Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center rehabilitating bobcat kitten
ROANOKE, Va. (WFXR) — The Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center has received its first bobcat kitten of the year, and just the third in the past three years.
It was picked up in Floyd on May 21, after it was discovered near its mother, who had been hit and killed by a car.
'Luckily, he did get away from that incident and he has no major injuries,' said Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center volunteer coordinator Catherine McGrath. 'The vets have looked over him and he's in fantastic health. All he's going to need as we raise him are a couple vaccinations.'
The center is working to rehabilitate him and is targeting a spring 2026 release date.
'He's going to be here for a very long time because that's how long it's going to take him to essentially grow up and be large enough to survive while in the wild,' said McGrath.
Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center receives first-ever rare Eastern Spotted Skunk
He has to be fed a specialized formula every two-to-three hours, and staff have to wear full protective gear when interacting with him because of how susceptible big cats are to COVID-19.
Staff members are also working hard to avoid having the animal bond with them, a process they say would complicate things upon its release back into the wild.
'Because the bobcat is going to take about a half a year to ween, that's a lot of interaction with people and not a lot of interaction with another of his own species,' said McGrath. 'So, what we want to do is mitigate him associating us with food and care.'
She also said the Center is actively looking for another bobcat kitten in need of rehabilitation so that the two can grow up as a pair.
'You never want to raise any sort of baby alone,' said McGrath. 'You want to raise them in pairs because that reduces the risk of habituation.'
The whole rehab process is an expensive one, and the Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center says it is looking for some assistance in the form of donations.
'By the time we're getting him ready for release, he's eating four times more than the average house cat,' said McGrath. 'And when you add that up to a year of that sort of care, that is thousands of dollars of specialized food for him.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scientific American
33 minutes ago
- Scientific American
Can You Still Get a COVID Vaccine This Fall? Here's What to Know
For the first time since the COVID vaccines became available in pharmacies in 2021, the average person in the U.S. can't count on getting a free annual shot against a disease that has been the main or a contributing cause of death for more than 1.2 million people around the country, including nearly 12,000 to date this year. 'COVID's not done with us,' says Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at Brown University. 'We have to keep using the tools that we have. It's not like we get to forget about COVID.' In recent weeks, the Department of Health and Human Services, led by prominent antivaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has announced a barrage of measures that are likely to reduce COVID vaccine access, leading to a swirl of confusion about what will be available for the 2025–2026 season. HHS officials did not respond to a request for comment for this article. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Government officials appear to be limiting COVID shots to people who are aged 65 and older and to those who have certain preexisting health conditions—groups that have long been known to face a higher risk of developing severe COVID. Pregnant people and some children, meanwhile, appear to be explicitly excluded from access, despite plentiful evidence that vaccines are very safe and effective for them and that COVID infections can cause them significant harm. Scientific American spoke with clinicians and public health experts about the latest COVID vaccine recommendations, what access may look like this fall and how these policies might influence people's vaccination choices and health. What COVID vaccines will be manufactured this year? Public health experts are monitoring a strain of the COVID-causing virus SARS-CoV-2 called NB.1.8.1, which was first detected early this year and last month became responsible for one in 10 COVID cases globally. So far, the new variant has mostly been reported in Asia and Europe. But it has also been picked up in airport surveillance in multiple U.S. states, says Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease physician and a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. The emergence of a new variant isn't surprising, particularly at this time of year, Chin-Hong says. 'It's kind of acting like clockwork—maybe this might be the variant of the summer,' he adds. Still, NB.1.8.1 has led to concerns about a potential surge in cases—although Chin-Hong and other scientists don't have any evidence so far that it causes more serious disease than other currently circulating strains. 'All of these new variants, they might be more transmissible, they might be more immune evasive, but I've seen no data whatsoever that suggests that they're more pathogenic,' says Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan. Within the U.S., a strain called LP.8.1 has been the most common one detected since March. Both NB.1.8.1 and LP.8.1 are among the alphabet soup of strains that descended from a key ancestor lineage called Omicron JN.1, which dominated U.S. cases by early 2024. Current vaccines target this category of strains. And in May a Food and Drug Administration panel determined that, this year, vaccine producers should again tailor their shots to a single strain within the JN.1 lineage—preferably LP.8.1. What's going on with COVID vaccine policy? Strain selection aside, the recent messaging and decision-making on vaccine policy for COVID and beyond have been chaotic, with various governmental groups and officials announcing different access guidelines and restrictions. 'The situation we're in right now is nuts,' says Nuzzo, referring to the fact that agency leaders have sidestepped the formal science committees that traditionally make vaccine-related decisions. 'We don't change vaccine policy on a willy-nilly basis. There's an incredible amount of nuance, and all of the data need to be considered.' But on June 9 Kennedy took a major step against this evidence-driven decision-making process by firing the entire CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Kennedy announced the committee rehaul in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, in which he alleged there were 'persistent conflicts of interest' among committee members. According to a recent HHS statement, new committee members are under consideration, and the group will still meet as scheduled from June 25 to 27. ACIP has traditionally been particularly important because any vaccine it recommends must be fully paid for by health insurance companies—a condition that greatly determines real-world access. It's unclear what the committee's overhaul will mean for COVID vaccine access in particular. Another concern is that Kennedy announced in late April that HHS would implement a policy requiring all 'new' vaccines—including updated versions of existing ones, such as COVID shots—to be tested against a placebo. The original COVID vaccines were tested in just this manner. But conducting similar tests when an effective and very safe vaccine already exists would be not only unethical for researchers but also expensive and time-consuming for manufacturers. It remains unclear when the new policy will take effect. What does this mean for COVID vaccine access this fall? If you are 65 years old or older, you should be able to get a COVID shot as you have in recent years. If you have an underlying condition such as cancer, diabetes, or heart or lung problems, you may also be able to get a COVID shot as usual. These issues and several others are on the CDC's list of conditions that leave people more vulnerable to severe disease, and this list is included in the description of the new regulatory framework. One 2021 study looked at many (but not all) of the conditions on the list and estimated that three in four U.S. adults has at least one. People are allowed to self-disclose a preexisting condition at pharmacies without a prescription or doctor's note. That list could also be expanded later if new research finds other risk factors that increase people's risk of severe COVID, says Jacinda Abdul-Mutakabbir, a clinical pharmacist and an assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. But there's also a chance that qualifying conditions may be reduced instead. For example, current or recent pregnancy is included in the CDC's existing list, but HHS officials announced in late May that the COVID vaccine would no longer be recommended for pregnant people. Data have shown that COVID may cause various complications during pregnancy —increasing the risk that the pregnant person may require emergency care, be put on a ventilator or die. The newborn child of an infected person is also more likely to be born preterm or to have low birth weight. And babies younger than six months old—who are ineligible for vaccination because of their immature immune system—have the highest rates COVID hospitalization after adults aged 75 and older. In contrast, evidence from people vaccinated during pregnancy show that newborns receive protective immunity through antibodies that cross the placenta and are found in breast milk, Chin-Hong explains. Healthy children also face new restrictions to COVID vaccine access: The shot is now only recommended to them based on 'shared clinical decision-making,' according to the vaccine schedules released by the CDC last month. This means parents must consult with a health practitioner about whether to vaccinate such children. Experts worry about the consequences of restricting access for kids. Children under age 18 make up a smaller percentage of COVID hospitalizations and deaths. But that doesn't mean zero risk, Chin-Hong says. 'We know that COVID still kills kids,' he says. 'No death of a child is a good death—and these are all preventable.' 'Because children and pregnant people are considered vulnerable populations, they were not included in the original studies that were done for the COVID vaccines,' Abdul-Mutakabbir says. But five years' worth of real-world vaccine data from these groups show the health benefits. 'We do see effectiveness and safety in these vaccines,' she says. It's still possible that the late June ACIP meeting will shift the landscape again. But if you want a COVID vaccine this fall and don't meet current guidelines, you may still be able to request a shot. Your insurance may not pay for it, however, leaving you to risk a price tag of around $200. 'Insurance companies or providers are only required to pay for vaccines that are listed as recommended by the CDC,' Abdul-Mutakabbir says. Full, partial or no-cost coverage for nonrecommended vaccines is at the insurance provider's discretion. Any changes to coverage—and the times at which those changes are announced—will vary among programs, including private and governmental ones, such as the federal-state program Medicaid and the federal program Medicare. Until then, Chin-Hong and Abdul-Mutakabbir say, the COVID vaccines released in the fall of 2024 are still recommended and available to people who haven't already had one. And as of April 26, only 23 percent of adults and 13 percent of children in the U.S. had received the shot. 'If you are nervous about the surge or planning summer travel, I would recommend' getting the vaccine, Abdul-Mutakabbir says. The larger fight over vaccines For Rasmussen, the confusion over COVID shots signals the beginning of a longer tug-of-war—with Kennedy's HHS on one end. 'I think I know what their plan is, and it's to reduce access to vaccines in general,' she says. 'In my view, this is an incremental step in a larger attack on vaccination in general.' She encourages people worried about vaccine restrictions—and about the role of science in making these decisions—to call their congressional legislators. 'A lot of people speaking out is what is needed right now to make a big difference here,' she says. Abdul-Mutakabbir also hopes people continue to seek vaccines for COVID and other diseases—especially while they are still easily available. 'It's important that we consider the things that we can protect ourselves against,' Abdul-Mutakabbir says. 'Should you have a barrier with getting a COVID vaccine, guess what? There's no change to the flu vaccine; there's no changes to the pneumococcal recommendations; there's no change to measles, mumps, rubella vaccine. Get the vaccines that we can get.'
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Best '70s Ski Outfits From the POWDER Archives
As you might remember (or as your parents might remind you), things were a bit different in the 1970s. Global politics were in upheaval, society was opening its mind to new norms, and ski bumming was entering its first golden age. Those were also the years when this publication, first helmed by founders Jake and Dave Moe, began chronicling the deeper side of ski culture. At the time, ski culture had started to evolve into the free-spirited and expression-driven form it still has today, in part driven by the pages of the first volumes of POWDER Magazine. Powder skiing represented the ultimate freedom, and in true 1970s fashion, the skiers of the time took their expression of it to extreme lengths. Speaking of fashion, this was the era of true drip: from tight-fitting one-piece ski suits to oversized knit sweaters, most everything featured loud colors, patterns, and revealing necklines. Check out the Best 70s Ski Outfits from the POWDER archives below. This piece is part of POWDER's Summer of Ski Nostalgia content series. Stay tuned in daily for more nostalgic articles, and keep an eye out for the upcoming Summer of Ski Nostalgia badge to identify future content. You can also view all of POWDER's summer nostalgia content here. These were the days before Gore-Tex and other waterproof/breathable fabrics, with skiers instead opting for wool sweaters and the odd stretchy ski suit. These things were warm, bordering on sweaty, but they undoubtedly oozed style. A 1977 gear editorial section highlighting the year's finest insulated wares for skiers. Many iconic ski brands really found their stride in the 1970s. Look at how far things have come in these ads from Bogner, Rossignol, and Gerry Clothing. Apparel ads from the 70s were just built different. The wool sweater, still an icon of ski fashion today, provided the vibes during the 70s. Personally, these are WAY too hot for me to wear anywhere but inside a cozy mountain hut, but to each their own, I suppose. Eyewear was also on point, with many skiers still opting for large-framed sunglasses instead of full-on goggles. Fashion over function, especially on sunny days. For anyone who has worn goggles of this era, you'll remember that fogging was a pretty real issue. Marketing copy has always been a hot topic of discussion for brands. How can you make things eye-catching without being too weird? That clearly didn't matter to apparel manufacturers back then. Marlboro jackets? Budweiser sweaters? Nothing was sacred back then. While backcountry skiing really entered its golden age during the COVID pandemic, skiers have been walking up mountains and enjoying soft turns on the way down for many years. Take a look at the style and equipment (or lack thereof) employed during the 1970s from places like Vail to Courchevel. Long before technical outerwear, skiers were enjoying hard-earned turns deep in the backcountry. This piece is part of POWDER's Summer of Ski Nostalgia content series. Stay tuned in daily for more nostalgic articles, and keep an eye out for the upcoming Summer of Ski Nostalgia badge to identify future content. You can also view all of POWDER's summer nostalgia content Best '70s Ski Outfits From the POWDER Archives first appeared on Powder on Jun 4, 2025
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
HHS justifies decision to stop recommending Covid shots during pregnancy with studies supporting the shots' safety
The Department of Health and Human Services is circulating a document on Capitol Hill to explain its decision to remove the Covid-19 vaccine recommendation for pregnant women — citing studies that largely found the shot is safe. The document, which HHS sent to lawmakers days before Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced his plan to fire the panel that advises the CDC on immunizations, says that studies have shown that women who got the vaccine during pregnancy had higher rates of various complications. And it claims that 'a number of studies in pregnant women showed higher rates of fetal loss if vaccination was received before 20 weeks of pregnancy,' footnoting a research paper on vaccination during pregnancy. But Dr. Maria P. Velez of McGill University, the lead author of one of the studies, told POLITICO in an email that 'the results of our manuscript were misinterpreted.' The 2023 study shows a slightly higher rate of miscarriages among women who were immunized against Covid-19 during their pregnancies. But, Velez said, that after adjusting for 'variables that can confound a crude association,' like 'age, rurality, neighbourhood income quintile, immigration status, comorbidity' and other factors that could affect the outcome, Canadian researchers found 'no association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and an increased risk of miscarriage.' Raw numbers don't account for significant differences among the groups being compared — such as underlying conditions and when during pregnancy the people were vaccinated, said Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist who's consulted for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Scientists, including the Canadian researchers, use statistical methods to adjust for those factors, she said, which is how they determined the vaccine wasn't associated with miscarriage. In a statement, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon pointed to the raw study data, which showed a slightly higher rate of miscarriage in the first half of pregnancy for women who were vaccinated against Covid compared with those who weren't. 'The underlying data speaks for itself — and it raises legitimate safety concerns,' he said. 'HHS will not ignore that evidence or downplay early pregnancy loss.' Nixon added that HHS and the CDC encourage people to talk to their providers 'about any personal medical decision.' Vaccine researchers and obstetricians criticized the decision to remove the recommendation for pregnant women, and researchers cited in the HHS document largely dismissed any connection between Covid vaccination and miscarriages. 'Given that COVID-19 infection during pregnancy is associated with serious maternal and neonatal morbidity, the current study can inform healthcare providers, pregnant women and those considering a pregnancy about the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in relation to miscarriage risk,' Velez and her co-authors wrote in the study. That research was based on health-system data from Ontario, Canada, and aligned with similar population studies in the U.S., Scotland and Norway. Similarly, HHS cited an April 2022 study in its document concerning mRNA vaccination in people undergoing in-vitro fertilization, which also found no adverse effects on conception rates or on early pregnancy outcomes. 'Administration of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was not associated with an adverse effect on stimulation or early pregnancy outcomes after IVF,' the New York City-based researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Mount Sinai West hospital wrote in the study. 'Our findings contribute to the growing body of evidence regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women who are trying to conceive.' The HHS document also includes an incorrect link for that study, instead leading to a different study — also cited in HHS' document — by Israeli researchers that found the vaccine 'appears to be safe during pregnancy,' with no increase in preterm labor or in newborns with low birth weight. That February 2022 study did note a possible increase in preterm birth rates for women vaccinated during the second trimester, and the authors suggested future investigations of outcomes based on the timing of immunization. HHS' assertion about significant risks to pregnant women 'contradicts the bulk of published studies,' said Dr. Paul Offit, an expert who has served as an outside adviser on vaccines to the FDA and the CDC. HHS deviated from past practice when it changed the Covid vaccine guidance last month, announcing the decision without the endorsement of an existing outside panel of expert advisers. Dr. Steven Fleischman, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told POLITICO at the time that he was disappointed by HHS' decision, and pointed to data showing that newborns can benefit from maternal antibodies from the vaccine for protection from Covid. 'In fact, growing evidence shows just how much vaccination during pregnancy protects the infant after birth, with the vast majority of hospitalized infants less than 6 months of age — those who are not yet eligible for vaccination — born to unvaccinated mothers,' Fleischman said.
