Tumgik
#Zoonotic diseases
ovaruling · 6 months
Text
yeah no shit!!! literally still aggressively happening
Tumblr media Tumblr media
40 notes · View notes
veganpropaganda · 27 days
Text
Livestock at multiple dairy farms across the U.S. have tested positive for bird flu — also known as highly pathogenic avian influenza, or HPAI — in an outbreak that's likely spread to at least five states.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service confirmed Friday that cows in Texas, Kansas and Michigan had been sickened by the virus, and there were presumptive positive test results for additional herds in New Mexico and Idaho.
It's the first time the disease has been found in dairy cattle, according to the American Veterinary Medical Association.
On Monday, the Texas Department of State Health Services announced that a person who was exposed to dairy cattle presumed to be infected with bird flu had also caught the virus.
It is only the second time a human in the U.S. has contracted HPAI A, or H5N1, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A person in contact with infected poultry was sickened in Colorado in 2022.
9 notes · View notes
iheartvmt · 8 months
Text
Vaccinated 28 hounds and beagles against rabies this afternoon! Hound season has begun ^.^
22 notes · View notes
acti-veg · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
135 notes · View notes
etakeh · 9 months
Text
The report, also led by NYU's Center for Environmental and Animal Protection, highlights several areas of vulnerability, including commercial farms where millions of livestock come into close contact with each other and their handlers; the wild animal trade in which animals are imported with few or no health checks; and the fur trade in which minks and other animals are bred for their coats, with little safety oversight.
A little something to look forward to!
Signed,
Your Local Fucking Ray of Sunshine
14 notes · View notes
daisylovesrumble · 2 days
Text
Bird Flu Is Infecting More Mammals. What Does That Mean for Us? - The New York Times
There has been no stopping H5N1. Avian flu viruses tend to be picky about their hosts, typically sticking to one kind of wild bird. But this one has rapidly infiltrated an astonishingly wide array of birds and animals, from squirrels and skunks to bottlenose dolphins, polar bears and, most recently, dairy cows.
The blow to sea mammals, and to dairy and poultry industries, is worrying enough. But a bigger concern, experts said, is what these developments portend: The virus is adapting to mammals, edging closer to spreading among people.
A highly pathogenic strain of H5N1 was identified in 1996 in domestic waterfowl in China. The next year, 18 people in Hong Kong became infected with the virus, and six died.
2 notes · View notes
grrlscientist · 9 days
Text
the WHO sounds alarm over human cases of bird flu, says ‘looking for new hosts’
The World Health Organization said that A (H5N1) strain has become "a global zoonotic animal pandemic"🦠 🛟
0 notes
plethoraworldatlas · 3 months
Text
SALEM, Ore.— Wildlife-advocacy and animal-protection groups sent an urgent letter today calling on Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek and state officials to address mink fur farms’ escalating threats to public health and wildlife.
The groups are asking the governor to fast-track phasing out commercial mink fur farming in Oregon to stanch the significant risk of dangerous zoonotic diseases being spread from these operations.
The groups’ letter also requests that disease surveillance and control measures quickly be put in place to help prevent the spread of viruses like COVID-19 and avian influenza, which threaten Oregonians and wildlife.
“The spread of these highly contagious, extremely deadly diseases among commercially farmed mink poses growing threats we can’t ignore anymore,” said Hannah Connor, environmental health deputy director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Gov. Kotek has to act immediately to strengthen animal disease prevention and ultimately phase out commercial mink fur farming in Oregon.”
When bred and farmed for their fur, mink pose a particularly high risk to humans because their upper respiratory tract is similar to ours, making them potentially potent “mixing vessels” for generating novel pandemic viruses. Mink fur farms are also effective reservoirs for viruses due to their tightly confined and unsanitary conditions. COVID-19 affected multiple Oregon mink fur farms in 2020 and 2021, and several mink who tested positive for the virus escaped into the wild.
“Mink on fur farms incubate diseases such as COVID-19 and avian influenza, creating the perfect conditions for new variants to jump to humans — with potentially devastating results. Mink farms risk worsening the current pandemic and ushering in the next one,” said Kate Dylewsky, assistant director of government affairs at the Animal Welfare Institute. “This public health threat is dire, and we hope that Gov. Kotek will act quickly to end mink farming in Oregon.”
In recent months, highly pathogenic avian influenza, or HPAI, has spread in European fur farms, increasing concerns among scientists about the virus mutating and spreading among humans. Farmed mink in Europe are understood to have contracted HPAI from wild birds and then rapidly infected each other with the virus.
0 notes
aarunresearcher · 3 months
Text
0 notes
tigrislili · 6 months
Text
Having worked with sheep and goats, you don't want to let them near your face, or any open skin wounds, there are too many zoonotics they can transmite to humans.
I remember years ago, a former friend had her wedding at Pine Haven Farm, and a lot of the animals had runny eyes, and open blisters. My former friend stated I should have told the farm, I stated my college degrees were not free, neither is my knowledge.
Zoonotic Diseases from Sheep/Goats
Rabies. Rabies is a severe, viral disease that can affect all mammals, including sheep and goats. ...
Contagious Ecthyma (Soremouth) ...
Ringworm (Dermatophytosis) ...
Chlamydiosis. ...
Campylobacteriosis. ...
Listeriosis. ...
Salmonella. ...
Q Fever (Query Fever, Coxiellosis)
1 note · View note
sabnews24x7 · 7 months
Link
0 notes
iheartvmt · 2 years
Text
Look who I found in a dog fecal the other day: Giardia spp!
We did the fecal because the dog had acute onset of profuse, foul-smelling, liquid diarrhea. In addition to the giardia, there's also some motile rod-shaped and spirochete bacteria swimming around. These may or may not be contributing to the GI signs; some bacteria are normal inhabitants of the gut, others are pathogenic, and some can be both depending on strain or circumstances.
We treated with metronidazole and fenbendazole to kill the giardia, bland diet and maropitant to help with the diarrhea and GI discomfort, and probiotics to help reestablish the good GI flora that will also get killed by the antibiotic. The owner was also instructed in good hygiene and environmental disinfection practices to prevent re-infection and zoonotic transmission (the zoonotic risk is low given that different strains of Giardia typically infect dogs and people, but we don't know if there are any immune compromised people in the household, so better safe than sorry).
The clinical signs quickly resolved, and the fecal was negative on follow-up.
((Sorry for the jumpy video; I had a hard time keeping these squiggly little dudes in focus and the phone lined up with the lenses at the same time 😛))
23 notes · View notes
prose2passion · 8 months
Text
0 notes
janebdean-blog · 9 months
Text
If you’ve ever been inside a slaughterhouse, you’ll see that it’s sanitary conditions are extremely similar to outdoor meat markets. Urine, feces, blood all mixed together. It’s impossible to keep them off of the meat. They’re a breeding ground for zoonotic diseases.
0 notes
thisismenow3 · 10 months
Text
We can grow meat and it’s good!
Imagine it. No unethical conditions for animals. No resulting human plagues like bird flu or mad cow. We could reduce the number of cows belching methane to just niche animal husbandry and small traditional pastoralists. We could reduce deforestation and hunting of wild animals and the resulting extinctions to make room for pasture and farms. With fixes to our electrical grid it’d be carbon neutral. They could set up grow plants/facilities in every major city and have new food ready within days. It’s boggling how much could change for the better with this, and it could all happen quickly if there was major investment.
youtube
1 note · View note
Text
Comparative Assessment of Arsenic Contamination in Raw Milk, Infant Formulas and Breast Milk
Tumblr media
Abstract
Rapidly growing urbanization and increased industrialization has led to introduction of numerous detrimental toxicants into the environment. Such toxicants which are hazardous to human health, ultimately become a part of our food chain and accumulate in human body, in levels exceeding permissible limits. One of the most common food toxicants is heavy metals out of which Arsenic ranks 1st in the list of top 20 hazardous substances. Arsenic intake has been found to induce skin, liver, bladder and lung cancers, disturb GIT, cause fatigue, arrhythmia, bruising, nerve impairment, hyperkeratosis, hyperpigmentation of skin, gangrene, cyanosis and black foot disease. Milk and milk-based products from different milch animals that make up one of the most nutritious categories of food are reported for being contaminated with Arsenic, worldwide. Arsenic is introduced in milk from human and other milk producing animals by the intake of arsenic contaminated water or through their feed. On the other hand, breast feeding is reducing day by day due to a false verdict that it is unsafe for infants whereas infant formula milk is safer, as heavy metals like arsenic become a part of human milk in areas with high arsenic content in drinking waters. Therefore, this review highlights various studies determining arsenic contamination in raw milk, infant milk formulas as well as breast milk, in an attempt to create awareness regarding which mode of infant nutrition is safest to choose
Keywords: Arsenic; Heavy Metals; Milk Contamination; Infant formulas; Breast feeding
Introduction
From farm to fork, food is subjected to numerous potential hazards of physical, chemical and microbiological nature, making it quite a challenge to ensure that the food is not at all toxic for human consumption [1,2].Toxicity is a condition when a micronutrient or additive or any toxic compound exceeds its safety limit and causes adverse health effects. The trace elements in different foods are of significant interest because of their essential (as micronutrients) or toxic nature. Although there are many potential toxins related to foodstuff but heavy metals are quite common and abundant. Heavy metals are the metals which have high density (more than 5 g/cm3) and are dangerous for human consumption if exceeding their safety limits. According to the list of “Top 20 Hazardous Substances” compiled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), heavy metals including Arsenic (As), Lead (Pb), Mercury (Hg), and Cadmium (Cd) stand on 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th position, respectively. Arsenic is of prime importance as it is a common yet potent water contaminant and from there it transfers to different food by coming in contact directly or indirectly. This heavy metal has been reported to pose multiple adverse effects on human health as well.
Milk and milk-based products make up one of the most nutritious category of foods rich in protein and minerals, a great source of calcium and magnesium, as well as trace amounts of essential elements such as iron, copper and zinc. Since, the primary form of feed at infant level to almost all ages is milk, therefore milk and milk-based products have always been valued for their significant role in body growth and development. Unfortunately, the rapidly increasing urbanization and growing industrialization have immensely polluted the environment and consequently milk and milk-based products have been highly contaminated with several toxic substances particularly heavy metals that may pose detrimental effects to human health [3]. Milk is also being contaminated with arsenic. Arsenic is introduced in milk from human and other milk producing animals by the intake of arsenic contaminated water or through their feed. This is known to exceed the safety limits i.e. 0.1 mg/ml. Breast feeding is reducing day by day due to false consideration that it is not safe for infants whereas infant formula milk is safer, as heavy metals like arsenic becomes a part of human milk in areas with high arsenic content in drinking waters. This review paper is written to shed some light on this issue and highlight the studies that indicate the arsenic contamination in milk.
Heavy Metals
Heavy metals are the metals whose specific gravity exceeds 5g/cm3 in their standard state. The most toxic heavy metals are namely Arsenic, Lead, Mercury, and Cadmium ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in the list, respectively. Presence of these heavy metals is to be measured in parts per million (ppm), and the obtained values are to be compared to the Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake (PTWI) for toxic metals as set by the FAO. Heavy metals that contaminate milk might originate from the milking utensils, milking personnel, milk processing, contaminated water used for agricultural purposes and animal fodder, as well as the immediate surroundings of milch animal [2].
Heavy Metals Toxicity
The toxicity of heavy metals results due to the longterm exposure to low contamination sources in our environment, including in the air we breathe, water and food we consume. Lead, chromium, nickel, cadmium and cobalt are the common heavy metals that might contaminate cows and other environments, disrupt milk at different levels and cause numerous problems. The contamination of milk products with heavy metals might be a consequence of the contamination of the basic cow milk that has been exposed to contaminated atmosphere including feed or poor water source. Moreover, contamination of raw milk might occur during its production. Cadmium, mercury and lead are quite hazardous to human health therefore they are referred to as a major menace to humans when consumed along with food [2]. Another study named as “Lead and Mercury in Breast Milk”, has reported the presence of Mercury in breast milk as well as bovine milk in substantially higher amounts as compared to those observed in common infant formulas. Whereas the Levels of lead in breast milk are relatively lesser than that found in milk-based infant formulas [4].
Health Risks Associated with Heavy Metals
Heavy metals belong to a class of pervasive toxicants that prevail everywhere in land, air and water. Among all the toxicants, arsenic (As) and mercury (Hg) were considered to be unusual, since they exist in a series of different chemical species with diverse toxicities to human beings [5]. Heavy metals when accumulate in the body might cause various diseases including nervous system disorders, renal failure, genetic mutations, types of cancers, neurological disorders, respiratory disorders, cardiovascular diseases, immune system weakening and infertility. Lead causes onset and development of various cancers, central nervous system disorders, anemia, renal, hepatic and cardiac damage, compromised immune system as well as weakened GIT tract. Lead can also cause encephalitis and hepatitis. Whereas Cadmium deposits in body tissues just like the liver and kidneys, causing anemia, as well as elevated blood pressure. Cadmium is also a potent carcinogen that can readily induce tumor development particularly in the prostrate and lungs.
Health Risks Linked with Arsenic
Arsenic toxicity has emerged as a worldwide health issue that has affected masses of people because of its high prevalence in land, air and water resources, as well as absorption in food crops. The maximum permissible limit for arsenic in milk established by European Union Commission is about 0.1 mg/ ml (European Union 2006). The organic forms of arsenic such as monomethylarsenic (MMA), dimethylarsenic (DMA), arsenobetaine and arsenocholinehave been observed to be relatively nontoxic in comparison to its inorganic formsarsenite (AsIII) and arsenate (AsV) that have been categorized as Type 1 carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) [6]. Comprehensive data is present to validate the oraltoxicity of inorganic arsenic along with its various carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effects. Its intake has been reported to cause generalized body fatigue, disturbed GIT, arrhythmia, bruising and nerve impairment. The most distinctive effects that are observed as a result of prolonged oral exposure of arsenic are hyperpigmentation of the skin and hyperkeratosis. Other noncarcinogenic effects might include peripheral vascular effects such as gangrene, cyanosis, blackfoot disease and various other cardiovascular effects including circulatory problems as well as increased blood pressure. Oral exposure to inorganic arsenic has also been observed to increase the risk of cancer in the skin, liver, bladder and lungs [7]. Previous century witnessed a massive, endemic disease just due to contamination of drinking water with arsenic, called Hydroarsenism Chronic Regional Endemic that is associated with a specific type of skin cancer.
A number of factors are responsible for severity of toxicity of arsenic in humans. These factors include age, sex, nutritional status, concentration, dose and duration of exposure to arsenic. Arsenic exposure during gestation period has been observed to pose detrimental effects on development of fetus through irreversible faltering of thioredoxinreductase, methyltransferases and DNA repair enzymes. Human arsenic toxicity has also been associated with epigenetic changes like DNA methylation, histone modification and RNA interference whereas chronic arsenic exposure might result in an increased risk of diabetes mellitus. Arsenic is the first metalloid which is directly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) and even induces lungs, skin and urinary bladder cancers [8,9]. Long-term exposure to As might result in arsenicosis-a term that refers to arsenic related health effects including internal cancers (lung, kidney, bladder), skin problems, skin cancers, diseases of the blood vessels of the legs and feet, hyperkeratosis, hyperpigmentation, hair hypomelanosis and mee’s lines [10]. The actual mechanism behind how arsenic induces cancers is yet not completely understood. While certain studies declare arsenic toxicity to be affective on child intelligence (e.g., perceptual reasoning, verbal comprehension and working memory) as well [11].
Arsenic in Breast Milk
Mothers’ milk is the basic source of nutrition of the offspring; therefore, it is indispensable to ensure that the composition of human milk is safe enough for the infant. Lately, the presence of lead, cadmium and mercury in human milk, has been reported as well. Due to prevalence of arsenic rich bedrock in widespread areas of the world, ground water is often detected with high concentration of arsenic and travels through the entire food chain to ultimately become a part of mother’s milk as well. Native Andeans living in a village at the northwest of Argentina have been reported with high concentrations of arsenic (200μg/l) in the drinking water. Whereas, low concentrations of arsenic were detected in the breast milk and urine of the nursing babies in relation to the high level of maternal exposure. This shows that inorganic arsenic is not found in breast milk to a significant extent. Therefore, there is a quite valid reason for long breast-feeding periods for newborns [12].
A study revealed that in Izmir, breast milk was observed to be considered toxic for suckling infants, but still less than the cow’s milk. Therefore, the point to ponder is that arsenic contamination through breast or cow’s milk is relatively higher in babies living in areas with higher thermal activity or in regions where ground water has higher arsenic concentration (Ulman, C. et al.,1998). In another study atomic absorption spectrometry was used to measure level of arsenic in 64 samples of breast milk collected from Ankara, Turkey and the arsenic level appeared to be below the limit of quantification (LOQ, 7.6μg/l) in all samples [13]. The probable effects of arsenic contamination for nursing new-borns and infants, were also analyzed by Sternowsky & Moser [14] with a Perkin-Elmer Type 403 hydride-generation atomic absorption spectrometer, equipped with an arsenic EDL-lamp using 36 breast milk samples obtained from three different regions of Germany. Arsenic was not detectable, i.e. below 0.3μg/l, in majority of samples whereas the greatest concentration of 2.8μg/l was obtained in a sample from the rural area. It was revealed that Arsenic concentrations did not vary in samples obtained before and after nursing nor with the age of the infant.
Khan & Ismail [15] also determined arsenic concentration in breast milk samples collected from all over Pakistan. The results of the study indicated the presence of arsenic in the mother milk samples within the range of 0.092-1.240mg/L, while the mean as level was 0.504 ppb. The concentration of arsenic in the mother milk was found to be within the safe limits. Although, Breastfeeding is the primary preventive measure that can be given to the child at birth, the ratio of exclusively breast milk fed babies for their first six months has dropped from about 20% in 1998 to 16% in 2003 [12].
Arsenic in Milk and Milk Products
Arsenic is considered as one of the inevitable contaminants for human beings and is well known as a toxic element since ancient times. Humans are exposed to many chemical forms of both inorganic and organic arsenic but the highly stable organic forms are apparently nontoxic. Arsenic content of foods is generally less than 1 mg/kg, with the exception of seafood in which arsenic is predominantly in the organic form [16]. Prolonged, chronic exposure to inorganic arsenic through breathing, drinking or ingestion has been linked to, skin, lungs and urinary bladder cancer [17]. In past decade, almost 13,000 Japanese infants have been afflicted with contaminated milk powder, majorly in the western part of the country where industrialization was considerable. Affected infants reported diarrhea, fever, skin pigmentation, whereas more than 100 died from acute poisoning [4].
Carrera et al, 2004 also determined the concentration of arsenic in cow milk samples collected from Cordoba. The arsenic was found to be in the range of 0.3-10.5 ng/g. Dakeisi et al, 2006 analyzed the concentration of arsenic in milk powder as well. The level of arsenic contamination in milk powder was found to be in the range of 4-7mg/l. In 2005, ANTUNOVIĆ et al, used a hybrid technique on an atomic absorption spectrophotometerto determine the arsenic content of milk and the results revealed that arsenic concentrations in ewe milk varied depending on the lactation stage. Concentration of arsenic was lower in colostrum at 2nd lactation day (As0.011mg/kg) as compared with milk on the 10th (As: 0.025 mg/kg), 30th (As: 0.028 mg/kg) and 60th (As: 0.029mg/kg) lactation day. Licata & Trombetta [18] assessed the milk from 40 cows bred on various farms in Calabria to determine the load of heavy metal contamination in them. Quantitative analyses performed using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer with graphite furnace; followed by hot vapor generation technique showed the mean concentration of as in samples was about (37.90μg/kg). In 1999 arsenic levels were determined in cow milk samples collected at the most important dairy farms of the Comarca Lagunera in Coahuila and Durango, Mexico, a region naturally rich in Arsenic. Arsenic concentrations found in milk ranged from <0.9 to 27.4 ng g-1. Using a pharmacokinetic approach, it was found that the cow’s milk biotransfer factor for arsenic was up to 6 × 10-4 [19].
The concentration of Arsenic in Philippine’s infant formula milk for 6-12 months old was also analyzed by Cruz, Din [20] using Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry and results were compared with an existing standard for permissible quantities of arsenic in food products as set by the World Health Organization. All the infant formulas tested showed up to be negative for Arsenic. Another study was conducted to determine arsenic concentration in 32 raw cow milk samples collected from traditional and industrial sites of Arak City, Markazi Province, Iran using an atomic absorption spectrometer. The residual amounts of as were found out to be lower than permissible limits established by Codex Alimentarius [2].
Therefore, considering the stated previous studies, we cannot conclude that all the infant formula milk available in markets worldwide, contains toxic heavy metals or not. However, this study can be further utilized as a reference or a foundation for future in-depth analysis of heavy metal contamination in various foods. This review can also help create awareness among consumers, manufacturers, and the professionals in the health care system because of its cumulative display of important statistics regarding heavy metal contamination in foodstuff.
Conclusion
Milk is no doubt affected by the heavy metal contaminated water sources, yet the above discussed studies showed that human milk is still the safest of all, as arsenic levels do not vary significantly even if one is taking arsenic contaminated water in daily routine, however it may be a potent risk on a long term basis. Furthermore, safety of milk obtained from different animals with respect to arsenic contamination showed that if it is taken from a sheep, it is least susceptible to Arsenic toxicity even from a place with higher Arsenic content in water, but the cow milk is most susceptible. In a nutshell the misconception of breast milk being unsafe and infant formulas being safer is under question and the studies show that breast milk is the safest among all other milk sources.
To Know More About  Journal of Dairy & Veterinary sciences
Please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com/jdvs/index.php
For more Open Access Journals in Juniper Publishers
please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com/index.php
0 notes