Minnesota to begin testing raw cow milk for H5N1
"H5N1 is an emerging disease in dairy cattle, and conducting disease surveillance supports the state's ability to effectively respond to outbreaks and limit the potential impact on the livestock and poultry industries, as well as on public health," said MDA Commissioner Thom Petersen.
There is no concern for the safety of the public milk supply, as all milk sold in stores is pasteurized to kill bacteria and viruses, and pasteurization has been shown to effectively eliminate active H5N1 virus present in milk.
People and pets should not consume unpasteurized (raw) milk, raw milk cheeses, or raw or undercooked meat from animals with suspected or confirmed H5N1 virus infection. All raw dairy products may contain harmful bacteria, parasites, or viruses which can cause illness.
The MDA will order the testing of raw milk samples already collected from each of Minnesota's approximately 1,600 dairy farms on a monthly basis. These routinely collected bulk milk samples, which are taken before the pasteurization process, will be sub-sampled by industry labs and sent for H5N1 testing to the Minnesota Veterinary Diagnostic Lab (MVDL) at the University of Minnesota.
When a sample analysis shows the presence of influenza virus, the Minnesota Board of Animal Health (BAH) will be notified to collect an additional verification sample to confirm the presence of the H5N1 virus on the identified farm.
All non-negative samples will also be forwarded to the National Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory in Ames, Iowa, for further confirmation and genetic typing. The BAH will also initiate a farm quarantine and disease investigation.
Any farm where H5N1 is confirmed will be quarantined for a minimum of 30 days, during which no livestock, poultry, cats, manure, waste milk, or carcasses can leave the farm without a movement permit from the BAH.
Milk from healthy animals can still be sold for pasteurization, as usual.
Before lifting the quarantine, a farm must have three consecutive negative bulk milk tank tests taken at least seven days apart, and complete management and biosecurity plans for preventing the spread of the virus. Case managers will help farms work through this process.
When H5N1 is confirmed in a herd, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) will request a list of people on the farm who were exposed to the infected herd. MDH workers will contact these individuals to give them the option to enroll in human health monitoring.
Human cases of H5N1 are rare, and to date no human cases have been found in Minnesota.
"Although we understand that people may be concerned about getting sick with H5N1, the risk to the general public remains low at this time," said Dr. Ruth Lynfield, state epidemiologist and medical director at MDH. "People most at risk are those who have direct contact with infected or potentially infected animals and their environments."
Symptoms of H5N1 in people can include red, itchy, watery eyes and/or cough, sore throat, and a fever.
This testing plan is part of the National Milk Testing Strategy announced in December by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS), which requires sampling and testing of all raw cow milk for H5N1.
The MDA is working with the federal agency on funding for the testing.
USDA-APHIS is providing financial support to help dairy producers enhance biosecurity on their farms and follow the necessary response protocols if H5N1 is confirmed in their herd.
Anyone with questions about the testing plan can contact the MDA at TestingMilk.MDA@state.mn.us or visit the MDA website for more information.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
5 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Cutting mRNA Research Could Be Our Deadliest Mistake Yet
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently announced it will wind down funding for mRNA vaccine development—which could prove to be one of the costliest, deadliest decisions HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will make during his tenure. HHS has already scaled back access to and recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines—a decision experts are deeply concerned about—and Kennedy's frequently misinformed views on vaccines continue to fan the flames of anti-vaccination attitudes. Now, Kennedy's failure to fully explore the potential of mRNA vaccines could stagnate research that has the potential to save millions of lives around the world. The dark cloud of COVID-19, one of the deadliest infectious disease outbreaks in history, can hardly be thought of as having a silver lining. But the nearest thing to a glimmer of a positive would be that the fast development of COVID-19 vaccines helped prevent many more deaths and led to rapid progress in our understanding and use of mRNA technology. This greater understanding is now being explored as potential preventions or therapies for a wide range of diseases, from H5N1 bird flu and HIV to cancer. Terminating 22 mRNA projects will not only directly set back research on mRNA vaccines for infectious diseases including flu; it will also arguably have negative knock-on effects for researchers the world over exploring personalized treatments for noncommunicable diseases like cancer. Early research on some novel uses of mRNA is promising. For example, a preliminary trial of an mRNA HIV vaccine found that 80% of participants generated neutralizing antibodies, which in theory could help block HIV—pending further research and development. A melanoma mRNA vaccine, when combined with existing treatment, reduced the risk of death or disease recurrence by nearly 50%. (The vaccine is currently being tested further in a full scale Phase 3 clinical trial). Even more amazingly, personalized vaccines—where vaccines are created specifically for an individual using information from their cancer to optimize their immune response—using mRNA technology have even been proposed as a universal vaccine adaptable for all cancers. Read More: The CDC Shooting is a Dark Sign for Science and America Much of the research on personalized mRNA cancer vaccines is in some way indebted to gains in knowledge made from COVID-19 research, and it stands to reason that pulling such a large amount of funding from mRNA projects will slow down further progress in these areas. Approximately $500 million worth of research funding would almost certainly have advanced the scientific community's fundamental understanding of how, and to what extent, mRNA technology works and how it could be applied to prevent and fight disease. Also problematic is the manner in which HHS under Kennedy conveys their decisions. In announcing the funding withdrawal, HHS states it 'will focus on platforms with stronger safety records and transparent clinical and manufacturing data practices.' This implies that mRNA vaccines have not been properly or transparently tested—which is not true. The safety of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines has been demonstrated in numerous studies and systematic evidence reviews. Like pretty much all vaccines and treatments, mRNA vaccines are not without side effects, but evidence shows that any adverse events are nearly always mild and short-lived. COVID-19 vaccines have already saved millions of lives globally, with mRNA vaccines accounting for a significant majority of all doses administered in many countries. Kennedy's claim that 'mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits' is almost farcical in light of scientific evidence. Moreover, the whole purpose of clinical research is to test whether new scientific innovations—like novel applications of mRNA into different diseases—are safe and effective in the first place. Kennedy has long spoken of how we need more evidence and testing on mRNA vaccines, and so it is painfully ironic that he is pulling funding for research which would enable the scientific community to do just that. Read More: An mRNA Melanoma Vaccine Shows Promise Perhaps most concerning is the caliber of evidence upon which decisions with such massive implications are being made. In an HHS announcement of the termination of mRNA projects, Kennedy claims 'the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu.' The truth is, initial vaccines and booster doses have been shown to be very effective against reducing infection, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19. Kennedy does not even provide links or citations to systematic reviews or meta-analyses in reputable journals, the gold standard methods for scientific evidence. Rather, he simply links to an online evidence review which cherry picks studies searching only for the harms—and not the overall safety, effectiveness, or cost-benefit analysis—of the mRNA vaccines. The report does not describe the methods used to select and review studies, nor does it appear itself to have been peer-reviewed by other scientists. It almost certainly wouldn't be publishable in a scientific journal, yet it is being used as evidence to justify the fate of half a billion dollars of research funds. This is another example of how fringe viewpoints on mRNA technology, instead of the best available scientific evidence, are under Kennedy and HHS becoming the new mainstream. The U.S. has been at the forefront of developing mRNA technology for the past few decades, from the Nobel Prize-winning research of professors Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman at the University of Pennsylvania on mRNA, to the key role of U.S.-based pharmaceutical companies in vaccine production and rollout. Perhaps other countries, companies, and funding sources will offset this funding loss and lead the development of mRNA vaccine innovations. Large investments are already being made in the U.K. and China, for example. That would be to the detriment of U.S. scientific innovation and progress. Kennedy is right to scrutinize the potential overreach of the pharmaceutical industry, and to ensure their research and development is ethical and transparent. However, his seemingly personal war against "Big Pharma" and ideological opposition to mRNA risks stunting research that could one day help prevent the next pandemic or even provide cures for hitherto incurable cancers.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
New COVID variant, 'Stratus', sweeps through the U.S.; what to know in Minnesota
A new COVID variant, "Stratus," has grown in the U.S. and has now climbed the ranks, but what's happening in Minnesota? Variant XFG first appeared in January in Southeast Asia but only appeared in the U.S. around the end of May to June, USA Today previously reported. The new variant is now the third most common strain in the U.S. By June, the new strain had accounted for at least 14% of new cases. Is the new strain in Minnesota? While it's unclear if the new "Stratus" strain made its way to Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Health reported a drop in COVID-19 cases. In Minnesota, there were approximately 8.8 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people on May 8, according to MDH. That's a few weeks before the new strain entered the U.S. Meanwhile, on Aug. 3, MDH reported 1.1 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people. 'Dan the Man' remembered: Tree trimmer dies in central Minnesota incident What are the symptoms of the new variant? There is no evidence that XFG causes any distinct symptoms from other variants, according to the Palm Springs Desert Sun. However, hoarseness has been anecdotally associated with the strain, according to social media posts and news reports. The CDC outlines the following as common COVID-19 symptoms: Fever or chills Cough Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing Sore throat Congestion or a runny nose New loss of taste or smell Fatigue Muscle or body aches Headache Nausea or vomiting The CDC advises seeking medical care if you experience any of the following symptoms: Trouble breathing Persistent pain or pressure in the chest New confusion Inability to wake or stay awake Depending on skin tone, lips, nail beds, and skin may appear pale, gray or blue Ernesto Centeno Araujo covers breaking news for the Ventura County Star. He can be reached at ecentenoaraujo@ 805-437-0224 or @ecentenoaraujo. Corey Schmidt covers politics and courts for the St. Cloud Times. He can be reached at cschmidt@ This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Stratus, new COVID variant, grows in the US as Minnesota cases drop Solve the daily Crossword
Newsweek
4 days ago
- Newsweek
Trump's Ex-Surgeon General Attacks Vaccine Cuts: 'People Are Going To Die'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's former Surgeon General Jerome Adams has warned that "people are going to die" if the United States cuts funding for mRNA vaccine development. It comes after Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced last week that his department would terminate 22 Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) investments in mRNA vaccine development, representing nearly $500 million in federal funding. He said the decision was taken after reviews showed mRNA vaccines "failed protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu." Newsweek contacted the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for comment via email outside of regular working hours. Former Surgeon General Jerome Adams speaking at the White House in April 2020. Former Surgeon General Jerome Adams speaking at the White House in April 2020. AP Why It Matters Kennedy has been a longtime vaccine critic, and questioned their effectiveness on numerous occasions. His tenure as the head of HHS has seen top vaccine experts, food safety supervisors and other public-health officials either resign or be ousted. The 22 projects are led by major pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer and Moderna, and aim to develop vaccines against the flu, COVID-19 and H5N1. mRNA technology, which underpins these vaccines, is widely credited with helping slow the spread of the coronavirus during the 2020 pandemic. Infectious-disease specialists have also warned that future pandemics will be harder to stop without the help of mRNA. What To Know Adams, who served in Trump's first administration, said in an interview with CBS News on Sunday that mRNA technology accelerated vaccine development by an estimated 18 to 24 months. He added that "by the most conservative estimates, at least 2 million lives were saved" during the pandemic because of mRNA vaccines. "It's a natural molecule that's in all of our bodies. It's like a recipe card that tells your body how to make a protein," he said. "And this new idea, again, helps us develop vaccines and new treatments for everything from cancer, melanoma - which my wife has - to HIV, to better flu vaccines." He added: "These are advances that are not going to happen now... people are going to die because we're cutting short funding for this technology." Several other infectious disease experts have also spoken out against Kennedy's decision. Rick Bright, the former director of BARDA, said on X: "A bad day for science, and huge blow to our national security. This decision will have dangerous repercussions." Dr. Thomas A. Russo, an expert in infectious diseases, told Newsweek that Kennedy's decision was "shortsighted," and said mRNA vaccines "will be critical when the next, inevitable infectious diseases crisis rears its ugly head." What People Are Saying RFK Jr. said on X last week: "We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted. BARDA is terminating 22 mRNA vaccine development investments because the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu." Infectious diseases expert Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, who specializes in pandemic preparedness, told Newsweek: "RFK's actions are completely devoid of value. They are only designed to serve more distrust of a proven and valuable vaccine technology. The repercussions of this decision will serve only to diminish the resiliency of the United States, and the world, to infectious disease threats." What Happens Next In his statement, Kennedy urged the department to shift from mRNA vaccines and "invest in better solutions," but did not specify alternatives. Lawmakers, public-health officials, and industry leaders are expected to press HHS for detailed timelines and alternative research investments options.
