There are diseases hidden in the ice, and they are waking up.

Long-dormant bacteria and viruses, trapped in ice and permafrost for centuries, are reviving as Earth's climate warms

Throughout history, humans have existed side-by-side with bacteria and viruses. From the bubonic plague to smallpox, we have evolved to resist them, and in response they have developed new ways of infecting us.

We have had antibiotics for over a century, ever since Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin. In response, bacteria have responded by evolving antibiotic resistance. The battle is endless: because we spend so much time with pathogens, we sometimes develop a kind of natural stalemate.

However, what would happen if we were suddenly exposed to deadly bacteria and viruses that have been absent for thousands of years, or that we have never met before?

We may be about to find out. Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life.

In August 2016, in a remote corner of Siberian tundra called the Yamal Peninsula in the Arctic Circle, a 12-year-old boy died and at least twenty people were hospitalised after being infected by anthrax.

The theory is that, over 75 years ago, a reindeer infected with anthrax died and its frozen carcass became trapped under a layer of frozen soil, known as permafrost. There it stayed until a heatwave in the summer of 2016, when the permafrost thawed.

This exposed the reindeer corpse and released infectious anthrax into nearby water and soil, and then into the food supply. More than 2,000 reindeer grazing nearby became infected, which then led to the small number of human cases.

The fear is that this will not be an isolated case.

As the Earth warms, more permafrost will melt. Under normal circumstances, superficial permafrost layers about 50cm deep melt every summer. But now global warming is gradually exposing older permafrost layers.

Frozen permafrost soil is the perfect place for bacteria to remain alive for very long periods of time, perhaps as long as a million years. That means melting ice could potentially open a Pandora's box of diseases.

The temperature in the Arctic Circle is rising quickly, about three times faster than in the rest of the world. As the ice and permafrost melt, other infectious agents may be released.

"Permafrost is a very good preserver of microbes and viruses, because it is cold, there is no oxygen, and it is dark," says evolutionary biologist Jean-Michel Claverie at Aix-Marseille University in France. "Pathogenic viruses that can infect humans or animals might be preserved in old permafrost layers, including some that have caused global epidemics in the past."

In the early 20th Century alone, more than a million reindeer died from anthrax. It is not easy to dig deep graves, so most of these carcasses are buried close to the surface, scattered among 7,000 burial grounds in northern Russia.

However, the big fear is what else is lurking beneath the frozen soil.

People and animals have been buried in permafrost for centuries, so it is conceivable that other infectious agents could be unleashed. For instance, scientists have discovered intact 1918

Spanish flu virus in corpses buried in mass graves in Alaska's tundra. Smallpox and the bubonic plague are also likely buried in Siberia.

In a 2011 study, Boris Revich and Marina Podolnaya wrote: "As a consequence of permafrost melting, the vectors of deadly infections of the 18th and 19th Centuries may come back, especially near the cemeteries where the victims of these infections were buried."

For instance, in the 1890s there was a major epidemic of smallpox in Siberia. One town lost up to 40% of its population. Their bodies were buried under the upper layer of permafrost on the banks of the Kolyma River. 120 years later, Kolyma's floodwaters have started eroding the banks, and the melting of the permafrost has speeded up this erosion process.

In a project that began in the 1990s, scientists from the State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology in Novosibirsk have tested the remains of Stone Age people that had been found in southern Siberia, in the region of Gorny Altai. They have also tested samples from the corpses of men who had died during viral epidemics in the 19th Century and were buried in the Russian permafrost.

The researchers say they have found bodies with sores characteristic of the marks left by smallpox. While they did not find the smallpox virus itself, they have detected fragments of its DNA.

Certainly it is not the first time that bacteria frozen in ice have come back to life.

In a 2005 study, NASA scientists successfully revived bacteria that had been encased in a frozen pond in Alaska for 32,000 years. The microbes, called Carnobacterium pleistocenium, had been frozen since the Pleistocene period, when woolly mammoths still roamed the Earth. Once the ice melted, they began swimming around, seemingly unaffected.

Two years later, scientists managed to revive an 8-million-year-old bacterium that had been lying dormant in ice, beneath the surface of a glacier in the Beacon and Mullins valleys of Antarctica. In the same study, bacteria were also revived from ice that was over 100,000 years old.

However, not all bacteria can come back to life after being frozen in permafrost. Anthrax bacteria can do so because they form spores, which are extremely hardy and can survive frozen for longer than a century.

Other bacteria that can form spores, and so could survive in permafrost, include tetanus and Clostridium botulinum, the pathogen responsible for botulism: a rare illness that can cause paralysis and even prove fatal. Some fungi can also survive in permafrost for a long time.

Some viruses can also survive for lengthy periods.

In a 2014 study, a team led by Claverie revived two viruses that had been trapped in Siberian permafrost for 30,000 years. Known as Pithovirus sibericum and Mollivirus sibericum, they are both "giant viruses", because unlike most viruses they are so big they can be seen under a regular microscope. They were discovered 100ft underground in coastal tundra.

Once they were revived, the viruses quickly became infectious. Fortunately for us, these particular viruses only infect single-celled amoebas. Still, the study suggests that other viruses, which really could infect humans, might be revived in the same way.

What's more, global warming does not have to directly melt permafrost to pose a threat. Because the Arctic sea ice is melting, the north shore of Siberia has become more easily accessible by sea.

As a result, industrial exploitation, including mining for gold and minerals, and drilling for oil and natural gas, is now becoming profitable.

"At the moment, these regions are deserted and the deep permafrost layers are left alone," says Claverie. "However, these ancient layers could be exposed by the digging involved in mining and drilling operations. If viable virions are still there, this could spell disaster."

Giant viruses may be the most likely culprits for any such viral outbreak.

"Most viruses are rapidly inactivated outside host cells, due to light, desiccation, or spontaneous biochemical degradation," says Claverie. "For instance, if their DNA is damaged beyond possible repair, the virions will no longer be infectious.

However, among known viruses, the giant viruses tend to be very tough and almost impossible to break open."

Claverie says viruses from the very first humans to populate the Arctic could emerge. We could even see viruses from long-extinct hominin species like Neanderthals and Denisovans, both of which settled in Siberia and were riddled with various viral diseases. Remains of Neanderthals from 30-40,000 years ago have been spotted in Russia. Human populations have lived there, sickened and died for thousands of years.

"The possibility that we could catch a virus from a long-extinct Neanderthal suggests that the idea that a virus could be 'eradicated' from the planet is wrong, and gives us a false sense of security," says Claverie. "This is why stocks of vaccine should be kept, just in case."

Since 2014, Claverie has been analysing the DNA content of permafrost layers, searching for the genetic signature of viruses and bacteria that could infect humans. He has found evidence of many bacteria that are probably dangerous to humans. The bacteria have DNA that encodes virulence factors: molecules that pathogenic bacteria and viruses produce, which increase their ability to infect a host.

Claverie's team has also found a few DNA sequences that seem to come from viruses, including herpes. However, they have not as yet found any trace of smallpox. For obvious reasons, they have not attempted to revive any of the pathogens.

It now seems that pathogens cut off from humans will emerge from other places too, not just ice or permafrost.

In February 2017, NASA scientists announced that they had found 10-50,000-year-old microbes inside crystals in a Mexican mine.

The bacteria were located in the Cave of the Crystals, part of a mine in Naica in northern Mexico. The cave contains many milky-white crystals of the mineral selenite, which formed over hundreds of thousands of years.

The bacteria were trapped inside small, fluid pockets of the crystals, but once they were removed they revived and began multiplying. The microbes are genetically unique and may well be new species, but the researchers are yet to publish their work.

Even older bacteria have been found in the Lechuguilla Cave in New Mexico, 1,000ft underground. These microbes have not seen the surface for over 4 million years.

Obviously, such ancient antibiotic resistance cannot have evolved in the clinic as a result of antibiotic use.

The reason for this is that many types of fungi, and even other bacteria, naturally produce antibiotics to gain a competitive advantage over other microbes. That is how Fleming first discovered penicillin: bacteria in a petri dish died after one became contaminated with an antibiotic-excreting mould.

In caves, where there is little food, organisms must be ruthless if they are to survive. Bacteria like Paenibacillus may have had to evolve antibiotic resistance in order to avoid being killed by rival organisms.

This would explain why the bacteria are only resistance to natural antibiotics, which come from bacteria and fungi, and make up about 99.9% of all the antibiotics we use. The bacteria have never come across man-made antibiotics, so do not have a resistance to them.

"Our work, and the work of others, suggests that antibiotic resistance is not a novel concept," says microbiologist Hazel Barton of the University of Akron, Ohio, who led the study. "Our organisms have been isolated from surface species from 4-7 million years, yet the resistance that they have is genetically identical to that found in surface species. This means that these genes are at least that old, and didn't emerge from the human use of antibiotics for treatment."

Although Paenibacillus itself is not harmful to humans, it could in theory pass on its antibiotic resistance to other pathogens. However, as it is isolated beneath 400m of rock, this seems unlikely.

Nevertheless, natural antibiotic resistance is probably so prevalent that many of the bacteria emerging from melting permafrost may already have it. In line with that, in a 2011 study scientists extracted DNA from bacteria found in 30,000-year-old permafrost in the Beringian region between Russia and Canada. They found genes encoding resistance to beta-lactam, tetracycline and glycopeptide antibiotics.

How much should we be concerned about all this?
One argument is that the risk from permafrost pathogens is inherently unknowable, so they should not overtly concern us. Instead, we should focus on more established threats from climate change. For instance, as Earth warms northern countries will become more susceptible to outbreaks of "southern" diseases like malaria, cholera and dengue fever, as these pathogens thrive at warmer temperatures.
The alternative perspective is that we should not ignore risks just because we cannot quantify them.

"Following our work and that of others, there is now a non-zero probability that pathogenic microbes could be revived, and infect us," says Claverie. "How likely that is is not known, but it's a possibility. It could be bacteria that are curable with antibiotics, or resistant bacteria, or a virus. If the pathogen hasn't been in contact with humans for a long time, then our immune system would not be prepared. So yes, that could be dangerous."


http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170504-there-are-diseases-hidden-in-ice-and-they-are-waking-up?ocid=fbert

Bring it on, thin a few of the herd

miketrees wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 12:48pm:

Bring it on, thin a few of the herd

And if the herd includes you or your loved ones?

mothra wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 12:47pm:

How much should we be concerned about all this?

That depends, Mother. Are the leftards involved?

Enquiring mind wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:10pm:

mothra wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 12:47pm: How much should we be concerned about all this? That depends, Mother. Are the leftards involved?

Indeed they are. But alas, so are the rightards.

Microbes don't discriminate or we'd obviously have no tinted people left by now.

Another useless thread

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:15pm:

Another useless thread

Over your head, was it?

Climate is not allowed to change.

For the deer to die of the anthrax and be buried beneath the permafrost, ( permafrost is ground that hasn't thawed in more than two years), 75 years ago; should tell us 75years ago the Arctic was warmer and the permafrost less.

That accords with the view that the 1940's were as warm as today. 2016 minus 75 about 1941.

Oh god, here we go.  ::)

mothra wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:30pm:

Oh god, here we go.  ::)

You want to refute something I wrote?

lee wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:32pm:

mothra wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:30pm: Oh god, here we go.  ::) You want to refute something I wrote?

I don't want to play with you at all.

mothra wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:33pm:

I don't want to play with you at all.

That's good. I'm not in the market. ;)

mothra wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:21pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:15pm: Another useless thread Over your head, was it?

No, it just doesn't have any leftards in it.

Can't we find microbes that discriminate?

Not racist, of course. Microbes are not a race.

Quick, there is an unknown disease in ULAS J0744+25 .


Let's all .......... fret about it.

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 2:49pm:

Quick, there is an unknown disease in ULAS J0744+25 . Let's all .......... fret about it.

So, quite some distance over your head then?

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 2:49pm:

Quick, there is an unknown disease in ULAS J0744+25 . Let's all .......... fret about it.

Quick, there's a woman in a niqab on Park Street.

Let's all...

Cesterete them.

There is almost certainly vicious microbes laying dormant and the defrosting permafrost is probably a hazard, how serious a hazard I have no idea.

The Spanish flu is an interesting one, we may have lost resistance to that strain by now, plus if it can share DNA with other viruses we could have another outbreak.

We are sitting ducks with about 1 million people in the air at any time of the day, any virus can get 360 degree distribution in a very short time.
Its ironic we have much stronger quarantine laws for plants and animals than we have for humans.

Its almost certain that we will have more pandemics, as our population gets higher the greater the chance for a viral mutation,,, its natures way of keeping the population down.

miketrees wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 6:15pm:

There is almost certainly vicious microbes laying dormant and the defrosting permafrost is probably a hazard, how serious a hazard I have no idea. The Spanish flu is an interesting one, we may have lost resistance to that strain by now, plus if it can share DNA with other viruses we could have another outbreak. We are sitting ducks with about 1 million people in the air at any time of the day, any virus can get 360 degree distribution in a very short time. Its ironic we have much stronger quarantine laws for plants and animals than we have for humans. Its almost certain that we will have more pandemics, as our population gets higher the greater the chance for a viral mutation,,, its natures way of keeping the population down.

Nature can go and get fcked. We'll keep our own population down, thanks.

Ban them. Kill them. Cesterete them.

Enquiring mind wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 2:14pm:

mothra wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:21pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:15pm: Another useless thread Over your head, was it? No, it just doesn't have any leftards in it. Can't we find microbes that discriminate? Not racist, of course. Microbes are not a race.

Alas, we cannot convince the microbes o discriminate.

We can, however, deny medical treatment to people we don't like.

Will that do?

mothra wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 8:16pm:

Enquiring mind wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 2:14pm: mothra wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:21pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:15pm: Another useless thread Over your head, was it? No, it just doesn't have any leftards in it. Can't we find microbes that discriminate? Not racist, of course. Microbes are not a race. Alas, we cannot convince the microbes o discriminate. We can, however, deny medical treatment to people we don't like. Will that do?

It's a start I suppose, but our ultimate objective should be to eradicate them.

Freeeedom, innit.

Enquiring mind wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 8:26pm:

mothra wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 8:16pm: Enquiring mind wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 2:14pm: mothra wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:21pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on May 5th, 2017 at 1:15pm: Another useless thread Over your head, was it? No, it just doesn't have any leftards in it. Can't we find microbes that discriminate? Not racist, of course. Microbes are not a race. Alas, we cannot convince the microbes o discriminate. We can, however, deny medical treatment to people we don't like. Will that do? It's a start I suppose, but our ultimate objective should be to eradicate them. Freeeedom, innit.

Well, we've also damned their rivers, making stagnant bodies of water that breed copious amounts of disease bearing mosquitoes.

And then there's the odd haemorrhagic fever.

Patience.

mothra wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 12:47pm:

How much should we be concerned about all this? One argument is that the risk from permafrost pathogens is inherently unknowable, so they should not overtly concern us. Instead, we should focus on more established threats from climate change. For instance, as Earth warms northern countries will become more susceptible to outbreaks of "southern" diseases like malaria, cholera and dengue fever, as these pathogens thrive at warmer temperatures. The alternative perspective is that we should not ignore risks just because we cannot quantify them. "Following our work and that of others, there is now a non-zero probability that pathogenic microbes could be revived, and infect us," says Claverie. "How likely that is is not known, but it's a possibility. It could be bacteria that are curable with antibiotics, or resistant bacteria, or a virus. If the pathogen hasn't been in contact with humans for a long time, then our immune system would not be prepared. So yes, that could be dangerous." http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170504-there-are-diseases-hidden-in-ice-and-they-are-waking-up?ocid=fbert

As our history shows the Earth warms and cools as part of her natural cycle with reference to all the many natural influential factors that govern these cycles.

We have been warming since 1700 coming out of the little ice age.

This is not the first time bacteria and viruses have survived frozen by a cold spell to come back and infect us.

Climate change has been happening since the Earth formed and will continue until the Earth is no more, man cannot bottle climate change all he can hope is to adapt to it.

http://i68.tinypic.com/2ih1czn.jpg http://i68.tinypic.com/jzikat.jpg

Yes this isn't new news

it been happening since day dot.

Old diseases resurfacing for one reason & another

anti-vaxxers also have a hand in the resurgence of once

eliminated diseases.

Gnads wrote on May 6^th, 2017 at 10:17am:

Yes this isn't new news it been happening since day dot. Old diseases resurfacing for one reason & another anti-vaxxers also have a hand in the resurgence of once eliminated diseases.

Disease is nature's way of controlling the population.

Antivaxxers are a pernicious influence. Measles outbreaks are “just childhood diseases” to them tho some have died from it recently. I wonder when the next polio epidemic will hit?

Some of the diseases have acquired resistance to antibiotics. TB for one.

Quote:

Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life.

Viruses and Bacteria that have been dormant for thousands of years, we are likely to have ZERO immunity to.

With global mobility these pathogens are likely to spread to even developed countries.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 11:38am:

Quote: Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life. Viruses and Bacteria that have been dormant for thousands of years, we are likely to have ZERO immunity to. With global mobility these pathogens are likely to spread to even developed countries.

I don't know where you got your quote.

"By definition, frozen ground or permafrost has existed below 0°C for over 2 years."

http://www.victoria.ac.nz/antarctic/research/permafrost

Not saying it can't be "frozen for thousands of years". But it may not be.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 11:38am:

Quote: Climate change is melting permafrost soils that have been frozen for thousands of years, and as the soils melt they are releasing ancient viruses and bacteria that, having lain dormant, are springing back to life. Viruses and Bacteria that have been dormant for thousands of years, we are likely to have ZERO immunity to. With global mobility these pathogens are likely to spread to even developed countries.

At last! Someone who gets it.

Indeed. And it's not just through global warming that we are seeing the arrival of these pathogens. It's through deep earth exploration and deforestation also.

Are ou familiar with the Machupo virus?  A perfect storm of oligarchies and their desires and deforestation.

There will be more of it.

An the suggestion that the Spanish Flu could rear it's ugly head? or any possible recombination including it?

Dangerous days.

Actually we live in dangerous days for many other reasons other than melting permafrost as well.

Virus mutations and recombination is a numbers game, the more humans the higher the chance of mutations.

The more humans, the more chance of transfer of viruses from animals to humans.

The degree of increase risk due to permafrost melting would be difficult to quantify, but I am certain it exists.

miketrees wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 11:55am:

Actually we live in dangerous days for many other reasons other than melting permafrost as well. Virus mutations and recombination is a numbers game, the more humans the higher the chance of mutations. The more humans, the more chance of transfer of viruses from animals to humans. The degree of increase risk due to permafrost melting would be difficult to quantify, but I am certain it exists.

Isn;t that what i said?

But anyway, it's not just humans, it's intensive farming of livestock.

Bird and swine flu, for example.

And that's just a fraction of the viruses. We've got a whole world of pain coming to us through antibiotic resistance.

It's a biological arms race that we cannot possibly win.

I doubt we are saying the same thing.

Intensive animal farming is actually much safer than conventional farming when it comes to virus transfers.
You would require some understanding of farming to appreciate that however.

Australia is pretty good with the control of anti biotics, that wont save us as the superbugs can easily be imported from other countries(India) that have virtually no controls in place.

I think we should have a worldwide ban on a few old antibiotics (non patented) then have them available in 15/20 years time,,, we may find without exposure the bacteria will lose their resistance.
Then in 15 years time start rotating the banned antibiotics so we always have some to bring back.

They need to be unpatented ones to avoid legal battles.

miketrees wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 12:11pm:

I doubt we are saying the same thing. Intensive animal farming is actually much safer than conventional farming when it comes to virus transfers. You would require some understanding of farming to appreciate that however. Australia is pretty good with the control of anti biotics, that wont save us as the superbugs can easily be imported from other countries(India) that have virtually no controls in place. I think we should have a worldwide ban on a few old antibiotics (non patented) then have them available in 15/20 years time,,, we may find without exposure the bacteria will lose their resistance. Then in 15 years time start rotating the banned antibiotics so we always have some to bring back. They need to be unpatented ones to avoid legal battles.

Hilarious.

Let me break this down point by point.

Are you aware of how the avian flu and the swine flu broke out? I don;t think you are. You are ethnocentrcially thinking of Australian farming practices and not those of the rest of the world.

But bless you for trying.

But speaking of the western world farming practices, heard of E. coli O157:H7i popping up in bizarre places? You should have.

Among other things.

And "superbugs" are already in our hospitals. Would you like me tell you how many shelved antibiotics we currently have in fear of massive outbreak? I wrote my thesis on this. You're right. I doubt very much we are talking about the same thing.

Hilarious.

Let me break this down point by point.

Are you aware of how the avian flu and the swine flu broke out? I don;t think you are. You are ethnocentrcially thinking of Australian farming practices and not those of the rest of the world.

But bless you for trying.

But speaking of the western world farming practices, heard of E. coli O157:H7i popping up in bizarre places? You should have.

Among other things.

And "superbugs" are already in our hospitals. Would you like me tell you how many shelved antibiotics we currently have in fear of massive outbreak? I wrote my thesis on this. You're right. I doubt very much we are talking about the same thing.


Its such a pity I am picking up hostility from you, you seem intelligent enough to have a dialog with, however like a lot of life's problems attitude can get in the way.


So

Intensive modern farming, way less animal to human contact, less chance of viral transfer as opposed to small family farms.
Modern farming, quarantine in place, risk assessments undertaken, control measures in place.


Perhaps we were yelling at cross purposes.

miketrees wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 12:46pm:

Hilarious. Let me break this down point by point. Are you aware of how the avian flu and the swine flu broke out? I don;t think you are. You are ethnocentrcially thinking of Australian farming practices and not those of the rest of the world. But bless you for trying. But speaking of the western world farming practices, heard of E. coli O157:H7i popping up in bizarre places? You should have. Among other things. And "superbugs" are already in our hospitals. Would you like me tell you how many shelved antibiotics we currently have in fear of massive outbreak? I wrote my thesis on this. You're right. I doubt very much we are talking about the same thing. Its such a pity I am picking up hostility from you, you seem intelligent enough to have a dialog with, however like a lot of life's problems attitude can get in the way. So Intensive modern farming, way less animal to human contact, less chance of viral transfer as opposed to small family farms. Modern farming, quarantine in place, risk assessments undertaken, control measures in place. Perhaps we were yelling at cross purposes.

Less animal to human contact at what point of the food chain precisely?

Less animal to human contact at what point of the food chain precisely?

Pretty much all the farm side, its highly automated and mechanised on modern feedlots, not much chance of viral exchange.
Risk assessments would also advocate wearing PPE to reduce viral exchange.

I am talking viral, bacterial problems are a different item with different risks and controls.

miketrees wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 1:06pm:

Less animal to human contact at what point of the food chain precisely? Pretty much all the farm side, its highly automated and mechanised on modern feedlots, not much chance of viral exchange. Risk assessments would also advocate wearing PPE to reduce viral exchange. I am talking viral, bacterial problems are a different item with different risks and controls.

You don't think viruses recombinate irrespective of who or what is around them?

How easily do you think a virus would spread amongst immuno-compromised stock?

What are he likelihoods of such a virus recombinating to zoonoses? Zero, you think?

You don't think viruses recombinate irrespective of who or what is around them?

(Its a numbers game, higher populations, more interaction, more chances of mutations/ recombinations)

How easily do you think a virus would spread amongst immuno-compromised stock?

Not sure where you are getting immuno compromised stock from, but any depression of the immune system is going to be a problem,,, I would include that in my risk assessment

What are he likelihoods of such a virus recombinating to zoonoses? Zero, you think?


Well no as I have pointed out, its a numbers game, more animals, more humans more interactions, the higher the likelihood.
the chance stays the same but the likelihood increases.

miketrees wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 1:26pm:

You don't think viruses recombinate irrespective of who or what is around them? (Its a numbers game, higher populations, more interaction, more chances of mutations/ recombinations) How easily do you think a virus would spread amongst immuno-compromised stock? Not sure where you are getting immuno compromised stock from, but any depression of the immune system is going to be a problem,,, I would include that in my risk assessment What are he likelihoods of such a virus recombinating to zoonoses? Zero, you think? Well no as I have pointed out, its a numbers game, more animals, more humans more interactions, the higher the likelihood. the chance stays the same but the likelihood increases.

Where am i getting immuno-compromised from? I thought you had some understanding of intensive farming? Sorry, my mistake.

But in short, we are in agreement. Intensive farming increases the risk of viral recombination therefore increases he risk of zoonosis.

A numbers game, innit.

Where am i getting immuno-compromised from? I thought you had some understanding of intensive farming? Sorry, my mistake. (Not required, I thought we were being civil)

There is less chance of a suppressed immune system in a modern farm, Good nutrition, good genetics, good vacinations

But in short, we are in agreement. Intensive farming increases the risk of viral recombination therefore increases he risk of zoonosis. No zoonosis also requires the viruses spread to humans, much less chance on modern farms due to risk controls in place.

A numbers game, innit. Well at least you learnt that

miketrees wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 1:43pm:

Where am i getting immuno-compromised from? I thought you had some understanding of intensive farming? Sorry, my mistake. (Not required, I thought we were being civil) There is less chance of a suppressed immune system in a modern farm, Good nutrition, good genetics, good vacinations But in short, we are in agreement. Intensive farming increases the risk of viral recombination therefore increases he risk of zoonosis. No zoonosis also requires the viruses spread to humans, much less chance on modern farms due to risk controls in place. A numbers game, innit. Well at least you learnt that

Good nutrition? Are you kidding me? Do you seriously think factory farmed animals eat as well as their wild counterparts? They are fattened up. that is all.

And are we worried about what they are vaccinated for? You do understand how viruses recombinate, yes?

Are you aware of the full chemistry lab that goes into breeding factory animals?

As i said earlier, it's a biological arms race we fool ourselves into thinking we can win.

Take nature out of context and you get to deal with nature out of context.

Oh gawd, I must have missed the lecture where they painted peace signs on the side of the cows,,, of course they eat better.

lee wrote on May 5^th, 2017 at 1:29pm:

Climate is not allowed to change. For the deer to die of the anthrax and be buried beneath the permafrost, ( permafrost is ground that hasn't thawed in more than two years), 75 years ago; should tell us 75years ago the Arctic was warmer and the permafrost less. That accords with the view that the 1940's were as warm as today. 2016 minus 75 about 1941.

If the arctic was that warm the deer carcase would have rotted away. It was cold and the carcase froze and staid frozen until recently. It formed part of the permafrost. I have suggested before that Lee needs to attend a course in elementary logic.  ;) Lee did agree with me that the carcase was frozen but I guess Lees takes any opportunity to show his lack of reasoning powers and drag out AGW denial again.

Jovial Monk wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 4:06pm:

It was cold and the carcase froze and staid frozen until recently. It formed part of the permafrost. I have suggested before that Lee needs to attend a course in elementary logic.

Exactly right. it took you a long time to realise it. So it is now getting as warm as 75 years ago.

So first it cooled, to be buried in the permafrost, and it has since warmed,to be released from the permafrost. 


Jovial Monk wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 4:06pm:

Lee did agree with me that the carcase was frozen

Yes,I did.


Jovial Monk wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 4:06pm:

but I guess Lees takes any opportunity to show his lack of reasoning powers and drag out AGW denial again.

See, that is you error. You haven't shown the warming is due to AGW. Cognitive dissonance.

lee wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 4:44pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on May 7th, 2017 at 4:06pm: It was cold and the carcase froze and staid frozen until recently. It formed part of the permafrost. I have suggested before that Lee needs to attend a course in elementary logic. Exactly right. it took you a long time to realise it. So it is now getting as warm as 75 years ago. So first it cooled, to be buried in the permafrost, and it has since warmed,to be released from the permafrost.  Jovial Monk wrote on May 7th, 2017 at 4:06pm: Lee did agree with me that the carcase was frozen Yes,I did. Jovial Monk wrote on May 7th, 2017 at 4:06pm: but I guess Lees takes any opportunity to show his lack of reasoning powers and drag out AGW denial again. See, that is you error. You haven't shown the warming is due to AGW. Cognitive dissonance.

Complete disconnect from reality.

The carcase froze and so became part of the permafrost, then got buried by snow etc. The snow and the deer carcase were warmed due to AGW.

And previously you said 1980 was as warm as 1940? You now moving that up with no evidence?  ;)

Jovial Monk wrote on May 7^th, 2017 at 5:28pm:

And previously you said 1980 was as warm as 1940? You now moving that up with no evidence?

About 1940 was as warm as about 1980.

Hmmm. 2016 - 75 = 1941. pretty damn close. ;)