’t eat carnivore animals. We didn’t eat birds that prey on other birds.
So they’ve been grinding all these up and they were feeding it back to the animals until it turned into a big business. It started in Germany and spread to the UK, and then there’s mad cow disease.
Next came hormones. Hormones are also used for industrial farming for all animals to be impregnated on the same day. Then came along the bovine growth hormone (BGH) to increase milk production. That, unfortunately or fortunately, landed on my desk in 1988, and I started to ask questions. I said, “What’s this? Why are you doing that? Have you done any studies?” Monsanto, of course, had not done any studies.
Meanwhile, they passed other hormones for beef production. These hormones are sex hormones -- like a large birth control pill -- that are implanted behind the ears of cattle and left there for life. People eat that beef. Some of those hormones are synthetic and have been proven to be complete carcinogens.”
Further, raising animals in this way -- away from their natural environments and diets -- actually increases their risk of passing on a dangerous bug to you. For instance, most cows are fed grains, when their natural diet is grass. Grain diets create a much higher level of acidity in the animal’s stomach, which E. coli bacteria need to survive.
Making Food Safer With the “Five Pillars of Food Safety”
Dr. Chopra has a very interesting point, and that is if you remove the dangerous aspects of food production, it automatically makes for a much safer food supply. In essence, if you return to natural farming practices, there is no need for “organic” regulations because all food would be safe and natural.
This is how it was in the past … all food was essentially organic as a matter of course.
As Dr. Chopra explains, five of the most offending substances in the food supply are antibiotics, hormones, GMOs, pesticides and slaughterhouse waste. He says:
“If we demand to take these five substances out of the food system automatically, all food becomes natural. We don’t have to fight for it as organic; we don’t have to label. We don’t have to do anything. I call them in my book, which is called Corrupt to the Core: Memoirs of a Health Canada Whistleblower, the five pillars of food safety.
Three of those five are already banned in the European Union. The fourth, GMOs, have not yet been approved. With the fifth, Sweden has already banned some 80 pesticides. And so they’re on their way to do that.
Why would Canada and the United States not do the same thing?
Because otherwise, by loading all safety standards for food or even vaccines, we are going to import these things from China, India, Mexico, Brazil and we will be responsible.
Now we’re lowering the standards because the companies know that we don’t have the labor to produce food, drugs or anything here. It’s all going to come from those developing countries.
We have no standards -- like we know happened with melamine from China -- and we’re trying to set a standard on how much melamine can be safe. That’s ridiculous. Why should melamine be there in the first place or anything which is abnormal in the food system?
So we should be saying, “These are our standards: our food can be exported, bad food cannot be imported.”
And the whole world will begin to clean itself. Water, climate: it’s all food-dependent. If we clean up the food system, automatically everything cleans
http://www.matchdoctor.com/blog_115274/Looming_Before_Us_Corporate_Threats_to_Your_Food_Supply.html
posted 1/23/2010 2:17:27 PM | 0 kudos what's this?
report abuse
moon_watcher53
Dr. Shiv Chopra was a drug company insider, and also worked for what is now Health Canada -- the Canadian equivalent of the FDA. He’s acquired an enormous amount of expertise about vaccines, which you can hear in the first part of our interview, and also about the food supply.
In this second interview, Dr. Chopra shares his knowledge about food issues that affect every single one of us.
Sources:
Dr. Shiv Chopra Interview Part 1
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
I am very excited to share this second interview with all of you. Dr. Chopra is an insider; he was hired by the drug companies and worked with vaccine development in Europe. He has also worked for the Canadian government, in the equivalent of the FDA. He was a senior scientific advisor for what is now Health Canada for 20 years, working primarily in vaccines and antibiotics.
However, Dr. Chopra is also very knowledgeable and passionate about the issues threatening the food supply, and his sentiments echo my own very closely.
As Small Farms Disappear, the Food System is Crumbling
Most “farming” today is nothing like the small farming of our ancestors. Food production on a massive, corporate level has taken over the natural farming practices that thrived for hundreds of years. As Dr. Chopra said:
“Look at our food supply in Canada and the United States since they were established 200-300 years ago until they started to turn into this intensive industrial farming.
Until then, they were the happiest lands anywhere on earth because food was pristine, pure and it was doing well -- and there was a lot of land and water. Everything was good.
And then came the mechanization -- the chemicalization -- and now it’s come to the elimination of the family farm. How has it happened? This last thing that I’m talking about: we now no longer have family farms left, very few and very far in between.”
Those of you who are new to the natural health scene may find it surprising that the modern food system is in danger of collapsing. The food system began its dramatic decline the second the world turned away from the farming practices of our ancestors, and began to attempt to outdo nature with technology.
Now, producing food on a massive scale at the lowest price possible has taken precedence over obeying the laws of nature. The system is pushing natural systems and organisms to their limit, forcing living creatures to function as machines.
Of course, “whatever we may gain in industrial efficiency, we sacrifice in biological resilience,” Michael Pollan pointed out in Our Decrepit Food Factories.
Animals Pumped Full of Hormones and Fed Unnatural Diets
As you might suspect, food that is raised using unnatural processes often leads to unnatural responses in those who eat it. Now we are facing the reality of meat and dairy products laced with cancer-causing hormones, super-bug-creating antibiotics and new manifestations like mad cow disease.
Dr. Chopra expands:
“It first started with chemical fertilizers, and then pesticides, and then they moved on. From the pesticides, they said, “We can feed animals back to animals because only half the animal is meat and then the rest of the animal has to be wasted.”
So they picked up slaughterhouse waste and they ground it up. They picked up dogs and cats -- road kill as well -- and ground it all up. They start to feed animals back to animals that we people eat. All the animals that people ate were herbivores. We didn’t eat carnivore animals. We didn’t eat birds that prey on other birds.
So they’ve been grinding all these up and they were feeding it back to the animals until it turned into a big business. It started in Germany and spread to the UK, and then there’s mad cow disease.
Next came hormones. Hormones are also used for industrial farming for all animals to be impregnated on the same day. Then came along the bovine growth hormone (BGH) to increase milk production. That, unfortunately or fortunately, landed on my desk in 1988, and I started to ask questions. I said, “What’s this? Why are you doing that? Have you done any studies?” Monsanto, of course, had not done any studies.
Meanwhile, they passed other hormones for beef production. These hormones are sex hormones -- like a large birth control pill -- that are implanted behind the ears of cattle and left there for life. People eat that beef. Some of those hormones are synthetic and have been proven to be complete carcinogens.”
Further, raising animals in this way -- away from their natural environments and diets -- actually increases their risk of passing on a dangerous bug to you. For instance, most cows are fed grains, when their natural diet is grass. Grain diets create a much higher level of acidity in the animal’s stomach, which E. coli bacteria need to survive.
Making Food Safer With the “Five Pillars of Food Safety”
Dr. Chopra has a very interesting point, and that is if you remove the dangerous aspects of food production, it automatically makes for a much safer food supply. In essence, if you return to natural farming practices, there is no need for “organic” regulations because all food would be safe and natural.
This is how it was in the past … all food was essentially organic as a matter of course.
As Dr. Chopra explains, five of the most offending substances in the food supply are antibiotics, hormones, GMOs, pesticides and slaughterhouse waste. He says:
“If we demand to take these five substances out of the food system automatically, all food becomes natural. We don’t have to fight for it as organic; we don’t have to label. We don’t have to do anything. I call them in my book, which is called Corrupt to the Core: Memoirs of a Health Canada Whistleblower, the five pillars of food safety.
Three of those five are already banned in the European Union. The fourth, GMOs, have not yet been approved. With the fifth, Sweden has already banned some 80 pesticides. And so they’re on their way to do that.
Why would Canada and the United States not do the same thing?
Because otherwise, by loading all safety standards for food or even vaccines, we are going to import these things from China, India, Mexico, Brazil and we will be responsible.
Now we’re lowering the standards because the companies know that we don’t have the labor to produce food, drugs or anything here. It’s all going to come from those developing countries.
We have no standards -- like we know happened with melamine from China -- and we’re trying to set a standard on how much melamine can be safe. That’s ridiculous. Why should melamine be there in the first place or anything which is abnormal in the food system?
So we should be saying, “These are our standards: our food can be exported, bad food cannot be imported.”
And the whole world will begin to clean itself. Water, climate: it’s all food-dependent. If we clean up the food system, automatically everything cleans
http://www.matchdoctor.com/blog_115274/Looming_Before_Us_Corporate_Threats_to_Your_Food_Supply.html
Monday, December 21, 2009
EU Report: MRSA Widespread on Pig Farms
STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS (MRSA), PORCINE - EUROPE: SURVEY
***********************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
[1]
Date: Tue 24 Nov 2009
Source: EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) press release [edited]
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has published the 1st
EU-wide survey on MRSA (Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus
aureus_) in breeding pigs. The results indicate that MRSA, a
bacterium resistant to many antibiotics, is commonly detected in
holdings with breeding pigs in some EU Member States. The survey
provides estimates of its occurrence and makes recommendations for
further monitoring and investigation of the causes and implications
of MRSA findings in pig holdings in the EU.
The survey was carried out in 24 Member States, 17 of which found
some type of MRSA in their holdings with breeding pigs and 7 none at
all. On average, different types of MRSA were found in one out of 4
holdings with breeding pigs across the EU, but the survey also says
that figures vary greatly between Member States. MRSA ST398 was the
most reported type of MRSA among the holdings with breeding pigs in
the EU; some Member States also reported other types, but their
prevalence was much lower.
MRSA is a major concern for public health and its various types are
recognised as an important cause of hospital-acquired (or nosocomial)
infections in humans. The specific type MRSA ST398 has been
identified in some domestic animals and is considered an occupational
health risk for farmers, veterinarians and their families, who may
become exposed to it through direct or indirect contact with these
animals. In an opinion published earlier this year [2009], EFSA's
Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Panel assessed the public health
significance of MRSA in animals and food and concluded that the MRSA
ST398 strain is less likely to contribute to the spread of MRSA in
hospitals than other types carried by humans. The Panel also said
that there is currently no evidence that MRSA ST398 can be
transmitted to humans by eating or handling contaminated food.
In the survey published today [24 Nov 2009], EFSA recommends
monitoring of pigs and other food producing animals for MRSA. It also
says further research should be carried out so that the reasons for
differences in the prevalence of MRSA in the various Member States
can be identified and used to propose options on possible control
measures.
Note to editors:
The _Staphylococcus aureus_ is a bacterium that can be persistently
or intermittently carried by healthy humans and is a very common
cause of minor skin infections that usually do not require treatment.
In patients in hospitals, _Staphylococcus aureus_ is a common cause
of hospital-acquired infections. Its variant Methicillin-Resistant
_Staphylococcus aureus_ (MRSA) emerged in the 1970s and is now often
found in hospitals in many European Member States. MRSA is resistant
to many commonly used antibiotics. In recent years, clones of MRSA
have evolved outside the hospitals, causing infections among people
who have no connection with hospitals. Most recently MRSA has also
been detected in several farm animal species.
EFSA's Zoonoses Unit monitors and analyses the situation on zoonoses,
zoonotic agents, antimicrobial resistance, microbiological
contaminants and food-borne outbreaks across Europe. The Unit is
supported by a Task Force on Zoonoses Data Collection consisting of a
pan-European network of national representatives of Member States,
other reporting countries, as well as World Health Organisation (WHO)
and World organisation for animal health (OIE). They gather each year
data in their respective countries.
EFSA's BIOHAZ Panel provides scientific advice on biological hazards
in relation to food safety and food-borne diseases. This covers
food-borne zoonoses (animal diseases transmissible to humans),
Transmissible spongiform Encephalopathies (BSE/TSEs), food
microbiology, food hygiene and associated waste management issues.
The Panel's risk assessment work helps to provide a sound foundation
for European policies and legislation and supports risk managers in
taking effective and timely decisions.
--
Communicated by:
Sabine Zentis
Castleview Pedigree English Longhorns
Gut Laach 52385 Nideggen, Germany
******
[2]
Date: Tue 24 Nov 2009
Source: Federal (German) Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR): Press
release 31/2009 [edited]
Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_ (MRSA) are widespread
in pig breeding stocks in Germany. The results of a nationwide study
by BfR confirm the findings of earlier studies in Germany and other
EU Member States. They are part of a study conducted last year [2008]
in pig breeding stocks in the European Union. The results of the EU
study were published today [24 Nov 2009] by the European Food Safety
Authority (EFSA) [see item 1 above]. The BfR findings for Germany
show: MRSA was detected in the shed dust of 84 out of the 201 pig
breeding stocks examined (41.8 percent). People who come into contact
with pigs through their work are frequently carriers of this germ.
"Based on all the information available to us, the risk of infection
from pork-containing food is very low," says BfR President Professor
Dr. Andreas Hensel. In any case, meat should always be prepared with
careful attention to kitchen hygiene and only eaten after having been
thoroughly cooked through. This i!
nactivates any potential pathogens.
Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_ are widespread
pathogens. People mainly become infected with this germ in hospital.
As these pathogens are resistant to numerous antibiotics, infections
are very difficult to treat. Certain types of this bug may also lead
to infections outside hospitals.
Almost all the germs detected in 2008 in pig breeding stocks belong
to the ST398 type, which is common in livestock. Up to now, it has
only been detected very rarely in infected individuals in hospitals.
However, it is also found in individuals who have professional
dealings with livestock. This group includes farmers, vets and
slaughterhouse staff. Although this type of MRSA has only rarely led
to cases of disease in humans and animals up to now, the Hospital
Hygiene Committee of the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) recommends
testing individuals from these groups for the pathogen when they are
admitted to hospital. This would avoid the spread of the pathogen to
wounds in the case of surgery and throughout the hospital and via
this path to other patients.
Although this bug can also be detected in the meat from livestock,
the risk of contracting it from food is currently deemed to be low.
BfR and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) came to the same
conclusion in their risk assessments.
When compared with other European countries, the proportion of
MRSA-positive pig breeding stocks is relatively high in Germany.
Nonetheless, MRSA was detected in pig breeding stocks in most western
European countries that engage in intensive pig production. Future
studies must clarify the contributory factors to this situation. On
average across the 26 Member States which participated in the study,
22.4 percent of the herds stocks tested positive for MRSA. This is
revealed by the report on the EU-wide study published by EFSA today
[24 Nov 2009].
--
Communicated by:
Sabine Zentis
Castleview Pedigree English Longhorns
Gut Laach 52385 Nideggen, Germany
[BfR was established in Germany on 1 Nov 2002 to strengthen consumer
health protection, whose credibility had suffered as a consequence of
the BSE crisis. This explains why the legislator wrote into the Act
establishing BfR that it enjoys independence in its scientific
assessments. The main task of BfR is to voice an opinion on the
potential risks from food, consumer products and chemicals, and to
offer scientific advice to the federal ministries for their policy
decisions. Given the Institute's remit, the main ministries involved
are:
1. The Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection
(BMELV) (food and product safety)
2. The Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and
Nuclear Safety (BMU) (chemicals safety and contaminants in food)
3. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Affairs
(BMVBS) (transport of dangerous goods, ballast water agreement)
BfR cooperates with a number of national and international,
governmental and non-governmental agencies (FAO, WHO, OECD, etc.). It
is the national Focal Point of the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA)
and a partner of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).
BfR sees itself as the advocate of consumer health protection in a
context in which many stakeholders make their voices heard. Based on
its risk assessments, it seeks to strengthen consumer health
protection. To this end, the Institute offers policy advice,
participates in national and international agencies and disseminates
consumer information. One important component in its risk assessment
activities is risk communication and the various forms it can take.
BfR wishes to build on these by means of various projects and events.
The focus of its health assessments is on people as consumers.
Whenever control authorities detect microbial contamination or high
levels of harmful toxicological ingredients, heavy metals or
pesticides in foods, consumer products or cosmetics, BfR's scientific
assessment expertise is in demand. In their health assessments, the
Institute's scientists assume the important task of establishing how
germs or substances reach a food or product, whether they constitute
a risk to humans and what action should then be taken. They adopt a
science-based research approach and draw on exposure assessment and
toxicological methods. - Mod.AS]
[see also:
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, animals - Europe: evaluation 20090618.2255
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, zoo elephant - USA (02): (CA) 2008 add
20090310.0993
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, zoo elephant - USA: (CA) 2008 20090307.0951
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, swine - USA: (IA, IL) 20090126.0348
2008
----
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, livestock - UK: (Scotland) 20080605.1799
Staph. aureus (MRSA), nosocomial - UK (England) 20080427.1455
Staph. aureus (MRSA), comm. acq., MSM - USA: (MA, CA) 20080119.0232
2007
----
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, porcine - Canada, USA 20071109.3640
Staph. aureus (MRSA), comm. acq., human, equine - Canada 20070108.0076]
.......................................................arn/msp/lm
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at.
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
##########################################
Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:19 am
Show Message Option
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"revoltin1"
revoltin1
Offline
Send Email
Remove Author | Ban Author
Forward | Delete Message #75 of 95 < Prev | Next >
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date
EU Study Shows MRSA Wide-Spread at Pig Farms
STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS (MRSA), PORCINE - EUROPE: SURVEY *********************************************** A ProMED-mail
***********************************************
A ProMED-mail post
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
[1]
Date: Tue 24 Nov 2009
Source: EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) press release [edited]
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has published the 1st
EU-wide survey on MRSA (Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus
aureus_) in breeding pigs. The results indicate that MRSA, a
bacterium resistant to many antibiotics, is commonly detected in
holdings with breeding pigs in some EU Member States. The survey
provides estimates of its occurrence and makes recommendations for
further monitoring and investigation of the causes and implications
of MRSA findings in pig holdings in the EU.
The survey was carried out in 24 Member States, 17 of which found
some type of MRSA in their holdings with breeding pigs and 7 none at
all. On average, different types of MRSA were found in one out of 4
holdings with breeding pigs across the EU, but the survey also says
that figures vary greatly between Member States. MRSA ST398 was the
most reported type of MRSA among the holdings with breeding pigs in
the EU; some Member States also reported other types, but their
prevalence was much lower.
MRSA is a major concern for public health and its various types are
recognised as an important cause of hospital-acquired (or nosocomial)
infections in humans. The specific type MRSA ST398 has been
identified in some domestic animals and is considered an occupational
health risk for farmers, veterinarians and their families, who may
become exposed to it through direct or indirect contact with these
animals. In an opinion published earlier this year [2009], EFSA's
Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Panel assessed the public health
significance of MRSA in animals and food and concluded that the MRSA
ST398 strain is less likely to contribute to the spread of MRSA in
hospitals than other types carried by humans. The Panel also said
that there is currently no evidence that MRSA ST398 can be
transmitted to humans by eating or handling contaminated food.
In the survey published today [24 Nov 2009], EFSA recommends
monitoring of pigs and other food producing animals for MRSA. It also
says further research should be carried out so that the reasons for
differences in the prevalence of MRSA in the various Member States
can be identified and used to propose options on possible control
measures.
Note to editors:
The _Staphylococcus aureus_ is a bacterium that can be persistently
or intermittently carried by healthy humans and is a very common
cause of minor skin infections that usually do not require treatment.
In patients in hospitals, _Staphylococcus aureus_ is a common cause
of hospital-acquired infections. Its variant Methicillin-Resistant
_Staphylococcus aureus_ (MRSA) emerged in the 1970s and is now often
found in hospitals in many European Member States. MRSA is resistant
to many commonly used antibiotics. In recent years, clones of MRSA
have evolved outside the hospitals, causing infections among people
who have no connection with hospitals. Most recently MRSA has also
been detected in several farm animal species.
EFSA's Zoonoses Unit monitors and analyses the situation on zoonoses,
zoonotic agents, antimicrobial resistance, microbiological
contaminants and food-borne outbreaks across Europe. The Unit is
supported by a Task Force on Zoonoses Data Collection consisting of a
pan-European network of national representatives of Member States,
other reporting countries, as well as World Health Organisation (WHO)
and World organisation for animal health (OIE). They gather each year
data in their respective countries.
EFSA's BIOHAZ Panel provides scientific advice on biological hazards
in relation to food safety and food-borne diseases. This covers
food-borne zoonoses (animal diseases transmissible to humans),
Transmissible spongiform Encephalopathies (BSE/TSEs), food
microbiology, food hygiene and associated waste management issues.
The Panel's risk assessment work helps to provide a sound foundation
for European policies and legislation and supports risk managers in
taking effective and timely decisions.
--
Communicated by:
Sabine Zentis
Castleview Pedigree English Longhorns
Gut Laach 52385 Nideggen, Germany
******
[2]
Date: Tue 24 Nov 2009
Source: Federal (German) Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR): Press
release 31/2009 [edited]
Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_ (MRSA) are widespread
in pig breeding stocks in Germany. The results of a nationwide study
by BfR confirm the findings of earlier studies in Germany and other
EU Member States. They are part of a study conducted last year [2008]
in pig breeding stocks in the European Union. The results of the EU
study were published today [24 Nov 2009] by the European Food Safety
Authority (EFSA) [see item 1 above]. The BfR findings for Germany
show: MRSA was detected in the shed dust of 84 out of the 201 pig
breeding stocks examined (41.8 percent). People who come into contact
with pigs through their work are frequently carriers of this germ.
"Based on all the information available to us, the risk of infection
from pork-containing food is very low," says BfR President Professor
Dr. Andreas Hensel. In any case, meat should always be prepared with
careful attention to kitchen hygiene and only eaten after having been
thoroughly cooked through. This i!
nactivates any potential pathogens.
Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_ are widespread
pathogens. People mainly become infected with this germ in hospital.
As these pathogens are resistant to numerous antibiotics, infections
are very difficult to treat. Certain types of this bug may also lead
to infections outside hospitals.
Almost all the germs detected in 2008 in pig breeding stocks belong
to the ST398 type, which is common in livestock. Up to now, it has
only been detected very rarely in infected individuals in hospitals.
However, it is also found in individuals who have professional
dealings with livestock. This group includes farmers, vets and
slaughterhouse staff. Although this type of MRSA has only rarely led
to cases of disease in humans and animals up to now, the Hospital
Hygiene Committee of the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) recommends
testing individuals from these groups for the pathogen when they are
admitted to hospital. This would avoid the spread of the pathogen to
wounds in the case of surgery and throughout the hospital and via
this path to other patients.
Although this bug can also be detected in the meat from livestock,
the risk of contracting it from food is currently deemed to be low.
BfR and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) came to the same
conclusion in their risk assessments.
When compared with other European countries, the proportion of
MRSA-positive pig breeding stocks is relatively high in Germany.
Nonetheless, MRSA was detected in pig breeding stocks in most western
European countries that engage in intensive pig production. Future
studies must clarify the contributory factors to this situation. On
average across the 26 Member States which participated in the study,
22.4 percent of the herds stocks tested positive for MRSA. This is
revealed by the report on the EU-wide study published by EFSA today
[24 Nov 2009].
--
Communicated by:
Sabine Zentis
Castleview Pedigree English Longhorns
Gut Laach 52385 Nideggen, Germany
[BfR was established in Germany on 1 Nov 2002 to strengthen consumer
health protection, whose credibility had suffered as a consequence of
the BSE crisis. This explains why the legislator wrote into the Act
establishing BfR that it enjoys independence in its scientific
assessments. The main task of BfR is to voice an opinion on the
potential risks from food, consumer products and chemicals, and to
offer scientific advice to the federal ministries for their policy
decisions. Given the Institute's remit, the main ministries involved
are:
1. The Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection
(BMELV) (food and product safety)
2. The Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and
Nuclear Safety (BMU) (chemicals safety and contaminants in food)
3. The Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Affairs
(BMVBS) (transport of dangerous goods, ballast water agreement)
BfR cooperates with a number of national and international,
governmental and non-governmental agencies (FAO, WHO, OECD, etc.). It
is the national Focal Point of the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA)
and a partner of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).
BfR sees itself as the advocate of consumer health protection in a
context in which many stakeholders make their voices heard. Based on
its risk assessments, it seeks to strengthen consumer health
protection. To this end, the Institute offers policy advice,
participates in national and international agencies and disseminates
consumer information. One important component in its risk assessment
activities is risk communication and the various forms it can take.
BfR wishes to build on these by means of various projects and events.
The focus of its health assessments is on people as consumers.
Whenever control authorities detect microbial contamination or high
levels of harmful toxicological ingredients, heavy metals or
pesticides in foods, consumer products or cosmetics, BfR's scientific
assessment expertise is in demand. In their health assessments, the
Institute's scientists assume the important task of establishing how
germs or substances reach a food or product, whether they constitute
a risk to humans and what action should then be taken. They adopt a
science-based research approach and draw on exposure assessment and
toxicological methods. - Mod.AS]
[see also:
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, animals - Europe: evaluation 20090618.2255
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, zoo elephant - USA (02): (CA) 2008 add
20090310.0993
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, zoo elephant - USA: (CA) 2008 20090307.0951
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, swine - USA: (IA, IL) 20090126.0348
2008
----
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, livestock - UK: (Scotland) 20080605.1799
Staph. aureus (MRSA), nosocomial - UK (England) 20080427.1455
Staph. aureus (MRSA), comm. acq., MSM - USA: (MA, CA) 20080119.0232
2007
----
Staph. aureus (MRSA), human, porcine - Canada, USA 20071109.3640
Staph. aureus (MRSA), comm. acq., human, equine - Canada 20070108.0076]
.......................................................arn/msp/lm
*##########################################################*
************************************************************
ProMED-mail makes every effort to verify the reports that
are posted, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information, and of any statements or opinions based
thereon, are not guaranteed. The reader assumes all risks in
using information posted or archived by ProMED-mail. ISID
and its associated service providers shall not be held
responsible for errors or omissions or held liable for any
damages incurred as a result of use or reliance upon posted
or archived material.
************************************************************
Become a ProMED-mail Premium Subscriber at
************************************************************
Visit ProMED-mail's web site at
Send all items for posting to: promed@promedmail.org
(NOT to an individual moderator). If you do not give your
full name and affiliation, it may not be posted. Send
commands to subscribe/unsubscribe, get archives, help,
etc. to: majordomo@promedmail.org. For assistance from a
human being send mail to: owner-promed@promedmail.org.
############################################################
##########################################
Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:19 am
Show Message Option
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
View Source
Use Fixed Width Font
Unwrap Lines
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"revoltin1"
revoltin1
Offline
Send Email
Remove Author | Ban Author
Forward | Delete Message #75 of 95 < Prev | Next >
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date
EU Study Shows MRSA Wide-Spread at Pig Farms
STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS (MRSA), PORCINE - EUROPE: SURVEY *********************************************** A ProMED-mail
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Fw: A Win-Lose Proposition for Farmers and Consumers Animal Rights Blog
A Win-Lose Proposition for Farmers and Consumers
Submitted by Animal Person
From the website of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture:
Washington, DC - The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) this week released a proposal to address the critical economic situation of American dairy, pork, and poultry producers, while simultaneously providing much-needed nutritional assistance to Americans facing hunger due to job loss and other economic hardships.
People whose careers involve creating, fattening, transporting and slaughtering sentient nonhumans whose parts and secretions will then be used as food are having some financial difficulties.
Along with the rest of the country.
To "help these industries survive this economic downturn and gain a solid footing for the future," NASDA is proposing a "bold solution: a plan to take extra inventories off the market to reduce supply, all while providing vital nutritious, protein-rich foods to those who are unable to afford them, which is in more demand now than ever before."
Translation? First let's deconstruct:
- The recession has caused a decrease in demand for animal products. I say stop right there, as Michael Pollan, Mark Bittman and Jonathan Safron Foer could be behind the decrease. We don't really know. We do know that a feature of a recession is that all sectors are affected in the same direction, and I don't see anyone proposing a bold solution for writers or editors.
- What if consumers have genuinely been paying attention and have realized that animal products aren't that healthy, are an environmental disaster (the way most are produced) and not sustainable and are a blatant, direct signs of the largest and longest injustice in human history? What if Meatless Mondays and all of the messages about decreasing consumption of animal products have made a difference and consumers have spoken? What if this has nothing to do with the recession or less than one might think (nothing's a tough sell)? Why the rescue plan? The market has spoken; this is supposed to be capitalism, not corporate socialism.
But all of that aside, the bold solution is: Americans who participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) would be the targeted consumers of the surplus (in addition to military food assistance programs in places like Afghanistan).
"By removing these excess products off the market, and placing them into food assistance programs, we will quickly stabilize the prices for these products, allowing the producers to break-even, or perhaps even make a profit on their farms. Simultaneously, our fellow citizens struggling to put food on their table will find themselves with more opportunities for healthy, protein-rich meals."
So people with lower incomes, who already have higher incidences of obesity and diabetes and already don't eat as well as people with higher incomes, will be the intended consumers of exactly the type of foods they don't need to be eating. And that's being done as a favor of sorts, a gift to them by the benevolent NASDA.
Perhaps just as ironic is the mission of the NASDA, which includes "protection of animal and plant health, stewardship of our environment, and promoting the vitality of our rural communities."
http://www.animalrightsblog.com/2009/12/06/a-win-lose-proposition-for-farmers-and-consumers/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AnimalRightsBlog+%28Animal+Rights+Blog%29
More Serious Adverse Reactions to H1N1 Vaccine
Jordan McFarland, a 14-year-old boy from Virginia, is weak and struggling to walk after coming down with a reported case of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) within hours after receiving the H1N1 vaccine for swine flu.
McFarland left Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children in a wheelchair nearly a week after developing severe headaches, muscle spasms and weakness in his legs following a swine flu shot.
Jordan is among the first people in the U.S. to report developing the potentially life-threatening muscle disorder after receiving the H1N1 vaccine this fall. Increased cases of GBS were found in patients who received a 1976 swine flu vaccine.
Likewise, a young woman in France has also been diagnosed with GBS after a swine flu shot. The woman, identified only as a health worker, was diagnosed with GBS six days after she received the swine flu shot, according to the French health ministry
Swedish, Japanese, and Chinese health officials have also reported a number of serious side effects, including deaths of people who received the H1N1 vaccine. In China, the Ministry of Health announced that the two people, including one teacher from Hunan province, died hours after receiving their inoculations.
Chinese health officials have pulled all vaccines manufactured in the same batch used to inoculate the teacher.
Fifty-four percent of Chinese residents reported in a China Daily survey that they would not get the H1N1 vaccine because of concerns about the shot's safety. Among those inoculated so far in China, more than 1,200 have complained of side effects ranging from sore arms, rashes, and headaches, to anaphylactic shock and sudden drops in blood pressure.
Sources:
MSNBC November 12, 2009
InfoWars.com November 13, 2009
Time November 15, 2009
ABC News November 17, 2009
The Japan Times October 25, 2009
The Digital Journal October 28, 2009
NBC Washington News November 26, 2009
Click on title above to go to original article and see comment by Dr. Mercola
McFarland left Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children in a wheelchair nearly a week after developing severe headaches, muscle spasms and weakness in his legs following a swine flu shot.
Jordan is among the first people in the U.S. to report developing the potentially life-threatening muscle disorder after receiving the H1N1 vaccine this fall. Increased cases of GBS were found in patients who received a 1976 swine flu vaccine.
Likewise, a young woman in France has also been diagnosed with GBS after a swine flu shot. The woman, identified only as a health worker, was diagnosed with GBS six days after she received the swine flu shot, according to the French health ministry
Swedish, Japanese, and Chinese health officials have also reported a number of serious side effects, including deaths of people who received the H1N1 vaccine. In China, the Ministry of Health announced that the two people, including one teacher from Hunan province, died hours after receiving their inoculations.
Chinese health officials have pulled all vaccines manufactured in the same batch used to inoculate the teacher.
Fifty-four percent of Chinese residents reported in a China Daily survey that they would not get the H1N1 vaccine because of concerns about the shot's safety. Among those inoculated so far in China, more than 1,200 have complained of side effects ranging from sore arms, rashes, and headaches, to anaphylactic shock and sudden drops in blood pressure.
Sources:
MSNBC November 12, 2009
InfoWars.com November 13, 2009
Time November 15, 2009
ABC News November 17, 2009
The Japan Times October 25, 2009
The Digital Journal October 28, 2009
NBC Washington News November 26, 2009
Click on title above to go to original article and see comment by Dr. Mercola
Sunday, December 6, 2009
1,000+ Adverse Reactions to H1N1 Vaccine
From JudicialWatch.Org;
Over 1000 Adverse Reactions to H1N1 Vaccine Since October
Last Updated: Tue, 11/24/2009 - 4:31pm
In recent months, H1N1, or swine flu, has been spreading allover the globe, raising concern and alarm. First detected in March 2009, H1N1 is already responsible for over 1,000 deaths in the U.S. alone. Worldwide, H1N1 flu has become a globalproblem, as an outbreak map created by the New England Journal of Medicine shows. While most common in the U.S. and Europe, H1N1 is also affecting much of Asia and parts of Africa. One of the biggest problems concerning H1N1 has been the lack of vaccines. Although the U.S. originally estimated that approximately 120 million doses of the vaccine would be available by mid-October, in the beginning of November only 11 million had been produced. But while the vaccine may help protect against swine flu, reports from the Centers for Disease Control suggest that the vaccine has problems of its own.
Since the vaccine began being administered in early October, there have been almost two thousand adverse events reported to the Centers for Disease Control vaccine reporting system, VAERS. Judicial Watch used the Freedom of Information Act to request copies of the VAERS. From October 1 – November 4th, there were 1,112 adverse reactions reported. The most common side effects were generally not serious and included fever (present in 240 cases) and nausea (present in 112 cases). However, there were also cases of serious and life threatening reactions. In total, 38 cases were classified as serious, and twelve were considered life threatening. There were also six people who died after receiving the vaccine, although at this time it is unknown whether the vaccine caused the deaths.
Many of the adverse reactions affected young children,including an eight year old who suffered “chills, increased [heart rate],lethargy and altered mental status…cough, nasal congestion, fever, diarrhea, sore throat, disoriented and lethargic” (ID: 362672). His condition was considered serious and he was hospitalized. Another child was hospitalized when he experienced seizures and convulsions immediately after receiving the vaccine (ID: 362926). Less than one day after vaccination, a 5 year old boy visited the ER with an aggravated “croup sounding cough.” He “could not breathe…even tried crying – he was not able to get air in his lungs…started turning blue/gray" (ID: 361270). Another five year old developed “life threatening” symptoms within one day of receiving the vaccine, including a cough, hoarseness, and a high fever (ID: 362913).
A one and a half year old baby with no pre-existing conditions was hospitalized three days after receiving the vaccine with a long list of symptoms including: “Cough, Crying, Diarrhea, Dyskinesia, Irritability, Malaise, Movement disorder, Muscle spasms, Muscle twitching, Pyrexia, Pyuria, Respiratory tract congestion, Rhinorrhoea, Screaming" (ID: 362196). Similarly, another one-year-old infant wasadmitted to the hospital three days after receiving the vaccine. He had a high fever and began sufferingseizures. His status was classified as life threatening, and he spent 10 days in the hospital (ID: 364197).
The vaccine may also be harmful during pregnancy. In one VAERS report, a woman who was eight months pregnant with healthy prenatal exams received the vaccine. Four days later, she complained of nausea and feeling warm. At the hospital, it was discovered that the baby had died. While the cause of death was unknown, the ultrasound revealed that there was “no amniotic fluid around the baby” (ID: 36299).
There was no overall similarity in serious cases, but the more common side effects included severe shortness of breathe and seizures. A 55 year-old man suffered a life threatening reaction “immediately after H1N1 vaccine…[patient] reported not feeling well, could not breathe, obvious respiratory distress, weakness, and cyanosis, elevated heart rate” (ID: 362087). Another man “developed headache that progressively got worse with facial pain” one day after receiving the H1N1 vaccine. After being admitted into the hospital, he had a seizure (ID: 363685). In an extremely serious case, A 35 year old patient with no previous medical conditions died three days after receiving the H1N1 vaccine, after being sent to the ER for “nausea, vomiting, chills, stomach cramping, diarrhea, tachypnea,hypotension, and diaphoresis.” The cause of death was “due to septic shock” and asplenia, a condition that occurs when the spleen is not functioning properly (ID: 362855).
VAERS reports also suggest that in some cases, the vaccine could be causing H1N1 flu. One woman was given the H1N1 vaccine and less than three days later she was sent to the emergency room and hospitalized, “presumed H1N1 positive, from the H1N1 vaccine.” Her condition was classified as life threatening (ID: 36285). A man who had received the vaccine went to a clinic and was diagnosed as having “more than likely – H1N1 as a result of the live virus vaccine” (ID: 361344). Another woman was hospitalized two days after vaccination, with “H1N1 suspected.”
The Department of Health and Human Services continues to monitor the vaccine but has concluded that the H1N1 vaccine is safe. Others, however, have raised questions. Barbara Loe Fischer of the National Vaccine Information Center questioned both the necessity of the vaccine and the seriousness of H1N1 itself. Fisher stated that the vaccine was overhyped, and that there was “an unprecedented campaign by the federal health officials for us to take this very seriously when the evidence is that this is not anymore serious than the season influenza.” Most people conclude that the H1N1 vaccine has the same safety rate as regular flu vaccines. Still, caution is necessary, especially in light of the reactions to the vaccine. In order to aid the public in their decisions regarding the vaccine, Judicial Watch has included all VAERS reports from October through November 7, 2009 below, and will be requesting updated reports as necessary.
Over 1000 Adverse Reactions to H1N1 Vaccine Since October
Last Updated: Tue, 11/24/2009 - 4:31pm
In recent months, H1N1, or swine flu, has been spreading allover the globe, raising concern and alarm. First detected in March 2009, H1N1 is already responsible for over 1,000 deaths in the U.S. alone. Worldwide, H1N1 flu has become a globalproblem, as an outbreak map created by the New England Journal of Medicine shows. While most common in the U.S. and Europe, H1N1 is also affecting much of Asia and parts of Africa. One of the biggest problems concerning H1N1 has been the lack of vaccines. Although the U.S. originally estimated that approximately 120 million doses of the vaccine would be available by mid-October, in the beginning of November only 11 million had been produced. But while the vaccine may help protect against swine flu, reports from the Centers for Disease Control suggest that the vaccine has problems of its own.
Since the vaccine began being administered in early October, there have been almost two thousand adverse events reported to the Centers for Disease Control vaccine reporting system, VAERS. Judicial Watch used the Freedom of Information Act to request copies of the VAERS. From October 1 – November 4th, there were 1,112 adverse reactions reported. The most common side effects were generally not serious and included fever (present in 240 cases) and nausea (present in 112 cases). However, there were also cases of serious and life threatening reactions. In total, 38 cases were classified as serious, and twelve were considered life threatening. There were also six people who died after receiving the vaccine, although at this time it is unknown whether the vaccine caused the deaths.
Many of the adverse reactions affected young children,including an eight year old who suffered “chills, increased [heart rate],lethargy and altered mental status…cough, nasal congestion, fever, diarrhea, sore throat, disoriented and lethargic” (ID: 362672). His condition was considered serious and he was hospitalized. Another child was hospitalized when he experienced seizures and convulsions immediately after receiving the vaccine (ID: 362926). Less than one day after vaccination, a 5 year old boy visited the ER with an aggravated “croup sounding cough.” He “could not breathe…even tried crying – he was not able to get air in his lungs…started turning blue/gray" (ID: 361270). Another five year old developed “life threatening” symptoms within one day of receiving the vaccine, including a cough, hoarseness, and a high fever (ID: 362913).
A one and a half year old baby with no pre-existing conditions was hospitalized three days after receiving the vaccine with a long list of symptoms including: “Cough, Crying, Diarrhea, Dyskinesia, Irritability, Malaise, Movement disorder, Muscle spasms, Muscle twitching, Pyrexia, Pyuria, Respiratory tract congestion, Rhinorrhoea, Screaming" (ID: 362196). Similarly, another one-year-old infant wasadmitted to the hospital three days after receiving the vaccine. He had a high fever and began sufferingseizures. His status was classified as life threatening, and he spent 10 days in the hospital (ID: 364197).
The vaccine may also be harmful during pregnancy. In one VAERS report, a woman who was eight months pregnant with healthy prenatal exams received the vaccine. Four days later, she complained of nausea and feeling warm. At the hospital, it was discovered that the baby had died. While the cause of death was unknown, the ultrasound revealed that there was “no amniotic fluid around the baby” (ID: 36299).
There was no overall similarity in serious cases, but the more common side effects included severe shortness of breathe and seizures. A 55 year-old man suffered a life threatening reaction “immediately after H1N1 vaccine…[patient] reported not feeling well, could not breathe, obvious respiratory distress, weakness, and cyanosis, elevated heart rate” (ID: 362087). Another man “developed headache that progressively got worse with facial pain” one day after receiving the H1N1 vaccine. After being admitted into the hospital, he had a seizure (ID: 363685). In an extremely serious case, A 35 year old patient with no previous medical conditions died three days after receiving the H1N1 vaccine, after being sent to the ER for “nausea, vomiting, chills, stomach cramping, diarrhea, tachypnea,hypotension, and diaphoresis.” The cause of death was “due to septic shock” and asplenia, a condition that occurs when the spleen is not functioning properly (ID: 362855).
VAERS reports also suggest that in some cases, the vaccine could be causing H1N1 flu. One woman was given the H1N1 vaccine and less than three days later she was sent to the emergency room and hospitalized, “presumed H1N1 positive, from the H1N1 vaccine.” Her condition was classified as life threatening (ID: 36285). A man who had received the vaccine went to a clinic and was diagnosed as having “more than likely – H1N1 as a result of the live virus vaccine” (ID: 361344). Another woman was hospitalized two days after vaccination, with “H1N1 suspected.”
The Department of Health and Human Services continues to monitor the vaccine but has concluded that the H1N1 vaccine is safe. Others, however, have raised questions. Barbara Loe Fischer of the National Vaccine Information Center questioned both the necessity of the vaccine and the seriousness of H1N1 itself. Fisher stated that the vaccine was overhyped, and that there was “an unprecedented campaign by the federal health officials for us to take this very seriously when the evidence is that this is not anymore serious than the season influenza.” Most people conclude that the H1N1 vaccine has the same safety rate as regular flu vaccines. Still, caution is necessary, especially in light of the reactions to the vaccine. In order to aid the public in their decisions regarding the vaccine, Judicial Watch has included all VAERS reports from October through November 7, 2009 below, and will be requesting updated reports as necessary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
