1
   

# 68 Wildclickers arranging a ball

 
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 07:39 am
Do you really think I can remember what I was driving in '69?

All clicked from here.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 07:59 am
Ul,

I read the peopleandplanet article and it was very interesting. Certainly the efficiency of factory farms is more than offset by other negative consequences.

I am ashamed to say that in all of my reading, it is just now that I realize that I had not come across anything that addressed the issue of the root cause of avian flu (of whatever strain).

There has been discussion of its spread, appearance in migrating wild birds, vaccines and other reactions to its appearance in your own region.

I am reasonably well read, and watch the nightly mainstream news - and I don't recall any discussion of this topic.

I can understand the poultry industry and agribusiness in general not wanting to have it out in the open, but that would not stop workers in the factory farms, investigative reporters, veterinarians and other animal health experts.

Does this idea mean that avian flu develops spontaneously and independently in factory farms all over the world? That it does not develop via any one means or place and then spreads via fecal material and nasal secretion of the birds, on the feet of workers, etc?

What are the odds of it developing in so many different places at the same time?

What makes this outbreak so much more scarier than other small and confined emergence of the flu?
Stradee indicated that it had appeared in various factory farm operations for chickens, turkeys, ducks in various years.

Why are the concepts of mutation and pandemic just being discussed in the last two or so years?
0 Replies
 
ul
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 08:36 am
It seems that a virus can develop spontaneously-
some become more virolent, some don't.

Susan,
have a look here
http://www.medindia.net/patients/patientinfo/birdflu_orginate.htm

Quote:
Fowl plague was described in 1878 as a serious disease of chickens in Italy. It was determined in 1955 that fowl plague (FP) virus is actually one of the influenza viruses. All influenza viruses affecting domestic animals (equine, swine, avian) belong to Type A, and Type A influenza virus is the most common type producing serious epidemics in humans. Types B and C do not affect domestic animals.

Another link

http://www.healthpolitics.com/program_transcript.asp?p=bird_flu#2

Quote:
"The H5N1 bird flu has infected humans and continues, as we speak, to evolve.6 It was first identified in South African wild terns in 1961. 2 It spread naturally throughout global bird populations over the next four decades, appearing dramatically in poultry populations in 2003. That outbreak occurred in eight countries in Asia - Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam - and resulted in the loss of more than 100 million domestic birds. The outbreak appeared under control until June of 2004 when it reappeared in four of the same countries and Malaysia."....


...."For one thing, studies demonstrate continued evolution.3 In response, the host range of H5N1 is expanding and is now present in pigs, horses, cats, tigers, leopards, whales and seals. 1 This, in part, has been made possible by the tremendous expansion of the domestic bird population in Asia. In China alone since the last pandemic outbreak in 1969, the number of domestic chickens has increased from 8 million to 13 billion. 6 The number of domestic pigs has also increased. Pigs, in particular, are viewed as a catalytic mixer of genetic brews. Finally, human-to-human transmission has occurred in a documented case of child to mother to aunt in Thailand. 7 But the spread stopped there, suggesting that the virus does not yet have the capability to readily jump from one human to the next...."

..."Human transmission of bird flu is predictable and therefore manageable. Failure to take action could be a mistake of historic proportions."
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 10:47 am
Thanks, Ul. I am developing a better understanding and will read the articles at the links.

Meanwhile, has anyone ever heard of light pollution? See next screen.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 10:55 am
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060318/a7091_2653.jpg

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060318/bob10.asp

"Light All Night

New images quantify a nocturnal pollutant

Ben Harder

Ansel Adams once called his photography of the nation's parklands a "blazing poetry of the real." If scientific data were verse, that description would also fit Chad Moore's pictures. Taken in dozens of national parks, mostly in the western United States, Moore's images emphasize contrast, horizon, and sky. But they aren't imitations of Adams' art. In the name of science, Moore photographs the darkness, but his subject may be in peril.

Scientists are using digital photography to document nighttime light pollution in wilderness areas. In Joshua Tree National Park, Calif., illumination (in false color at left) from San Diego, Los Angeles, and smaller communities outshines the Milky Way (center).
Duriscoe et al./NPS

Moore's data demonstrate that artificial light from urban areas penetrates deep into some of America's most remote, wild places. For species and ecosystems that have evolved with a nightly quota of darkness, light pollution can be a force of ecological disruption, other research has suggested. With the new images, ecologists can identify geographic areas where sensitive species are most likely to be affected. The inventory of images also provides a reference point for measuring future changes in light pollution, Moore says."
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:13 am
http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/060317_rhino.html

"Extinction Looms for Borneo's Rhinos

By Robert Roy Britt
LiveScience Managing Editor


A new study of Sumatran rhinos on Borneo puts the numbers of one group in the central region of the island as low as 13, a precariously small number.

The population has declined due in part to poaching.

"If this band of rhinos is to have a healthy future in Borneo the poaching must be stopped immediately," said Sybille Klenzendorf, lead biologist of World Wildlife Fund's Species Conservation Program. "Their numbers are so small that losing one or two rhinos to a poacher could upset the remaining rhinos' chances of survival." "
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:16 am
http://images.livescience.com/images/060317_coyote_04.jpg
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:17 am
sue, effeciciency for the market - a multi billion dollar a year market - causes irreversable damage to the enviornment. Animals are fed mass doses of anti-biotics and growth hormones - for good reason. Factory farms breed animal diseases.

When disease strikes factory farms, such as avian flu, there is a very productive way of dealing with profit margins. Culling. Millions of birds were destroyed in America. Killed. NOT EUTHANIZED! You can imagine the methods used for culling millions of ducks and chickens.
The cruelty alone is phenonminal.

Cattle, despite the 'precautions' taken by factory farmers, are contracting mad cow disease. Why is that? Business as usual.

Now, bush has 'decreed' factory farms will no longer be subject to enviornmental restrictions.

Personally, i'm not concerned with an avian pandemic for humans. However, nature sends warnings that humans ignore. Why? Chicken dinners, bar b q's, and advertising. You won't ever hear "good" science against the use of confined feed lots from the media. You will hear the neighbors of factory farmers complaining though - to a deaf media and imbecilic government that places profit before anything - especially enviornmental or animal health.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:17 am
http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/060316_flu_morph.htm

"Possible Path to Humans for Avian Flu Found

By Sara Goudarzi
LiveScience Staff Writer


New mutations in parts of the avian flu virus might provide a possible route for the virus to enter the human population. But scientists cautioned there was no cause for alarm.

Looking at a sample of the H5N1 virus isolated from a Vietnamese boy who died from the bird flu in 2004, researchers found a type of mutation that could provide a possible "foothold" for the virus in the human population.

The findings are detailed in the March 16 issue of the journal Science."
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:40 am
Ul,

Thanks for the links. Really interesting.

I was interested in seeing that in the first link, WHO out of Manila in 2004, was only advocating for protective clothes and equipment for poultry workers. Nothing at all about the practice itself of factory farming. This was under the link "Prevention and Control". No other avenue of prevention and control was mentioned.

"The under mentioned preventive and control measures are recommended as per the WHO guidelines:
(WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific, Manila, 26 January 2004)

1. Cullers and transporters should be provided with appropriate personal protective equipment: ........"

The second link you gave went into detail about the genetic instability of the virus: thus, the potential for change (mutation) is almost a given certainty.

Fascinating stuff.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:47 am
Stradee said:

"You won't ever hear "good" science against the use of confined feed lots from the media. "

And why not? Good science and scientists, and investigative reporters and organizations, are seldom silenced by an industry's practices unless there is an economic advantage to keeping silent.

The March 2006 issue of National Geographic has a long and detailed article, more of an expose, about mountaintop destruction for very little coal. I will see if they have any of it online.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:57 am
They only give you a little bit online.

http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0603/feature5/index.html

"The quest for Appalachian coal has led to mountaintop removal, a process that's been called "strip mining on steroids."


Get a taste of what awaits you in print from this compelling excerpt.

Coal brought people to Marfork hollow in the Appalachian Mountains of southern West Virginia. And it was coal, or rather a different way of mining it, that finally drove the people away. The last to leave was Judy Bonds.

A coal miner's daughter whose roots here go back eight generations, Bonds packed up her family and fled when she could no longer tolerate the blasting that rattled her windows, the coal soot that she suspected was clotting her grandson's lungs, and the blackwater spills that bellied-up fish in a nearby stream. Retreating to the town of Rock Creek, a few miles downstream, Bonds joined Coal River Mountain Watch, a citizens group determined to oppose surface-mining abuses.

In the years since Bonds moved, coal companies have turned to an even more aggressive mining process known as mountaintop removal. After clear-cutting a peak's forest, miners shatter its rock with high explosives. Then they scoop up the rubble in giant draglines and dump the overburden, as they call it, into a conveniently located hollow, or valley. The method was first tested in Kentucky and West Virginia in the late 1970s and has since spread to parts of Tennessee and Virginia.

"What the coal companies are doing to us and our mountains," said Bonds when she and I first met years ago, "is the best kept dirty little secret in America."

Now the secret is out. Coal companies have obliterated the summits of scores of mountains scattered throughout Appalachia, and more and more folks like Judy Bonds are decrying the environmental and social fallout of what some refer to as strip mining on steroids.

Not only is mountain topping less labor intensive than underground mining, it is also more efficient and profitable than the older form of surface mining, in which the operator stripped away the horizontal contours of a mountainside as one might peel an apple. So fast has the practice spread that there's no accurate accounting of the area affected, but surface mining in general has impacted more than 400,000 acres (160,000 hectares) in this four-state Appalachian region, including more than 1,200 miles (1,900 kilometers) of streambeds. If the practice continues until 2012, it will have squashed a piece of the American earth larger than the state of Rhode Island."
0 Replies
 
danon5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 03:40 pm
Interesting stuff re the flu - that could be real threat and should be looked at closely.

Stradee, some judges just overturned Bushes try to ease the pollution rules. see this = http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/18/politics/18enviro.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
0 Replies
 
Stradee
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:28 pm
Thanks dan! I hadn't read the article till just now - and i'm certain it will have a bearing on the legislation pending re: factory farm pollution.

and thanks everyone! sue and ul - interesting and informative also!

eh Beth ~ hmmm, what was i driving in the year 1969.

pondering

pondering

ah...recall slowly emerging from the file cabinet of me mind.

will save for new thread...........
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 05:28 am
All clicked on a chilly morn.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 05:31 am
Woodstock also was in '69.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 05:39 am
http://www.axcessnews.com/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=8698

"Gray Wolves to be Removed from Endangered Species List


By Freddie Mooche

(AXcess News) Washington - U.S. Interior Secretary Gale Norton last week proposed that the gray wolves in the Great Lakes region be removed from the endangered species list, which through that process will make it easier for ranchers to deal with the wolves.

Norton says that the population of gray wolves in the upper mid-west has expanded enough so that they are no longer in danger of extinction.

The move would ranchers the ability to shoot or trap the gray wolves, which under the endangered species act is illegal. The area Norton proposes to delist the gray wolfs from the Act covers Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan that have an estimated population of 3,800 gray wolves.

The move on Norton's part will also remove the gray wolves from bordering states, though the wolves are not considered to live there, but rogue wolves could roam into those states making them vulnerable if removed from the endangered species list.

Those bordering states affected are parts of the Dakotas, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio."
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 05:41 am
0 Replies
 
ul
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 08:12 am
Sunday- and a happy surprise- sunshine and about 50F. Very Happy The first warm day since weeks.

Unfortunately my desk is full of work Sad
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 09:05 am
aktbird57 - You and your 292 friends have supported 2,289,245.7 square feet!

Marine Wetlands habitat supported: 103,477.9 square feet.
You have supported: (0.0)
Your 292 friends have supported: (103,477.9)

American Prairie habitat supported: 49,181.1 square feet.
You have supported: (11,845.5)
Your 292 friends have supported: (37,335.6)

Rainforest habitat supported: 2,136,586.7 square feet.
You have supported: (169,222.3)
Your 292 friends have supported: (1,967,364.4)

~~~~~~~~~~~

2289245.7 square feet is equal to 52.55 acres

~~~~~~~

working on '69
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/26/2024 at 04:04:36