HEALTH Brazil Faces a Modern-Day Plague

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-28/brazil-faces-a-modern-day-plague

Latin America

Brazil Faces a Modern-Day Plague

Mac Margolis
Comments 10
Dec 28, 2015 12:35 PM EST
By Mac Margolis


In 33 years of practice, Rio de Janeiro obstetrician and gynecologist Isabella Tartari Proenca has helped countless expectant mothers through the anxieties of pregnancy and childbirth. But ever since an exotic virus called Zika hit Brazil a few months ago, she's run out of assurances. "I get calls and text messages all day long," Tartari told me. "My patients are terrified."

Who could blame them? Since May, when the national health ministry confirmed the first cases of Zika virus, the mosquito-borne disease has swept the country, infecting at least half a million people. While most victims escape with a low-grade fever, skin rashes and achy joints, some dire complications have ensued. Suspected to be among them is microcephaly, a condition that leads to exceptionally small infant head size, which causes lasting neurological damage and can lead to death.

Zika has since spread across Latin America. By Dec. 22, Brazilian authorities had confirmed 2,782 cases of microcephaly this year, a fivefold increase over the yearly average since 2010; 80 babies whose mothers tested positive for Zika were stillborn or died shortly after birth.

No one knows for sure if Zika causes microcephaly, nor how the virus attacks neurological tissue. And experts can only guess at how a sleeper disease that emerged in the forests of Uganda in 1947 and was known only for scattered outbreaks in the Pacific Islands since then ended up as an urban public health emergency halfway around the globe.

Dennis Fujita and Felipe Scassi of the Institute of Tropical Medicine of Sao Paulo think the virus might have arrived with athletes or fans during the 2014 World Cup, or possibly by way of South America's Pacific coast after an outbreak on Easter Island.

What's certain is that Brazil's response to the crisis came late and may already have fallen short. Consider Health Minister Marcelo Castro's advice to families thinking about having children: "Sex is for amateurs. Pregnancy is for professionals," he said in November. True, after the surge in microcephaly cases, President Dilma Rousseff declared a "war on the virus," deploying police and even the armed forces to join public health workers in a door-to-door mission to preach prevention and root out the disease.

As encouraging as that sounds, the pathogens are faster. Zika is only the latest epidemic transmitted by an old scourge: Aedes aegypti, a stripe-legged mosquito that not only flourishes in the steamy tropics but is also at home in cities.

A century ago, the panic was over yellow fever. But when a vaccine was found in the 1930s and the crisis passed, so did mosquito control. That cleared the way for dengue fever, an affliction that made the jump from Asia to the Americas in the 1980s and quickly spread on the wings of Aedes aegypti. Dengue is now a pandemic, with four separate strains contaminating 390 million people a year worldwide. Last decade, Brazil accounted for 60 percent of infections, and the country has logged more than 5 million cases since 2010. After years of research, the first of several dengue vaccines under development has been cleared for marketing in Brazil, Mexico and the Philippines.

There is no vaccine for Zika and no known treatment, which leaves battling mosquitoes the only recourse. That's a war best fought in September and October, when milder weather makes bug control manageable. By December, with temperatures spiking and mosquitoes swarming, there is little to be done.

Until a few months ago, however, health authorities were distracted by another exotic newcomer from Africa called chikungunya, but that virus petered out. No one was ready for Zika.

Underestimating a threat, then scrambling when the crisis hits: It's a familiar script in Latin America, and exactly the sort of blind spot that emerging diseases love. "We've been fighting a losing battle with the mosquito for 30 years," said virologist Mauricio Nogueira. By the time the authorities were paying attention, Zika had become an epidemic. Throw in underfunded hospitals and faulty primary care, and a full-blown public health crisis was born.

Though Brazil has laudable disease-control protocols, the outbreak quickly overwhelmed government-run health services. Testing for Zika is a complex and painstaking process that only 16 government-controlled labs nationwide are currently authorized to perform. Others will soon join the fight, but first they must jump some regulatory hoops -- a sensible precaution against fly-by-night labs and opportunists -- in a regimen that can take six to 12 months. That's precious time in an emergency, said Jose Mauro Peralta, an infectious-disease expert at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

And yet there is just so much government can do before a wily enemy. "This mosquito is a genius," said Sylvain Aldighieri, chief of epidemic alert and response at the Pan American Health Organization. Aedes aegypti has adapted perfectly to contemporary urban life, he said: It likes dirty water or clean. It can breed in an old truck tire, a shantytown gutter, or in the bromeliads that garland the verandas of Rio's luxury high-rises.

That makes Zika a moving target. The only way to root out such a generalized health problem is to enlist the entire country. Brazil did that early last century, when it dispatched soldiers to forcibly vaccinate citizens against smallpox, provoking a "violent revolt." Authorities have struggled ever since with how to engage the urban masses in the face of a public health threat without trampling democracy. "Eliminating the mosquito is a cultural problem," said Nogueira. "People still wait for the state to take charge."

That same inertia has led Brazil to squander vital resources. Ask Gubio Soares, a Federal University of Bahia virologist who flagged some of the country's first cases of Zika but has since had to abandon his efforts to fight it. "I have no funding for Zika," he told me. "I've never been invited by any official to develop a research project."

And so Brazilians, who are already battling dengue, must also brace for what some are calling the "Zika summer." With a vaccine likely years away and mosquitoes proliferating, there's little option but to slather on bug repellent -- one of Isabella Tartari's patients bought 150 tubes -- and appeal to a higher authority.

"We are thinking of starting a prayer group," said Isabela Maia, who is five months pregnant. It can't hurt.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Mac Margolis at mmargolis14@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Brooke Sample at bsample1@bloomberg.net
 

Richard

TB Fanatic
And experts can only guess at how a sleeper disease that emerged in the forests of Uganda in 1947 and was known only for scattered outbreaks in the Pacific Islands since then ended up as an urban public health emergency halfway around the globe.

Simple answer someone brought it over to Brazil, it may have lain dormant for a while.
 

FarmerJohn

Has No Life - Lives on TB
DDT works great, for a while.

It's repeated application has been used as a tool to induce outbreaks of mites in citrus. That was for the benefit of aspiring mitologists in college or graduate school. Even the mosquitoes eventually become resistant and then you still got mosquitoes and now you have also nearly wiped out the raptors.

The grandfather that I remember extolling the virtues of DDT is the same one that later bought me a life membership in the Sierra Club as a Christmas gift.

My spellchecker says that "mitologist" is not a real word. Am I spelling it wrong?
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
DDT works great, for a while.

It's repeated application has been used as a tool to induce outbreaks of mites in citrus. That was for the benefit of aspiring mitologists in college or graduate school. Even the mosquitoes eventually become resistant and then you still got mosquitoes and now you have also nearly wiped out the raptors.

The grandfather that I remember extolling the virtues of DDT is the same one that later bought me a life membership in the Sierra Club as a Christmas gift.

My spellchecker says that "mitologist" is not a real word. Am I spelling it wrong?

Two other materials are also effective in killing mosquitos, nicotine and caffeine, when sprayed into water where larvae and eggs are present.
 

Mercury3

Veteran Member
microcephaly, a condition that leads to exceptionally small infant head size, which causes lasting neurological damage and can lead to death.

What? Infant size head?

Oh I take it this means if a woman gets this while pregnant.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
What? Infant size head?

Oh I take it this means if a woman gets this while pregnant.

The baby is born with a tiny head, usually brain damage and often does not live or suffers severe retardation if it does live- By not sorting this Brazil risks hundreds if not thousands of children who will either die or be totally dependent on the State for care in their later years; but the problem with a third world economy is they can't think ahead like that and can only deal with what they have at the moment.

DDT might be a very short term "nuclear bomb" in a crises but the bugs become immune and it kills off other wildlife (like birds) that also lower the bug populations - so not a long-term fix which is why it fell out of use.

DSCN0398-269x192.jpg

microcephaly-photos.jpg
 

Scotto

Set Apart
DDT works great, for a while.

It's repeated application has been used as a tool to induce outbreaks of mites in citrus. That was for the benefit of aspiring mitologists in college or graduate school. Even the mosquitoes eventually become resistant and then you still got mosquitoes and now you have also nearly wiped out the raptors.

An except from:

Facts versus fears: DDT

In 1962 Rachel Carson’s lyrical yet scientifically flawed book Silent Spring was released. The book argued eloquently but erroneously that pesticides, and especially DDT, were poisoning both wildlife and the environment and also endangering human health. The emotional public reaction to Silent Spring launched the modern environmental movement. DDT became the prime target of the growing anti-chemical and anti-pesticide movements during the 1960s. Reasoned scientific discussion and sound data on the favorable human health effects of DDT were brushed aside by environmental alarmists who discounted DDT’s enormous benefits to world health with two allegations: (1) DDT was a carcinogen, and (2) it endangered the environment, particularly for certain birds.

In 1969 a study found a higher incidence of leukemia and liver tumors in mice fed DDT than in unexposed mice. Soon, too, environmentalists were blaming the decline in populations of such wild bird species as the osprey and peregrine falcon on the contamination by DDT of their environment. A number of states moved to ban DDT, and in 1970 the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced a plan to phase out all but essential uses.

Numerous scientists protested that the laboratory-animal studies flew in the face of epidemiology, given that DDT had been used widely during the preceding 25 years with no increase in liver cancer in any of the populations among whom it had been sprayed. And when the World Health Organization (WHO) investigated the 1969 mice study, scientists discovered that both cases and controls had developed a surprising number of tumors. Further investigation revealed that the foods fed to both mice groups were moldy and contained aflatoxin, a carcinogen. When the tests were repeated using noncontaminated foods, neither group developed tumors.

In 1970 the National Academy of Sciences declared, “In little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million human deaths due to malaria, that would otherwise have been inevitable.”

Additionally, the evidence regarding the effect of DDT on eggshell thinning among wild birds is contradictory at best. The environmentalist literature claims that the birds threatened directly by the insecticide were laying eggs with thin shells. These shells, say the environmentalists, would eventually become so fragile that the eggs would break, causing a decline in bird populations, particularly among raptors (birds of prey).

In 1968 two researchers, Drs. Joseph J. Hickey and Daniel W. Anderson, reported that high concentrations of DDT were found in the eggs of wild raptor populations. The two concluded that increased eggshell fragility in peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and ospreys was due to DDT exposure. Dr. Joel Bitman and associates at the U.S. Department of Agriculture likewise determined that Japanese quail fed DDT produced eggs with thinner shells and lower calcium content.

In actuality, however, declines in bird populations either had occurred before DDT was present or had occured years after DDT’s use. A comparison of the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Counts between 1941 (pre-DDT) and 1960 (after DDT’s use had waned) reveals that at least 26 different kinds of birds became more numerous during those decades, the period of greatest DDT usage. The Audubon counts document an overall increase in birds seen per observer from 1941 to 1960, and statistical analyses of the Audubon data confirm the perceived increases. For example, only 197 bald eagles were documented in 1941; the number had increased to 891 in 1960.

(So during the years DDT was used, bald eagle populations increaded more than 4.5 times the eagle populations PRIOR to DDT usage)

At Hawk Mountain, Pennsylvania, teams of ornithologists made daily counts of migrating raptors for over 40 years. The counts—published annually by the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary Association—reveal great increases in most kinds of hawks during the DDT years. The osprey counts increased as follows: in 1946, 191; in 1956, 288; in 1967, 457; and in 1972, 630.13 In 1942 Dr. Joseph Hickey—who in 1968 would blame DDT for bird population decline—reported that 70 per-cent of the eastern osprey population had been killed by pole traps around fish hatcheries. That same year, before DDT came into use, Hickey noted a decline in the population of peregrine falcons.

Other observers also documented that the great peregrine decline in the eastern United States occurred long before any DDT was present in the environment. In Canada peregrines were observed to be “reproducing normally” in the 1960s even though their tissues contained 30 times more DDT than did the tissues of the midwestern peregrines allegedly being extirpated by the chemical. And in Great Britain, in 1969, a three-year government study noted that the decline of peregrine falcons in Britain had ended in 1966 even though DDT levels were as abundant as ever. The British study concluded that “There is no close correlation between the decline in population of predatory birds, particularly the peregrine falcon and the sparrow hawk, and the use of DDT.”

In addition, later research refuted the original studies that had pointed to DDT as a cause for eggshell thinning. After reassessing their findings using more modern methodology, Drs. Hickey and Anderson admitted that the egg extracts they had studied contained little or no DDT and said they were now pursuing PCBs, chemicals used as capacitor insulators, as the culprit.

When carefully reviewed, Dr. Bitman’s study revealed that the quail in the study were fed a diet with a calcium content of only 0.56 percent (a normal quail diet consists of 2.7 percent calcium). Calcium deficiency is a known cause of thin eggshells. After much criticism, Bitman repeated the test, this time with sufficient calcium levels. The birds produced eggs without thinned shells.

After many years of carefully controlled feeding experiments, Dr. M. L. Scott and associates of the Department of Poultry Science at Cornell University “found no tremors, no mortality, no thinning of eggshells and no interference with reproduction caused by levels of DDT which were as high as those reported to be present in most of the wild birds where ‘catastrophic’ decreases in shell quality and reproduction have been claimed.” In fact, thinning eggshells can have many causes, including season of the year, nutrition (in particular insufficient calcium, phosphorus, vitamin D, and manganese), temperature rise, type of soil, and breeding conditions (e.g., sunlight and crowding).

http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C06Links/www.altgreen.com.au/Chemicals/ddt.html
 

FarmerJohn

Has No Life - Lives on TB
"File not found" on American Council on Science and Health. That link has been taken down. Perhaps it was tainted by its being viewed as too "industry-freindly" by informed observers.

I've read that Aedes aegypti can breed successfully with as little as a bottle cap of water.

The mosquitoes prefer to breed in areas of stagnant water, such as flower vases, uncovered barrels, buckets, and discarded tires, but the most dangerous areas are wet shower floors and toilet tanks, as they allow the mosquitos to breed in the residence. Research has shown that certain chemicals emanating from bacteria in water containers stimulate the female mosquitoes to lay their eggs. They are particularly motivated to lay eggs in water containers that have the correct amounts of specific fatty acids associated with bacteria involved in the degradation of leaves and other organic matter in water. The chemicals associated with the microbial stew are far more stimulating to discerning female mosquitoes than plain or filtered water in which the bacteria once lived.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aedes_aegypti
 
D

Dazed

Guest
The "science" on DDT is as poorly done as the "Science" on

Vaccines/"Autism" and the "science" of glowbal warming....

It doesn't matter. It is what the very vocal minority wants it to be.
There is zero evidence to anyone with a brain that DDT damaged the falcons, that it caused cancer or that Glowbal warming is actually happening....and a lot of evidence that all the studies of these and the vaccine/autism studies are pretty much bullshit.

Doesn't matter. Like some people are with radiation, they Believe and that is all that matters....Science be dammned. Except that it affects the rest of us and our lives.....

An except from:

Facts versus fears: DDT

In 1962 Rachel Carson’s lyrical yet scientifically flawed book Silent Spring was released. The book argued eloquently but erroneously that pesticides, and especially DDT, were poisoning both wildlife and the environment and also endangering human health. The emotional public reaction to Silent Spring launched the modern environmental movement. DDT became the prime target of the growing anti-chemical and anti-pesticide movements during the 1960s. Reasoned scientific discussion and sound data on the favorable human health effects of DDT were brushed aside by environmental alarmists who discounted DDT’s enormous benefits to world health with two allegations: (1) DDT was a carcinogen, and (2) it endangered the environment, particularly for certain birds.

In 1969 a study found a higher incidence of leukemia and liver tumors in mice fed DDT than in unexposed mice. Soon, too, environmentalists were blaming the decline in populations of such wild bird species as the osprey and peregrine falcon on the contamination by DDT of their environment. A number of states moved to ban DDT, and in 1970 the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced a plan to phase out all but essential uses.

Numerous scientists protested that the laboratory-animal studies flew in the face of epidemiology, given that DDT had been used widely during the preceding 25 years with no increase in liver cancer in any of the populations among whom it had been sprayed. And when the World Health Organization (WHO) investigated the 1969 mice study, scientists discovered that both cases and controls had developed a surprising number of tumors. Further investigation revealed that the foods fed to both mice groups were moldy and contained aflatoxin, a carcinogen. When the tests were repeated using noncontaminated foods, neither group developed tumors.

In 1970 the National Academy of Sciences declared, “In little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million human deaths due to malaria, that would otherwise have been inevitable.”

Additionally, the evidence regarding the effect of DDT on eggshell thinning among wild birds is contradictory at best. The environmentalist literature claims that the birds threatened directly by the insecticide were laying eggs with thin shells. These shells, say the environmentalists, would eventually become so fragile that the eggs would break, causing a decline in bird populations, particularly among raptors (birds of prey).

In 1968 two researchers, Drs. Joseph J. Hickey and Daniel W. Anderson, reported that high concentrations of DDT were found in the eggs of wild raptor populations. The two concluded that increased eggshell fragility in peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and ospreys was due to DDT exposure. Dr. Joel Bitman and associates at the U.S. Department of Agriculture likewise determined that Japanese quail fed DDT produced eggs with thinner shells and lower calcium content.

In actuality, however, declines in bird populations either had occurred before DDT was present or had occured years after DDT’s use. A comparison of the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Counts between 1941 (pre-DDT) and 1960 (after DDT’s use had waned) reveals that at least 26 different kinds of birds became more numerous during those decades, the period of greatest DDT usage. The Audubon counts document an overall increase in birds seen per observer from 1941 to 1960, and statistical analyses of the Audubon data confirm the perceived increases. For example, only 197 bald eagles were documented in 1941; the number had increased to 891 in 1960.

(So during the years DDT was used, bald eagle populations increaded more than 4.5 times the eagle populations PRIOR to DDT usage)

At Hawk Mountain, Pennsylvania, teams of ornithologists made daily counts of migrating raptors for over 40 years. The counts—published annually by the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary Association—reveal great increases in most kinds of hawks during the DDT years. The osprey counts increased as follows: in 1946, 191; in 1956, 288; in 1967, 457; and in 1972, 630.13 In 1942 Dr. Joseph Hickey—who in 1968 would blame DDT for bird population decline—reported that 70 per-cent of the eastern osprey population had been killed by pole traps around fish hatcheries. That same year, before DDT came into use, Hickey noted a decline in the population of peregrine falcons.

Other observers also documented that the great peregrine decline in the eastern United States occurred long before any DDT was present in the environment. In Canada peregrines were observed to be “reproducing normally” in the 1960s even though their tissues contained 30 times more DDT than did the tissues of the midwestern peregrines allegedly being extirpated by the chemical. And in Great Britain, in 1969, a three-year government study noted that the decline of peregrine falcons in Britain had ended in 1966 even though DDT levels were as abundant as ever. The British study concluded that “There is no close correlation between the decline in population of predatory birds, particularly the peregrine falcon and the sparrow hawk, and the use of DDT.”

In addition, later research refuted the original studies that had pointed to DDT as a cause for eggshell thinning. After reassessing their findings using more modern methodology, Drs. Hickey and Anderson admitted that the egg extracts they had studied contained little or no DDT and said they were now pursuing PCBs, chemicals used as capacitor insulators, as the culprit.

When carefully reviewed, Dr. Bitman’s study revealed that the quail in the study were fed a diet with a calcium content of only 0.56 percent (a normal quail diet consists of 2.7 percent calcium). Calcium deficiency is a known cause of thin eggshells. After much criticism, Bitman repeated the test, this time with sufficient calcium levels. The birds produced eggs without thinned shells.

After many years of carefully controlled feeding experiments, Dr. M. L. Scott and associates of the Department of Poultry Science at Cornell University “found no tremors, no mortality, no thinning of eggshells and no interference with reproduction caused by levels of DDT which were as high as those reported to be present in most of the wild birds where ‘catastrophic’ decreases in shell quality and reproduction have been claimed.” In fact, thinning eggshells can have many causes, including season of the year, nutrition (in particular insufficient calcium, phosphorus, vitamin D, and manganese), temperature rise, type of soil, and breeding conditions (e.g., sunlight and crowding).

http://dwb.unl.edu/Teacher/NSF/C06/C06Links/www.altgreen.com.au/Chemicals/ddt.html
 

China Connection

TB Fanatic
Mosquito fish


is


is



The western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) is a species of freshwater fish, also known commonly, if ambiguously, as simply mosquitofish or by its generic name, Gambusia, or by the common name gambezi. There is also an eastern mosquitofish (G. holbrooki).[2]

Mosquitofish are small in comparison to many other freshwater fish, with females reaching an overall length of 7 cm (2.8 in) and males at a length of 4 cm (1.6 in). The female can be distinguished from the male by her larger size and a gravid spot at the posterior of her abdomen. The name "mosquitofish" was given because the diet of this fish sometimes consists of large numbers of mosquito larvae, relative to body size.[3] Gambusia typically eat zooplankton, beetles, mayflies, caddisflies, mites, and other invertebrates; mosquito larvae make up only a small portion of their diet.[4]

Mosquitofish were introduced directly into ecosystems in many parts of the world as a biocontrol to lower mosquito populations which in turn negatively affected many other species in each distinct bioregion. Mosquitofish in Australia are classified as a noxious pest and may have exacerbated the mosquito problem in many areas by outcompeting native invertebrate predators of mosquito larvae. Several counties in California distribute mosquitofish at no charge to residents with manmade fish ponds and pools as part of their mosquito abatement programs.[5][6][7] The fish are made available to residents only and are intended to be used solely on their own property, not introduced into natural habitat. On 24 February 2014, Chennai Corporation introduced western mosquitofish in 660 ponds to control the mosquito population in freshwater bodies.[8]

Fertilization is internal; the male secretes milt into the genital aperture of the female through his gonopodium.[3][9] Within 16 to 28 days after mating, the female gives birth to about 60 young.[3][10] The males reach sexual maturity within 43 to 62 days. The females, if born early in the reproductive season, reach sexual maturity within 21 to 28 days; females born later in the season reach sexual maturity in six to seven months.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquitofish
 
Top