Boris Johnson urged fox hunters to break the law and keep killing animals despite the practice being banned, in an article written while he was a Conservative MP.
In the 2005 piece, Mr Johnson said he “loved” hunting with dogs, in part because of the “semi-sexual relation with the horse” and the “military-style pleasure” of moving as a unit.
The future prime minister argued that the imposition of the ban was “not about cruelty” but “a Marxian attack” by the Labour government on the upper class.
“It is a brutal and pointless liquidation of a way of life. They ban it just because they can; and the people I really despair of are those idiots who say that they ‘don’t care much one way or another’,”…
Two little blue penguins (Eudyptula minor), the world’s smallest penguin species, on the rocks of St Kilda breakwater. Photograph: Douglas Gimesy/Photography Doug Gimesy, or, Picture: Doug Gimesy
Australian scientists have found evidence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in about a dozen species, including bats, penguins, sea lions and wallabies
For 13 years now, scientist Michelle Power has been grabbing samples of human waste and animal poop from Antarctica to Australia to try and answer a vital question.
Has the bacteria in humans that has grown resistant to antibiotics – an issue considered to be one of the world’s greatest health challenges – made its way into wildlife?
The answer, it seems, is a resounding yes.
Associate professor Michelle Power from Macquarie University Department of Biological Science.
“I don’t think there’s been an animal where we haven’t found it,” says Power, an associate professor at Macquarie University in Sydney.
The sorts of animals Power has chosen to look at most live close to humans or are urbanised – like possums – or animals that spend time with humans either in wildlife care facilities or in conservation breeding programs.
So far, Power says she has found evidence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in about a dozen animals, including bats, penguins, sea lions and wallabies.
“You have organisms moving from us, to animals, and then potentially back to us again,” she says. “At the moment it’s hard to track what’s coming back and forth, but we know humans have driven this emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.”
Power’s work on the issue started in 2007 when she looked at faeces samples of endangered brush-tailed rock wallabies being raised in captivity in New South Wales as part of conservation efforts.
In late 2009, Power fulfilled a romantic 20-year-old dream of travelling to Antarctica to do scientific research. The rather less romantic goal was to sample the human sewage from a research station there, and to “sneak up behind penguins and seals” and take their poo.
Penguins on the Antarctic Peninsula.
Advertisement
But again, her findings revealed that bacteria from humans was making its way into the Antarctic wilderness, including antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Between 2017 and 2019, Power’s scientific colleagues together with wildlife carers have collected 448 poo samples from the little penguins of Philip Island and St Kilda, and from the penguins in zoos (one method to collect samples from wild penguins is to leave a piece of card near the entry to a nesting box because, Power says, they “like to poo out the door”).
Almost half the little penguins in captivity have antibiotic-resistant bacteria, compared with 3% of the wild population.
Researcher Ida Lundback, right, with the assistance of volunteer Naomi Wells, left, takes a faecal sample from a captured little blue penguin (Eudyptula minor) before returning it back to its burrow.
Power has also been part of an ongoing citizen science project encouraging others to do the faeces collecting – this timer the secretions of possums.
After analysing abut 1,800 samples so far, Power says the Scoop a Poop project has shown about 29% of Australia’s brush-tailed possums are carrying antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
In 2019, Power was part of a study that found antibiotic resistance in grey-headed flying foxes – a species listed as vulnerable.
In research yet to be published, Power says she has found evidence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in wild populations of Tasmanian devils.
So how did our bacteria get into the animals?
Power says about three-quarters of the antibiotics that humans take are actually excreted, ending up in wastewater systems. Places where antibiotics are manufactured are also potential avenues for escape of antibiotics.
And then there are the times when animals are taken into care, or raised in captivity and exposed to humans, and then released into the wild.
“We are seeing a variation in the prevalence [of antibiotic-resistant bacteria] across different wildlife species but why that is the case, we are not sure,” Power says.
Clockwise from top: An urban brush-tailed possum, a female grey-headed flying fox and an Australian sea lion.
Possums are a species that are highly urbanised, sometimes feed on the ground, and live and eat close to humans – close enough that many find homes in the roof space of Australian houses. But they tend to be solitary.
Flying foxes on the other hand hang around in trees in tightly packed camps that can run into the thousands. About 5% of wild grey-headed flying foxes had antibiotic-resistant bacteria in their excretions, compared with 40% of those in care facilities.
Power says: “Maybe the possums are getting closer to our organisms, but also they’re solitary species. Flying foxes on the other hand live up in trees but live in higher densities.”
According to the World Health Organisation, the emergence of bacteria resistant to antibiotics is one of the world’s greatest health challenges facing humans, making treatment of dangerous diseases ever more challenging.
But the impact of this bacteria on wildlife, Power says, “is the big unknown” and she says there’s no direct evidence yet that it’s doing harm.
A faecal sample from Australian sea lions (Neophoca cinerea) that has been plated on Chromocult media – a selective differential media that makes E coli visible by showing it as dark purple.
She says: “The gene transfer of endemic bacteria could alter microbial communities and know more and more each day about the significance of friendly microbes to healthy immunity.”
Dr Wayne Boardman is a wildlife veterinarian at the University of Adelaide and the former head vet at London Zoo who has been collaborating with Power on research.
One big concern Boardman holds is that the antibiotic resistance could make it harder for vets to care for sick animals.
But also, he says, the bacteria and the genes associated with them that are being passed from humans to animals could then evolve and come back into the human population.
“It’s in the bacteria’s interest to try and protect themselves,” he says. “Whilst the risks are relatively small, they could be compounded over the years because we have more of these antimicrobial resistant genes occurring and then we get further and further into the mire.
Michelle Power with a culture of E.coli taken from faecal samples from Antarctic marine life (Weddell seal – Leptonychotes weddellii).
“It’s a human induced issue. We can’t blame the animals. It’s only humans using antibiotics.”
Prof Clare McArthur, a behavioural ecologist at the University of Sydney, says Power has answered the first important question – are human bacteria being passed into our wildlife?
“The next questions is, does it matter,” she says. “I think of this from a gut perspective. We know that the gut biome is important and we know from humans that if you tweak it then things can go pear shaped in terms of our health.
“In the back of my mind is the question – if they’re picking up antibiotic-resistant bacteria, is that altering their gut biome? We don’t have an answer for that yet.”
As for Power, she’s worried that wildlife picking up human pathogens could be another pressure on species already vulnerable.
“These bacteria are pathogens and they can cause diseases in us. I’m worried about wildlife health and what some of these resistant bacteria might mean for wildlife species, many of which are already vulnerable.”
Inslee tightens limits on Phase 3 gatherings, warns stay-home order may return
Washington state Gov. Jay Inslee said indoor and outdoor social gatherings in Phase 3 counties will be limited to 10 people in a press conference July 16, 2020. He also talked about the possible further restrictions due to coronavirus and COVID-19. BY TVW
This article has Unlimited Access. For more coverage, sign up for our daily coronavirus newsletter. To support our commitment to public service journalism: Subscribe Now.
Public health experts from around Washington warned Friday evening that the state is “in an explosive situation,” according to a report released by the State Department of Health.
The report paints a grim picture of COVID-19 conditions in Washington. The state is in the early stages of a runaway outbreak, the experts said.
BY RICHARD RICHELS, HENRY D. JACOBY, GARY YOHE AND BEN SANTER, OPINION CONTRIBUTORS — 07/18/20 09:00 AM EDT 885THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL147
In its campaign against action on greenhouse gas emissions, one of the more subtle moves by the Trump administration is its manipulation of the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC). This number is used to represent the damage resulting from emitting an additional ton of carbon. Climate economists sometimes refer to it as the most important number you’ve never heard of. Undermine the SCC and you can discredit action to fight climate change, boost support for the fossil fuel industry, tip the scales away from renewable energy and counter other important policy initiatives. Fortunately, in a detailed report on the estimation of the SCC, the congressional watchdog General Accounting Office has called out this latest affront to reliable assessment of the science and risks of climate change.
The SCC is a key input to the benefit-cost analyses required of all federal regulatory actions, and thus is an important factor in their justification. The federal SCC estimate has also been adopted by several states. Examples of the SCC’s use are abundant, including the setting of reasonable federal standards for the performance of private automobiles and appliances.
Estimating the SCC requires joint consideration of natural and social science aspects of the climate change problem. A federal working group spent nearly a decade on this process. Recognizing that the underlying methodology needed rigorous and impartial review, the interagency group commissioned a comprehensive update by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The 2017 NAS report supported the previous approach to valuing the SCC, recommending a program of research and analysis to improve the estimate.
The Trump administration did not follow this recommendation. Instead, it imposed measures to hobble reliable estimation of the SCC. The earlier working group was disbanded, associated documents were withdrawn and the NAS study was ignored. Instead, changes were made to limit the SCC’s scope and the weight it gave to future generations. These changes cannot be justified by either the science or the standards deemed acceptable for benefit-cost studies.
As a result of the administration’s changes, the previous central value for the SCC – roughly $50 per ton of CO2 – was reduced by nearly 90 percent.
These changes are misguided and pernicious. They limit damages to those occurring within U.S. borders, and thus reflect a tragic misunderstanding about climate change and the U.S. national interest. CO2 emissions, primarily from the burning of fossil fuels, impact every person on the planet, regardless of the geographical location of the source. To limit current and future climate change damages, it is in the U.S. national interest not only to reduce its own emissions, but also to encourage other countries to do the same. The administration’s near-zero SCC does just the opposite, offering other countries a pretense for adopting positions that mimic those of the world’s second-largest emitter.
There are many other causes for concern. The impacts of our emissions will be felt most cruelly by the most vulnerable Americans, and by those countries least able to cope with the ensuing damages. Ignoring the needs of these individuals and countries threatens to exacerbate societal inequities at home and to create millions of environmental refugees abroad. Humanitarian crises that would burden rich and poor nations alike are the obvious consequences. Preventing these crises is both the right thing to do and in our own self-interest.
Another critical aspect of the SCC calculation is the value placed on future generations. Intergenerational equity is a contentious topic. There are reasonable debates among social scientists about what constitutes fairness in the treatment of unborn generations. Despite these disagreements, there is convergence among scholars as to what represents a plausible range of discount factors. The administration, ignoring the prudent advice of the NAS authors and other knowledgeable experts, provides no analysis of its own. It simply mandates a set of discount rates at the higher end of the spectrum, to the disadvantage of future generations.
In its assessment of the administration’s SCC procedure, the GAO uses careful diplomatic language. It writes that, “. . . the federal government may not be well positioned to ensure agencies’ future regulatory analyses are using the best available science.” Our interpretation is more direct: Ignoring the science to cook the numbers discredits the federal process for public decision-making.
The GAO recommends that a federal agency should be made responsible for addressing the NAS report, and for ensuring that the best-available science is used in calculating the SCC. Sadly, there is little expectation that this recommendation will be heeded by an administration that denies the reality and seriousness of the climate threat.
Richard Richels directed climate change research at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). He served on the National Assessment Synthesis Team for the first U.S. National Climate Assessment.
Henry D. Jacoby is the William F. Pounds Professor of Management, Emeritus in the M.I.T. Sloan School of Management and former co-director of the M.I.T. Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.
Gary Yohe is the Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental Studies, Emeritus, at Wesleyan University in Connecticut. He served as convening lead author for multiple chapters and the Synthesis Report for the IPCC from 1990 through 2014 and was vice-chair of the Third US National Climate Assessment.
Ben Santer is a climate scientist and member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. He served as convening lead author of the climate change detection and attribution chapter of the IPCC’s Second Assessment Report and has contributed to all five IPCC assessments.
The cubs were tranquilized and trapped so they could be safely transported to Bear With Us Centre for Bears, where they will be cared for and released next year. (Supplied)
SUDBURY — Two bear cubs have been taken to an animal sanctuary after their mother was killed by a vehicle in the Sudbury community of Garson last week.
A social media post by the city on Thursday said after their mom was killed, the two cubs scrambled up a tree in a nearby park.
“City parks staff spotted the cubs and called in Greater Sudbury Police and Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry to help,” the city said. “These two beautiful cubs are in safe hands today after a frightening and tragic ordeal.”
The cubs were tranquilized and trapped so they could be safely transported to Bear With Us Centre for Bears, where they will be cared for and released next year.
A photo of the snoozing little bruins after they were captured and also posted on social media by the city.
“Thanks to everyone who helped give these two cubs a safe and happy outcome!” the city said.
People walk down a sidewalk on Friday in St. Simons Island, Ga. Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp made an order earlier in the week that forbade municipal officials from setting mandatory face-covering policies. | Sean Rayford/Getty Images
On its face, the legal showdown between Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms over the legality of the city’s face mask mandate is a dispute over the right balance between personal freedom and public health.
But the increasingly bitter feud between the Republican governor, an acolyte of President Donald Trump, and the Democratic mayor, a possible vice presidential pick who, herself, has tested positive for Covid-19, is also a microcosm of the fault lines — political, racial, geographic — hampering the country’sresponse to…
Updated 6:19 AM ET, Fri July 17, 2020Almost 100,000 mink on the farm are to be culled after 78 out of 90 animals tested — equivalent to 87% of the sample — tested positive for coronavirus.
(CNN)Spanish authorities have ordered the culling of almost 100,000 mink following an outbreak at a farm, where the animals are bred for fur,after a number tested positive for the novel coronavirus.The Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Environment of Spain’s Aragon region said in a statement on Thursday that it had ordered the slaughter of the 92,700 mink after seven workers on the farm tested positive for Covid-19 and the animals were found to be infected with the coronavirus.
A mink may have infected a human with Covid-19, Dutch authorities believeAs a precaution the department shut down the farm, in Teruel, eastern Spain, on May 22, for monitoring before conducting a number of tests at random, which initially returned a negative result.However, subsequent tests, the most recent of which was July 7, confirmed 78 out of 90 animals tested — equivalent to 87% of the sample — had become infected with the coronavirus.Content by CNN UnderscoredThe best deals in Apple’s Amazon storeYes, Apple has set up shop on Amazon. That means you can get official Apple products with free Prime shipping.In the statement, the department said no conclusions could be drawn as to whether “there is human-to-animal transmission or vice versa,” and that “no abnormal behavior has been detected in the animals nor has there been an increase in mortality in them.”However, it said all mink on the farm would be slaughtered as a preventative measure.
Can animals spread Covid-19 to humans?
This is not the first mink farm to have seen a coronavirus outbreak. In May, Dutch authorities introduced mandatory testing at all mink farms in the Netherlands after they said they believed a mink might have infected a human with Covid-19.The testing has led to the culling of up to one million mink in the country at two dozen farms, according to animal welfare charity Humane Society International.”On the basis of new research results from the ongoing research into Covid-19 infections at mink farms, it is plausible that an infection took place from mink to human,” the Dutch government said in a statement at the time. “It also appears from this research that minks can have Covid-19 without displaying symptoms.”
As new daily coronavirus infections continue to break records in the U.S., researchers are considering whether the cannabis plant has the potential to be used in the treatment of COVID-19.
Experts from the University of Nebraska and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute are recommending that scientists study the anti-inflammatory properties in CBD as a potential treatment for lung inflammation caused by the coronavirus.
There is no scientific evidence that cannabis or its compounds can help with COVID-19 specifically, but in a peer-reviewed article in Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, the authors said further research is needed to understand if CBD can help patients infected by the virus.
Emily Earlenbaugh, a Forbes contributor and co-founder of Mindful Cannabis Consulting, joined CBSN to discuss the study. She explained that in severe cases of COVID-19, the body’s immune system overreacts and releases too many cytokines, which is called a “cytokine storm.”
“Cytokines will normally help to create inflammation to fight off infections,” Earlenbaugh said. “But in these extreme cases, you see so much cytokines being released into the system that it creates a cytokine storm. You might see high fever, inflammation, severe fatigue and nausea, and in serious cases, it can lead to death through organ failure.”
Earlenbaugh said CBD is known from previous research as an IL-6 cytokine inhibitor, meaning it helps reduce the production of cytokines.
The authors of the study wrote that one drug, Tocilizumab, resulted in the “clearance of lung consolidation and recovery” in 90% of the 21 treated patients. The drug, however, resulted in adverse side effects like pancreas inflammation and hypertriglyceridemia.
Researchers then turned to cannabis, specifically CBD. The authors said that several cannabinoids in the cannabis plant have anti-inflammatory properties. They said CBD “has shown beneficial anti-inflammatory effects in pre-clinical models of various chronic inflammatory diseases” and noted that the FDA approved one CBD product to treat certain forms of epilepsy.
“CBD has very few side effects, so it’s something that’s being looked at as a much more mild treatment that still has a lot of anti-inflammatory powers,” Earlenbaugh told CBSN.
The authors of the study said that CBD can help reduce anxiety in patients and increase the production of interferons, a protein that helps that body fight infections.
But given the very early stages of this research, Earlenbaugh warns that people should “definitely express caution” against using cannabis to fight COVID-19. She said some researchers have warned using the drug early on in the infection stages could cause negative side effects.
“We’re very pretty far away from human research that could really definitively answer those questions for us,” Earlenbaugh says. “The other reason for caution is that cytokines are important in fighting off infections. So, we don’t want to reduce them as a preventative measure or in early stages of the infection.”
WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind. — Although the Arctic is best known for frozen tundra, it also has a number of freshwater lakes that are covered in ice most of the year. But the length of time they are ice-covered is decreasing, and this is allowing methane to bubble into the atmosphere.
Globally, lakes are responsible for nearly one-third of biogenic methane emissions, but new research predicts that this level could increase to nearly 60% by the end of the century due to global warming. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas that traps 32 times more heat than carbon dioxide.
Purdue University professor Qianlai Zhuang and graduate student Mingyang Guo of Purdue’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences studied Arctic lakes in Finland, where roughly 10% of the country is covered by freshwater lakes.
Their findings in this lake-dense region will help researchers adequately quantify methane emissions from the entire…
00:21/00:30
Almost 100,000 mink on the farm are to be culled after 78 out of 90 animals tested — equivalent to 87% of the sample — tested positive for coronavirus.
Exposing the Big Game 