Mediaboss Marketing

The mosquito plague of summer is fast approaching and with it comes the threat of diseases, such as St. Louis encephalitis and West Nile virus. Not just human picnickers and campers have to worry about mosquito-borne disease. Even the largest of captive creatures is in danger from the tiny pests.

Two orcas, or killer whales (Orcinus orca), kept in captivity have died from the two diseases mentioned above, reported the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS).

I think it is safe to say that no one would have thought of the risks that mosquitoes might pose to orcas in captivity, but considering the amount of time they unnaturally spend at the surface in shallow pools at these facilities, it is yet another deadly and unfortunate consequence of the inadequate conditions inherent to captivity, said Courtney Vail, campaigns manager for WDCS.

BRIEF: Are Dolphins Doomed?

In captivity, the aquatic predators cant move around or dive as much as they do in the wild. The orcas spend time floating at the surface, especially while sleeping, and that makes them a tempting 6 ton blood smorgasbord for mosquitoes.

NEWS: The Search Is On For Elusive White Whale

Logging (floating at the surface) was commonly witnessed while I was at SeaWorld, especially at night, which provided a static landing platform for mosquitoes, former Sea World orca trainer John Jett told the WDCS. Free ranging orcas, conversely, are on the move and not exposed to mosquitoes. They don't remain still long enough and mosquitoes are weak fliers, limited to coastal areas.

The two orca fatalities were:

The WDCS questions the ethics of keeping highly intelligent, social whales and dolphins in captivity and call for an end to the practice. They discourage tourists from visiting marine parks that hold cetaceans in captivity.

IMAGE:

See original here:
Mosquitoes Killed Two Killer Whales

US authorities have recommended that two controversial papers describing a genetically-engineerd form of the H5N1 virus, commonly known as bird flu, can be published.

As we reported in March, The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) considered a paper by Dutch Scientist Dr. Ron Fouchier and recommended that it should only be published if it did not include the methodological and other details that could enable replication of the experiments by those who would seek to do harm.

That recommendation was made because the research in question explained how scientists had engineered the H5N1 virus into a form that could be transmitted aerially. Ferrets infected with the virus appear to have transmitted it to uninfected members of the same species merely by breathing on them.

Publication of research explaining how the virus was concocted, it was argued, could lead to the virus being weaponised. As that's just the kind of thing that someone wishing to unleash a pandemic would love to know, the US therefore asked the NSABB to consider whether the research should ever be published.

Scientific debate has since raged about dual purpose research that has potential health benefits but also has obvious security downsides.

The NSABB has now overturned its previous decision and now says, in a statement by Francis S. Collins, Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), that Fouchier's research and a paper by US-based researcher Dr. Yoshihiro Kawaoka can be published. The change has come after the NSABB evaluated additional data and assessed clarifications added to both document. The NIH now believes both pieces of research do not appear to enable direct misuse of the research in ways that would endanger public health or national security.

Science is yet to decide if it will publish Fouchier's research, as it awaits a ruling by Dutch authorities.

Go here to see the original:
US okays release of bird flu research

Public release date: 16-Apr-2012 [ | E-mail | Share ]

Contact: Sarah Jackson press_releases@the-jci.org Journal of Clinical Investigation

VIROLOGY Replication of immunodeficiency virus in humans

The acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) pandemic is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1), which attacks the immune system and leaves infected individuals susceptible to opportunistic infections. AIDS and HIV-1 are thought to have a relatively short history in humans, with the first infections likely occurring around the turn of the 20th century. HIV-1 is derived from highly related simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) that infect modern primates, including chimpanzees. SIVs must have crossed the species barrier to infect humans at some point in the past, but the molecular adaptations that permitted a new host are unknown. Drs. Beatrice Hahn and Frank Kirchoff led an international research effort to understand what adaptations allow a chimpanzee strain of SIV to replicate in human tissues. They found that SIV is capable of replicating in human immune tissues, but that replication occurs at very low levels. By introducing a single amino acid change into the SIV Gag protein, a structural protein that makes up the viral capsid, the research team found that viral replication in cultured human tissues increased dramatically, while replication in chimpanzee-derived immune cells was decreased. Their work indicates that species-specific adaptation of Gag is critical for viral replication efficiency and suggests that changes in Gag potentially played a role in the emergence of HIV/AIDS.

TITLE:

Efficient SIVcpz replication in human lymphoid tissue requires viral matrix protein adaptation

AUTHOR CONTACT:

Frank Kirchhoff

Institute for Molecular Virology, 89081 Ulm, , DEU

Phone: 49-731-500 65150; Fax: 49-731-500 65153; E-mail: frank.kirchhoff@uni-ulm.de

Link:
JCI early table of contents for April 16, 2012

If you were born in the United States after 1979 and have lived here since, you've grown up in a polio-free country.

Don't take it for granted.

Timelines note the highly contagious virus predates recorded history. More than 3,000 years ago in Egypt, cryptic evidence showed signs the disease always was a far greater crippler than a killer.

When Franklin D. Roosevelt contracted polio at age 39, the virus drew even more attention and soon medical philanthropy took flight via his March of Dimes campaign.

In my childhood home, I lived with it, too. My mother caught a mild case of polio when she was pregnant with my younger brother, Jim. I remember waving to her as she peered from the window of the train she'd boarded in Muncie, Ind., headed to Cleveland Clinic for a checkup.

In the early 1950s, the U.S. reported its most cases ever when the epidemic hit nearly 60,000 individuals.

Folks were frightened. No one knew the cause of the transmission of the disease. Families avoided swimming pools, water fountains and other public places.

What health professionals did know, however, is that polio attacks the nervous system, quickly destroying nerve cells that activate muscles, causing irreversible paralysis within hours. Paralysis caused immobilization of breathing muscles.

I recall collecting dimes for coin saver booklets to give to the March of Dimes, the charity that advanced development of Jonas Salk's injected vaccine as well Albert Sabin's live oral vaccine (OPV).

Back then, my father's construction business built a camp designed for children who had been crippled by polio kids about my age who wore leg braces or were bound to wheelchairs.

See original here:
Why the battle against polio isn't over

I suppose conspiracy theories might be in order. When Consumer Reports concluded that they couldnt recommend the iPhone 4 because of alleged reception problems if you held the handset the wrong way, they might have really expected to see sales of Apples smartphone plummet, Gene Steinberg writes for TechNightOwl. But it doesnt seem there was any impact at all, other than in the quarter before the iPhone 4S came out. That was when customers apparently remained on the sidelines awaiting the new model, not because CR had anything to say about it.

Thats quite a difference from the auto industry. When CR downgrades a motor vehicle for severe handling defects a few models nearly overturned during emergency handling tests you can bet manufacturers will take notice, Steinberg writes. But thats the car business. With the iPhone, Apple didnt pay attention to CRs non-recommendation. The customers didnt either, obviously, or not in any significant way.

Steinberg writes, Now CR tried once again to get in front of the debate when some people complained that the new iPad ran hot The temperature tests of other tablets that indicate the difference between them and the new iPad is, at best, a slight to none. Under normal use and service, those variations wouldnt be terribly noticeable. As these tests are repeated and published, it makes CR look more and more foolish. Clearly, they targeted Apple, hoping, perhaps, to find a serious defect and gain more attention than they received when they messed up the iPhone 4 test.

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Bird cage liner for bird-haters.

Related articles: Tests prove Apples new iPad heat levels comparable to Android tablets March 26, 2012 Expert: iPad heat claims overblown, not a real issue March 22, 2012 Whats the deal with Consumer Reports and Apple? March 21, 2012 Consumer Reports bombshell: New iPad runs hotter than predecessor but not especially uncomfortable March 20, 2012 FUD Alert: Consumer Reports to investigate reports of iPad and excess heat March 20, 2012 Consumer Reports hops off free PR gravy train, officially recommends Apple iPhone 4S November 8, 2011 Why does anyone believe Consumer Reports? April 6, 2011 Consumer Reports on iPad 2: We didnt notice any significant speed improvement March 15, 2011 Consumer Reports was wrong on Verizon iPhone 4; so-called death grip fixed by Apple March 2, 2011 Consumer Reports: Verizon iPhone 4 has antenna problem; not recommended February 25, 2011 Consumer Reports continues laughable vendetta against iPhone 4 January 14, 2011 Android sweeps Consumer Reports rankings as iPhone 4 is omitted November 17, 2010 All of Consumer Reports recommended smartphones suffer attenuation when held July 19, 2010 Consumer Reports: Apples free Bumper case does not earn iPhone 4 our recommendation July 16, 2010 Consumer Reports: Apples Bumper case fixes iPhone 4 signal-loss issue July 15, 2010 Consumer Reports continues harping on iPhone 4 attenuation issue July 14, 2010 Electromagnetic engineer: Consumer Reports iPhone 4 study flawed July 13, 2010 The Consumer Reports Apple iPhone 4 fiasco July 13, 2010 Consumer Reports: Oh yeah, almost forgot, Apple iPhone 4 is also the best smartphone on the market July 12, 2010 Consumer Reports: We cannot recommend Apple iPhone 4 July 12, 2010 Consumer Reports: Apple Retail Store is the best place to buy a cellphone May 11, 2010 Consumer Reports: AT&T dead last in service survey; 98% of iPhone users would buy iPhone again December 01, 2009 Consumer Reports does their readership a disservice, says viruses target Apple Macs December 13, 2005 Consumer Reports: Apples new iPod screens scratch-prone like iPod nanos October 28, 2005 Consumer Reports dubiously finds 20-percent of Mac users detected virus in last two years -UPDATED August 10, 2005

See the original post:
Consumer Reports was no iPhone killer and they’re no iPad killer, either