Swine flu preparedness - I vote yes

Published May 3rd, 2009 in Body & Mind, Earth, Human World and Science. 4 Comments

Last week the World Health Organization (WHO) raised the pandemic alert level to Phase 5, its second-highest level, the level just before a full-blown pandemic phase. Today, just before posting to this blog, there are 226 U.S. human cases of H1N1 flu infection, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

As the CDC reports, since January of this year, 13,000 people in the U.S. have died from the regular flu - while, as of this writing, only one person in the U.S. has died of swine flu.

Why did the health experts jump to Phase 5 on swine flu? The answer is that these experts - who are charged with keeping the rest of us safe - have a system, and they’re trying to follow it. Here’s the official definition of Phase 5, from the WHO. Phase 5 is “characterized by human-to-human spread of the virus into at least two countries in one WHO region. While most countries will not be affected at this stage, the declaration of Phase 5 is a strong signal that a pandemic is imminent and that the time to finalize the organization, communication, and implementation of the planned mitigation measures is short.”

And here’s a statement by WHO Director-General, Dr Margaret Chan, issued on April 29. Among many other things, Chan said, “Let me remind you. New diseases are, by definition, poorly understood. Influenza viruses are notorious for their rapid mutation and unpredictable behavior.”

Viruses mutate. Conditions can change quickly. Is a pandemic imminent, as the Phase 5 alert level suggests? At this writing, the WHO has not lowered the alert level. No one knows what will happen.

Marsha Canright, director of media relations at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston explained other factors that set off the current concern about the H1N1 virus. Swine flu, she said, “has that ‘red flag’ characteristic of attacking young, strong people unlike a more typical flu which is … more likely to cause death in the very old and very young.” Attacking able-bodied young people was a characteristic of the Spanish Flu - caused by a particularly deadly and virulent strain of the H1N1 virus - in 1918. The Spanish Flu caused the last major pandemic, which began in March of 1918 and raged around the globe for about two years, killing as many as 100 million - or more than twice the number of people killed in World War I.

Canright also said, “Concerns about this new swine flu (at least from scientists here) are that people lack any real immunity from the strain so we don’t get the pleasant benefits of herd immunity or protection from past vaccines, as far as we know … Scientists are starting to look at the molecular makeup of this flu and hope to find similarities with existing vaccines. It takes time to grow a vaccine and they need to get on it …”

Health experts say a serious and deadly pandemic is inevitable, but this particular strain of swine flu has not been very deadly so far. Again, as of today, 226 have been affected in the U.S., with only one death. If this flu does not cause a deadly pandemic, then are steps being taken by the WHO and CDC a waste of time? Are they just trying to scare us? Is it a left-winged government plot? Or could it be a dress rehearsal for the real pandemic?

Last week, health experts in the U.S. began using new media platforms such as Twitter to convey information to health care professionals as well as to the public. Over the past week, CDCEmergency on Twitter grew from have just over 10,000 followers last Sunday to more than 86,000 followers today. Here are just a few of the CDC’s tweets over the past week.

3:03 PM Apr 24th from mobile web
8 confirmed human cases of swine flu in U.S. Many cases in Mexico.

7:38 PM Apr 24th from mobile web
Latest scientific details from CDC about specific swine flu cases in CA & TX: http://bit.ly/DgmWe

12:12 AM Apr 25th from mobile web
New CDC video podcast on swine flu helps you learn signs/symptoms & how to protect yourself: http://bit.ly/19zsjQ

8:22 AM Apr 25th from web
Wash Your Hands! It’s the single most important thing you can do to keep from getting sick. Video at http://bit.ly/vhNpe

8:31 PM Apr 25th from web
11 swine flu cases confirmed by CDC in U.S.: 7 in CA, 2 in TX, 2 in KS: http://bit.ly/1133Zz

9:50 PM Apr 25th from web
Learn NOW how to take care of someone sick with swine flu in your home. New CDC guidance: http://bit.ly/17dsMr

7:07 PM Apr 26th from web
20 confirmed cases of swine flu in U.S. 1 hospitalized. All have fully recovered. http://bit.ly/uycgL

12:07 PM Apr 27th from web
Swine flu - 40 confirmed cases. New York count now at 28. http://bit.ly/KO5pA

12:47 PM Apr 27th from web
CDC Swine Flu Update - Conference Call for Clinicians - 2-3PM ET NOW! http://bit.ly/y9g7Z

9:24 PM Apr 28th from web
# CDC reminds you that you can NOT get swine flu from eating pork. http://bit.ly/16YpY1

1:37 PM Apr 28th from web
# Interim Guidance—Pregnant Women and Swine Influenza: Considerations for Clinicians http://bit.ly/5uJfG

1:34 PM Apr 28th from web
# Swine Flu case count in U.S. - NY 45, CA 10, TX 6, KS 2, OH 1. Total 64 http://bit.ly/funJH

11:15 AM Apr 29th from web
# SwineFlu case count in U.S.-AZ 1, CA 14, IN 1, KS 2, MA 2, MI 2, NV 1, NY 51, OH 1, TX 16 & 1 death. Total 91 http://bit.ly/EzRgq

12:35 PM Apr 30th from web
UPDATED - 2009 H1N1 case count in U.S.-AZ 1, CA 14, IN 1, KS 2, MA 2, MI 1, NV 1, NY 50, OH 1, SC 10, TX 26. http://bit.ly/19fDC8

2:28 PM Apr 30th from web
Guidance for Clinicians & Public Health Professionals. http://bit.ly/16JewF

2:27 PM Apr 30th from web
# Guidance on Specimen Collection, Processing, and Testing for Patients with Suspected (H1N1) Virus Infection. http://bit.ly/13PbJC

12:50 PM Apr 30th from web
# Guidance - HIV-Infected Adults & Adolescents: Considerations for Clinicians Regarding 2009 H1N1 A Virus. http://bit.ly/dY7oE

8:31 AM May 1st from web
Guidelines: Tissue Specimen Submission for Pathologic Evaluation of Influenza Infections. http://bit.ly/3v7ND

#swineflu8:34 AM May 1st from web
H1N1 Influenza Virus Biosafety Guidelines for Laboratory Workers. http://bit.ly/icx3Y

9:37 AM May 2nd from web
CDC has isolated the new H1N1 virus and is working to make a vaccine.

Personally, I’m grateful to the WHO and CDC - and to governments around the world - who are working hard. From where I sit - from this editor’s chair - it looks to me as if they’re doing their best to prevent a pandemic.

Here’s a picture of the swine flu virus, just released today:

The H1N1 influenza virus (CDC image)

Miles traveled by your breakfast?

Published April 16th, 2009 in Climate & Weather, Earth, Human World and Plants. 5 Comments

The World Watch Institute has published a great article explaining the complex way in which our U.S. agricultural system - and by extension the food systems of the rest of the western world - contribute to global carbon emissions.

Is Local Food Better? by Sarah DeWeerdt - published in the latest issue of World Watch magazine - explains that miles traveled by our food from farm to table are not the whole story in calculating the contribution of agriculture to carbon dioxide emissions.

Food delivery from farms and factories to your table accounts for only 4 percent of the U.S. food system’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to the article.

More emissions come from the transport of fertilizer, pesticides, and animal feed. When these extra activities are considered, ‘food miles’ account for about 11 percent of carbon emissions, writes DeWeerdt.

Climate scientists - true experts, who study our world’s complicated climate using computer models and other tools of science - are now in near unanimous agreement that human-caused carbon emissions are causing Earth to warm. Meanwhile, only about half of non-experts (other sorts of scientists, the public) believe human-caused emissions are the problem. Those results come from a study by Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman released in the January 2009 issue of EOS. Good explanation of that study here.

Climate policy players: 7 EarthSky podcasts

Published April 11th, 2009 in Science. 5 Comments

On March 30-31, 2009, EarthSky attended the Summit on America’s Climate Choices in Washington D.C. At the Summit, EarthSky interviewed 7 experts on the climate challenge: Dr. Ralph Cicerone, Dr. James Woolsey, Dr. Albert Carnesale, Dr. Robert Socolow, Dr. Stephen Schneider, Dr. Jerry Melillo and Dr. Lorents Lorentsen. EarthSky subsequently created 7 short podcasts that are now being distributed via both broadcast and online outlets in the global EarthSky Network. As a result, in spring and early summer 2009, the words of the 7 scientists interviewed by EarthSky – speaking on the vital issue of climate change – will be heard a combined total of 98 million times.

Ralph Cicerone: NAS studies to determine climate choices

Albert Carnesale: Climate response could create growth

James Woolsey: Plug-in hybrids for U.S. security, climate

Robert Socolow: Live well, transform energy to help climate

Stephen Schneider: Avoidable and unavoidable climate impacts

Jerry Melillo: Documenting climate impacts in U.S.

Lorents Lorentsen: Who will pay for climate action?

We had some rabid responses to these podcasts earlier this week. Apparently my hope that the climate debate was winding down was completely off base. I’ve been thinking a lot this week about the phrase ‘people of good will.’ I do believe that the 7 scientists whose words you can hear in these podcasts are people of good will, and I also believe the vast majority of you who comment at EarthSky’s site are people of good will. I ask … please … tone down the personal attacks and flaming for flaming’s sake. The rest of us are trying to have intelligent discussions here!

Sneak peak at climate policy players

Published April 4th, 2009 in Science. 12 Comments

Interesting week here at EarthSky. Jorge went to the climate summit held by the National Academy of Sciences - ‘advisors to the nation on science.’ And indeed our U.S. Congress has asked the NAS to advise on formulating climate policy. Jorge got comments from 7 key scientists who spoke at the summit this week. EarthSky will release several short podcasts to our broadcast network on Monday, but here’s a sneak peak:


Science studies to determine climate choices

Climate response could create growth, says expert

Plug-in hybrids might benefit U.S. security, climate

That last link is a podcast with James Woolsey, who is a former head of the CIA and who Mother Jones described as a hybrid hawk. National security thinking was well represented at this week’s summit. Consider that the least developed nations are expected to be hit hardest by climate change.

BTW, this week’s NAS climate summit reminds us that there’s a system rolling into action - related to U.S. climate change policy. The National Academy of Sciences is part of that system. Meanwhile, I doubt the same can be said of the worlds-largest-ever meeting of global warming skeptics that took place in New York earlier this month.

Climate summit ends, Congress gets new bill

Published April 1st, 2009 in Climate & Weather, Earth, Human World and Science. 11 Comments

The National Academy of Sciences summit on America’s Climate Choices brought scientists and policy-makers together earlier this week in Washington DC. It has now ended, and, almost simultaneously, Henry Waxman (Democrat, California) and Edward Markey (Democrat, Massachusetts) have introduced draft legislation to the House of Representatives, which would control greenhouse gases through a cap-and-trade system. Read some reactions to the new bill here.

The bill’s title is The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, prompting Andy Revkin of the New York Times to ask on his Facebook page, “Does lack of word ‘climate’ in title of climate bill say something about the issue these days?”

The bill would among other things cut greenhouse emissions 20 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. That’s a deeper cut than the 14 per cent cut proposed by President Barack Obama in late February 2009. However, both Obama’s plan and the new bill would target an 80 percent cut by 2050.

In the meantime, on the world stage, the targets set by the Kyoto Protocol - an international environmental treaty produced at the United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 - are due to expire in 2012. Scientists, corporations, policy-makers and other stakeholders are gearing up for new major climate conference to be held in Copenhagen in December 2009. The outcome is expected to be a new climate treaty. The U.S. never signed the Kyoto Protocol, but clearly the prospects for U.S. signing of the new treaty under the Obama administration are better.

For more, read Chris Mooney’s great piece on Climate Change Myths and Facts from the March 21 Washington Post.

Summit on ‘America’s climate choices’ begins today

Published March 30th, 2009 in Climate & Weather, Earth, Human World and Science. 6 Comments

A two-day summit on climate change begins today in Washington D.C. It came about because the U.S. Congress asked the National Academies - whose mission is to be advisors to the nation on science issues - to do what the mission implies and advise on climate.

Under the heading America’s Climate Choices, this summit is bringing together top scientists, members of Congress, Obama administration officials, business leaders, state government officials, and representatives of nongovernmental organizations. EarthSky is there, and you can follow EarthSky climate tweets on Twitter.

The summit will lay the groundwork for future reports to Congress from the National Academies, which are expected to suggest ways that the U.S. can limit the magnitude of climate change, adapt to its impacts, and provide paths to action. A live webcast of the event can be viewed at
http://national-academies.org.

EarthSky is about to change its website

Published February 14th, 2009 in Science. 21 Comments

Hello EarthSkyers!

We’re going to be changing this website soon (this spring), and we value your input. EarthSky does 10 to 20 interviews each month with scientists. We’re going to try to make it easier for you to hear some of 90-second or 8-minute audio pieces - and add some video - of the best, most articulate and most interesting scientists we can find.

Okay - that’s us. What do you want to see from EarthSky?

Who do you want to hear interviewed?

What does it mean for humans and Earth to be coupled?

Published December 7th, 2008 in Innovation and Science. 12 Comments

Coupled. Joined together. Linked.

That’s what scientists believe we are, with Earth. Scientists sometimes call us and Earth a coupled human-Earth system, or a coupled human-natural system. Dr. Robert B. Waide, executive director of the Long Term Ecological Research Network Office and member of EarthSky’s Global Science Advisory Council - explained this concept to Jorge Salazar in a recent EarthSky interview.

In his interview, Waide used the language of science when he spoke of ecosystem services, which is a phrase that describes aspects of nature upon which we humans depend: air, water, plants, metals, sunshine, essentially everything tangible. But even the concept of ecosystem services doesn’t go deeply enough for most people. The words don’t convey the depth of our bond with Earth. It’s not just that nature provides services for us, upon which we depend. It’s also that, in acquiring those services - by the simple fact of our living on this planet - we humans in turn affect nature powerfully. Dr. Waide spoke to Salazar about scientists’ emerging understanding of the deeply-interwoven interactions between human and natural systems. He said:

We can no longer understand either natural or human systems by themselves. They’re deeply interwoven, and they each have long-term dynamics which influence the operation of those systems. So, in fact, humans behave in certain ways that effect the function and the structure of the ecosystems around them, and therefore effect the ecosystem services that come back to humans from those ecosystems.

It’s easy to understand that we live on Earth. It’s harder to understand that we and Earth are joined together. And yet examples of our innate oneness with Earth are all around us, and always have been. That’s what Jared Diamond was getting at in his book Collapse, which described societies that failed due to deforestation, fertility losses in soil, overhunting, overfishing, water management problems, or that most integral of issues, human population growth.

In 2005, when Hurricane Katrina initiated a tragic illustration of a coupled human-environment system along the Gulf Coast. What began as a natural event, a hurricane, became a human disaster as levees broke and New Orleans flooded. Afterwards, contaminated water from the city had to be pumped back into the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain, as environmental experts warned of devastating effects to surrounding wetlands. The secondary damage caused by polluted flood waters then impacted humans again, economically. And so the human and natural impacts cycled back and forth, dependent on each other: coupled.

Or here’s another example, in Texas, closer to home for me. The magnificent Big Bend National Park provided an ecosystem service to ranchers in the 1800s, who grazed their cattle on the vast fields of tobosa grass there. In other words, nature was affecting humans, providing a service. But in only decades beautiful Big Bend was overgrazed, and ocotillos and prickly pear replaced the grass. Humans had affected nature. Today, though, many people now find the desert landscape in Big Bend utterly enchanting, and the area has become a sanctuary to the hundreds of thousands of people each year who view the park from scenic overlooks or hike on designated trails. Nature is affecting humans again, providing new ecosystem services (spiritual rejuvenation and recreation).

Those are big examples, but you can find little ones as close as your suburban backyard because, no matter where you are on Earth, you and Earth are part of a single system. This is what many scientists today are trying to parse and analyze. In fact, the study of the human-Earth system is a priority area for the National Science Foundation via its Biocomplexity in the Environment program. A fall 2008 deadline has just passed for scientists to submit proposals to study the dynamics of coupled natural and human systems. Looking at the 2008 awards in this area, you get a glimpse of just how minute and detailed those scientific studies have to be, in order for scientists to make progress in understanding our connection to Earth.

My guess is that, as this century progresses, the understanding that humans and Earth are linked will become better known. It might become as powerful and ubiquitous in human culture as Albert Einstein’s revelation early in the 20th century that space and time are linked. Today’s astrophysicists will correct you if you speak of space and time separately. Astrophysicists have coined a new word - spacetime - which has become familiar to many people. In a way that’s similar, will many people come to understand that we don’t just live on Earth? Will we and our children come to recognize that, in the deepest possible sense, we and Earth are one thing?

Here in 2008, with few people on Earth recognizing the vital link between us and the planet, we do harmful things to Earth that might ultimately harm ourselves. Will people come to see themselves as coupled - joined - linked to Earth? Consider that this recognition could lead to a more harmonious, more beautiful and safer place to live if an older and wiser human species learns to take care of Earth, much as older people learn through necessity to take care of their own bodies.

The photo at the top of this post is called Wisdom of Children and Trees. It’s from Lepiaf.geo’s photostream.

The photo at the bottom of this post is from Jaako’s photostream.

Leaders seek a way forward in Africa’s GM wars

Published November 29th, 2008 in Climate & Weather, Earth, Human World, Innovation, Plants and Science. 26 Comments

My friends sometimes get mad at me when this subject comes up. Calestous Juma of Harvard passed on a link to a thoughtful editorial in the November 26 issue of Nature, which is one of the premier science journals, respected around the world. The subject is people going hungry, especially in Africa, and the desire for or opposition to using agricultural technology - including genetically modified foods and organisms - to help solve the crisis.

In the editorial, Nature’s editors speak of environmentalists, policy-makers, scientists and industry reps, who have been meeting both formally and informally for some time to find common ground and a way forward. That’s the good news: people of good will are meeting. Specifically, the African Union’s High-Level Panel on Modern Biotechnology - which brought environmental leaders like Tewolde Egziabher, head of Ethiopia’s Environmental Protection Authority, together with scientists like Calestous Juma of Harvard (he is an ardent and active promoter of technology for Africa) and industry leaders like Cheick Modibo Diarra, chairman of Microsoft in Africa. According to Nature:

The group eventually came to a consensus that Africa’s nations cannot afford to do without new technologies in agriculture — but that all new technologies would need appropriate safeguards to protect human health and the environment.

Sounds reasonable. The Nature editorial also said:

Despite the virulent opposition to genetically modified (GM) crops in some quarters, many believe that progress in areas such as drought-tolerant or nutritionally fortified plants could make a big difference in many of the poorest countries.

The fact is that hunger and its potential cures are a tough and heartbreaking subject. On the one side of the GM wars - not only in Africa but around the planet - food scientists and biotech companies such as Monsanto believe that genetically modified foods might help reduce food costs, increase yields, bring some barren lands into cultivation and help feed billions as global warming affects agriculture (and vice versa) in this century. Our century, after all, will be a century of rapid natural changes - with the climate changing, with helpful species (think bees) going away and with alien or invasive species moving in. On the other side of the GM wars, however, are well-intentioned environmentalists, who believe just as strongly that GM foods will destroy the natural world and human health.

I have questions. What is hunger exactly? When does hunger become starvation? How many of Earth’s 6.7 billion inhabitants are hungry? How many are starving? Are the world’s citizens hungrier now - starving more - than a century ago or a few decades ago? Which part of the globe has the hungriest people? Is there hunger in the U.S., and what does that mean? It’s not straightforward to find information about world hunger or GM foods on the Internet. There’s a lot of cyber-shouting going on. Is there scientific evidence against GM technologies for agriculture? As a science editor who spends her days seeking out science online, I wonder where is that evidence? Are people’s fears are founded in real science, or not? If GM foods are harmful, where are the food scientists - the true experts - speaking out against GM technology?

No one - not scientists, not environmentalists, not policy makers - wants an ecological catastrophe. No one wants to see people hungry, either. People of good will are meeting, and isn’t that what’s needed? Shouldn’t we all just take a breath, listen to the other side a minute, and search for appropriate safeguards to the new technologies that might feed hungry people? Certainly the various sides are needed to balance each other, in what’s become a very very complicated world - a world with billions who will need to eat this evening, and tomorrow - and with scientists telling us that humans and nature are coupled in a profound way.

By the way, a brief Google search also revealed that Sir David King, the former UK government’s chief scientist, in September blamed hunger in Africa in part on western middle class rejection of GM foods. He said:

The problem is that the western world’s move toward organic farming - a lifestyle choice for a community with surplus food - and against agricultural technology in general and GM in particular, has been adopted across the whole of Africa … with devastating consequences.


Tell me what you think.

The photo above is called There Is No Africa. From Turkairo’s photostream.

The bright objects after sunset are Venus and Jupiter

Published November 28th, 2008 in Earth, Science and Space. 8 Comments

Have you noticed them yet? The sky’s brightest planets - Venus and Jupiter - have been inching closer together in the evening sky all month. Now they are very close - an amazing sight! On Sunday and Monday - November 30 and December 1, 2008 - the waxing crescent moon will be nearby.

Look for Venus and Jupiter near the place the sun went down. They’re low in the sky but very bright. With the exception of the sun and moon, Venus is the brightest light in the heavens, and Jupiter is second-brightest.

This event is called a conjunction by astronomers. You can imagine the sky as a grid, much like the grid of longitude and latitude that we picture on Earth’s surface. A Venus/Jupiter conjunction happens when these objects have the same right ascension - like celestial longitutde - on the sky’s dome. In other words, at conjunction, Venus and Jupiter appear directly north and south of one another on the sky’s dome.

Conjunctions of Venus and Jupiter aren’t super common, but - if you’re watching for them - you’ll see one every few years. The next one will come in March of 2012.

During this particular Venus and Jupiter conjunction, Venus and Jupiter appear 2 degrees apart. That’s about the width of your finger at an arm length away.

Don’t miss ‘em!

Hear Joel and me talking about the conjunction on the radio on Sunday: Venus and Jupiter conjunction. Moon nearby!

See a sky chart for Sunday night: Venus and Jupiter in conjunction on November 30

See a sky chart for Monday night: Celestial trio in December 1 twilight

« Previous Entries

About

Award-winning science journalist Deborah Byrd founded EarthSky - a new media company focused on science - in 1991. She wants to help the voices of scientists reach a billion people around the world. .

Latest Posts

RSS

EarthSky Channels

My Topics

Meta