Othello Performance in Japan
From the small town B.C. farmer to United States' Department of Health and Human Services Secretary, the flock of those calling for a stop to the ordered killing of nearly 400 ostriches are growing daily. Universal Ostrich, a farm in Edgewood, B.C., has been making headlines since January 2025 when the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) ordered the cull of the entire flock of birds. The order is part of the CFIA's stamping out policy when an avian influenza outbreak is declared at a farm. "Canada's response has aimed to protect human and animal health and minimize impacts on the $6.8 billion domestic poultry industry and Canada's economy," the agency told The Morning Star May 27. "This supports Canadian families and poultry farmers whose livelihoods depend on maintaining international market access." The CFIA declared an H5N1 outbreak at Universal Ostrich on Dec. 31, 2024 and issued the cull order on Jan. 10, 2025. The farm has been fighting the order since, challenging the decision in federal court in April, which was turned down May 13. Justice Richard Zinn upheld CFIA's decision, but the farm is again back in the courts and filed an appeal May 26. "Which is fantastic but we are not safe," said Katie Pasitney, whose mom Karen Esperson and partner Dave Bilinski co-own Universal Ostrich. Pasitney is the spokesperson for the farm and explains that since the "outbreak," a total of 69 ostriches died in the initial weeks but the flock has since developed herd immunity. Universal Ostrich wants to work with the CFIA to use the antibodies the ostriches have developed to protect others. "It's all about saving our farmers, saving our food," said Pasitney. "Let's revamp these policies, let's bring science forward." The farm has been flooded with support from hundreds of other farmers, animal activists and Indigenous peoples who have camped out at the farm in recent days and weeks. Many politicians, both locally, provincially and in the U.S., are showing support, even Dr. Mehmet Oz. Oz is the latest U.S. health official seeking a stop to the killing. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. had a call with CFIA president Paul MacKinnon on May 22, along with Martin Makary, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner. The CFIA stands by its policies, citing a human case of H5N1 earlier this year and a number of human case in the U.S., including a fatality. "All highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses, particularly H5 and H7 viruses, have the potential to infect mammals, including humans. Allowing a domestic poultry flock known to be exposed to HPAI to remain alive allows a potential source of the virus to persist. It would increase the possibility of reassortment or mutation, particularly with birds raised in open pasture where there is ongoing exposure to wildlife." The Regional District of Central Kootenay also made a decision to not accept the ostriches at its landfills, pending testing of the birds. But the CFIA says it "has a duty to protect Canadians from the serious potential risks that avian influenza presents to our people and our economy." While compensation of up to $3,000 per ostrich could be awarded to Universal Ostrich, the CFIA says if an owner refuses to meet the depopulation requirements, the agency could move forward with depopulation itself, or use a third-party contractor. "This could mean withholding part or all compensation for the depopulation from the owners," CFIA said. "Depopulation can be a distressing outcome for an animal owner. When a depopulation is necessary, the CFIA provides an opportunity for all poultry farmers to develop the most appropriate plan based for their flock and facilities. CFIA veterinarians and inspectors work with poultry farmers to see that depopulation is completed humanely using internationally accepted methods. "We also provide guidance to producers throughout the process of depopulation, disposal, and cleaning and disinfection, so they can resume their operations as quickly as possible," said the agency.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Today
03-06-2025
- Japan Today
Canada, U.S. warn of air quality hazards as Canadian fire smoke reaches Europe
Huge plumes from Canada's wildfires sometimes reach very high altitude, where they pose less of an immediate health risk By Michel COMTE and Marion Thibaut Canada's wildfires, which have already forced evacuations of more than 26,000 people, continued their stubborn spread Tuesday, with heavy smoke choking millions of Canadians and Americans and reaching as far away as Europe. Alerts were issued for parts of Canada and the neighboring United States warning of hazardous air quality. A water tanker air base was consumed by flames in Saskatchewan province, oil production has been disrupted in Alberta, and officials warned of worse to come with more communities threatened each day. "We have some challenging days ahead of us," Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe told a news conference, adding that the number of evacuees could rise quickly. Every summer, Canada grapples with forest fires, but an early start to the wildfire season this year and the scale of the blazes -- over two million hectares (494,000 acres) burned -- is worrying. The provinces of Saskatchewan and Manitoba have been hardest hit. Both declared wildfire emergencies in recent days. "This has been a very difficult time for many Canadians," federal Emergency Management Minister Eleanor Olszewski told reporters in Ottawa. "This wildfire season has started off more quickly, and it's stronger, more intense," she said, adding that the Canadian military has deployed aircraft to evacuate remote towns in Manitoba and was ready to also assist Saskatchewan and Alberta with firefighting. Climate change has increased the impact of extreme weather events in Canada, which is still recovering from the apocalyptic summer of 2023 when 15 million hectares of forests were scorched. As of Tuesday, there were 208 active fires across Canada. Half of them were listed as out of control, according to the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre. Many of the affected populations are Indigenous, and some small communities have burned to the ground. Heavy smoke from the fires, meanwhile, has engulfed part of the continent, forcing residents of four Canadian provinces and the U.S. states of Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska and Wisconsin to limit outdoor activities. "Smoke is causing very poor air quality and reduced visibility," Environment Canada said in a statement. Wildfire smoke is comprised of gaseous pollutants such as carbon monoxide, along with water vapor and particle pollution, which can be particularly hazardous to health. Some of the worst smoke was in Alberta where three major oil sands producers -- Canadian Natural Resources, MEG Energy Corp, and Cenovus Energy -- this week evacuated workers and temporarily shut down hundreds of thousands of barrels of production per day. Huge plumes of smoke even reached Europe, the European Union's climate monitoring service said Tuesday. Due to their very high altitude, they do not pose an immediate health risk, according to the Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS), but are likely to result in hazy skies and reddish-orange sunsets. Additional plumes are expected to shade both continents in the coming days. "Central regions of Canada have experienced a very intense few weeks in terms of wildfire emissions," noted Mark Parrington, scientific director at CAMS. Canadian authorities have forecast a more intense fire season than usual in central and western Canada, due in particular to severe or extreme drought. "The significant reduction in snowpack in the spring led to early exposure of soil and vegetation, accelerating surface drying," explained University of Ottawa professor Hossein Bonakdari. "This early exposure acted as a silent amplifier, subtly setting the stage for extreme fires long before the first flame ignited," he said. Elsewhere, extensive forest fires have been raging in Russia's Far Eastern Federal District since early April, particularly east of Lake Baikal, generating carbon emissions of around 35 million tons, Copernicus reported. © 2025 AFP
Japan Times
02-06-2025
- Japan Times
Trump's WHO withdrawal could cost the U.S. dearly
While the COVID-19 pandemic is firmly in the past for many Americans, U.S. households continue to bear the costs of infectious-disease outbreaks. A few months ago, the price of eggs in the United States soared to a record high, largely owing to the spread of H5N1 bird flu. Since March 2024, the virus has ravaged U.S. chicken farms, leading to tens of millions of poultry deaths from infection or culling. More ominously, at least 70 human cases of bird flu have been identified in the U.S., with one death reported in Louisiana. In a recent report about enhancing the response to H5N1 in America and globally, the Global Virus Network, a consortium of the world's top virologists, warned of 'the terrible consequences of underreacting to current threats.' But while bird flu poses the most immediate risk to Americans, it is by no means the only one. Virulent infectious-disease outbreaks in other countries, such as mpox in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ebola in Uganda, Marburg in Tanzania and multicountry outbreaks of cholera do not respect borders and thus are a threat to people everywhere — including in the U.S. Without the efforts of the World Health Organization to contain these outbreaks, the risks of wider transmission would be much greater. This underscores the need for a global agency like the WHO to supervise cross-border cooperation — and the shortsightedness of U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw the U.S. from the organization. Despite being the world's richest and most powerful country, America is not immune to another COVID-19-style calamity and abandoning multilateralism and neglecting pandemic preparedness (such as the stockpiling of treatments and vaccines) will make it all the more vulnerable. One might think that the deadly spread of COVID-19, prolonged by the emergence of new virus strains, would convince policymakers to strengthen the world's public-health architecture — especially as experts warn that future pandemics could be even worse. But with other leaders indicating that they may follow Trump's example and leave the WHO, the resources for pandemic prevention and control could dwindle to the point that global outbreaks become more frequent and difficult to overcome. If Trump follows through with the move, his administration will become increasingly isolated and impotent. American officials, including at U.S. military installations abroad, will lose access to the WHO-led and -facilitated global networks that collect and share information about infectious-disease threats and respond to outbreaks. Moreover, the U.S. government will have no say in developing new solutions (which will almost invariably be less effective) for controlling the spread of diseases across borders — including its own. Trump has suggested that he may change his mind, presumably if the grievances set out in his executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the organization are addressed. This implies that the WHO should apply pressure on China to identify the pandemic's origins. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, for his part, has refused to accept the Chinese government's prevarications. If Trump can propose a way to determine the cause of COVID-19, I am sure that the WHO's leadership would gladly hear it. Trump's second condition is that the WHO undertake reforms and use its resources more effectively at the local level, with a greater focus on stopping the spread of infectious diseases. This is a demand that can and should be met. To that end, Tedros has already promised more targeted use of funds and implemented other measures to transform the organization. In addition, under Tedros, the WHO has transformed the way it raises funds. Its member states have sharply increased their annual contributions and it has diversified its donor base to share the funding load more widely. This is all part of the WHO's drive to be more sustainably financed, a plan launched as part of Tedros's effort to transform the organization's operations after he took office in 2017. Back then, he and member states assessed that the departure of a major donor could leave the WHO's programs and independence vulnerable to funding shocks. Who knew it would be the U.S. But, had those changes not been made, we can only imagine how much more challenging the WHO's current financial situation would be. The Trump administration should welcome these changes, not least because it benefits from having a seat at the table. If the U.S. ultimately abandons the WHO, developing evidence-based guidance and regulations for chronic-disease prevention and management will be significantly harder, undermining the administration's goal of addressing America's chronic-disease epidemic. The U.S. will also no longer be a part of the WHO's medicine prequalification process, a program that opens a host of new markets for drug producers in a cost-effective manner. Instead, U.S. pharmaceutical companies will be forced to sell their prequalified products to each country individually, putting them at risk of losing access to highly profitable multibillion dollar markets. Twenty-first-century trends — including more mobility and international travel, greater urbanization and increasing human encroachment on nature — fuel the global spread of infectious diseases, to the detriment of everyone. U.S. officials would be better positioned to protect their citizens if they joined — and perhaps even led — a discussion on how the WHO and other global health organizations, such as Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, can meet the world's needs. One such initiative, in which the U.S. had been a strong partner until Trump took office, was to negotiate a WHO Pandemic Agreement, which WHO member states adopted by consensus at the World Health Assembly on May 20. This historic compact, based on the principles of equity, collaboration and the reaffirmation of national sovereignty in public-health decision-making, will make the world safer from future pandemics. The U.S., bolstered by its world-class medical professionals and substantial public investment in medical research, has long exerted considerable influence on global health priorities. But withdrawing from the WHO places America on the outside, unable to shape the agency's policy agenda and reforms. When the next pandemic strikes, the U.S. will be left watching from the sidelines, as the WHO and its remaining member countries manage the global response and pick up the pieces as they see fit. Gordon Brown, a former prime minister of the United Kingdom, is U.N. Special Envoy for Global Education and Chair of Education Cannot Wait. © Project Syndicate, 2025.
Japan Today
31-05-2025
- Japan Today
FDA approves Moderna's new lower-dose COVID-19 vaccine
FILE - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration campus in Silver Spring, Md., is photographed on Oct. 14, 2015. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File) The U.S. approved a new COVID-19 vaccine made by Moderna late Friday but with limits on who can use it — not a replacement for the company's existing shot, but a second option. The new vaccine, mNexspike, is a step toward next-generation coronavirus vaccines. It's made in a way that allows for a lower dose — a fifth of the dose of its current COVID-19 vaccine, Spikevax — by refining its immune target. The approval 'adds an important new tool to help protect people at high risk of severe disease from COVID-19,' Stephane Bancel, Moderna's CEO, said in a statement Saturday. The Food and Drug Administration approved the new vaccine for use in all adults 65 and older, and for people age 12 to 64 who have a least one health condition that puts them at increased risk from the coronavirus. That's the same limit that the FDA set in licensing another COVID-19 vaccine option from competitor Novavax. Those restrictions are a departure from how the U.S. has handled COVID-19 vaccines until now, reflecting skepticism about vaccines from Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other Trump officials. Moderna's existing vaccine doesn't face those limits and has long been used for anyone ages 6 months and older. The company said it expected to offer both options this fall. The FDA's approval was based on a study of 11,400 people age 12 and older that compared the new low-dose vaccine with Moderna's existing vaccine. It found the new vaccine was safe and was at least as effective — and more by some measures — than the original shot, the company said. The news came just days after the Trump administration canceled funding for Moderna to develop a vaccine against potential pandemic flu viruses, including the H5N1 bird flu, despite promising early study results. © Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
