The not-so-deadly West Nile Virus

[Mark Walker]

David Smith wrote, but I plagiarized:

"The various Florida <environmental activist groups spokespersons> cannot be
said to be unbiased on this topic.  They are fighting to keep their jobs.  I
lived in Florida when they shut down <various recreational activities on
public lands> and you should have read the statistics on how many <birds,
bugs, and beasties> there were, and after the <various recreational
activities> were shut down there wasn't that much difference.  It seems as
though most people <scientists, activists, tree-huggers> will go to great
lengths to keep their job and statistics is probably one of the easiest ways
to misinform other people"

It really is kind of funny how both sides of this argument seem to speak out
of both sides of their mouths.  I can just imagine how badly Mr. Paul would
have been slaughtered on this list if he had said something like, "Contrary
to the 1999 news media in New York and the 2001 news media in Florida, West
Nile is NOT a particularly deadly virus. And compared with many other public
health problems it is a NEGLIGIBLE cause of mortality.", if it had been
referring to NEGLIGIBLE insect mortality (which is precisely what Paul has
been basically saying for at least five years now).  In fact, the
similarities between this statement and Paul's usual post are striking.
Surely everyone else can see that.

Personally, I don't consider even a single human death by insect-transmitted
virus negligible.  As I've said, I share other's disdain for indiscriminate
and mass spraying.  But come on - are you folks really suggesting that these
few deaths are an exaggeration???

You know - I'm just as upset with the shark attacks, because I know that
this will provide a license to slaughter virtually every shark seen in
shallow Floridian waters - all in the name of Florida tourism.  On the other
hand, I won't be planning any beachfront vacations to Florida any time soon.
Even if a few missing limbs would be negligible.

Mark Walker.




> The various Florida mosquito control districts cannot be said 
> to be unbiased
> on this topic. They are fighting to keep there jobs. I lived 
> in Florida when
> they shut down the auto inspection stations and you should 
> have read the
> statistics on how many defective cars there were, after the 
> stations were
> shut down there wasn't that much difference. It seems as 
> though most people
> (scientists, mechanics, whatever) will go to great lengths to 
> keep there job
> and statistics is probably one of the easiest ways to misinform other
> people.
>    David Smith
> "Michael Gochfeld" <gochfeld at EOHSI.RUTGERS.EDU> wrote in message
> news:1010827192714.ZM18278 at Gochfeld...
> > As a public health professional who has had several 
> opportunities to be
> > responsible for controlling vector borne diseases 
> (including by massive
> > use of pesticides, including DDT) as well as studying them, I feel
> > compelled to comment on the spraying issue vis-a-vis West 
> Nile virus.
> >
> > Contrary to the 1999 news media in New York and the 2001 
> news media in
> > Florida, West Nile is NOT a particularly deadly virus. And 
> compared with
> > many other public health problems it is a NEGLIGIBLE cause 
> of mortality.
> >
> > The basis for this is given in the attached article which I 
> completed
> > last week.
> >
> > Whether or not there are risks to humans from the 
> pesticides, there is
> > little evidence that the pesticide use has been beneficial 
> in reducing
> > the risk of West Nile to humans (or to crows, if you're 
> concerned about
> > their health).
> >
> > Does anyone find it remarkable that there are no published 
> accounts of
> > the efficacy of spraying in controlling West Nile (or even the
> > mosquitoes).
> >
> > Likewise, although there are abundant published accounts about the
> > numbers of dead birds showing up from southern Canada to 
> the Gulf Coast,
> > denominator information is lacking.  Are 10 infected crows 
> a lot or a
> > little.  It's very difficult to tell because there are virtually no
> > published accounts of the numbers of birds tested.  However, the few
> > data points indicate that even for crows (a species 
> especially sensitive
> > to West Nile virus), fewer than half of the birds tested 
> are positive
> > for WNV.  Moreover, overall in NJ and NY, in the past two years more
> > dead birds have succumbed from pesticide poisoning than from WNV
> > according to state veterinarians.
> >
> > My argument is that it is not a case of human health vs ecological
> > health, but that human health has benefitted little, if at 
> all, from the
> > spraying.  Moreover, in 1999 when the media was besotted 
> with spraying,
> > it failed to convey the messages from CDC and other 
> agencies, regarding
> > how people could reduce exposure to mosquitoes through control of
> > breeding places.
> >
> > As the attached article based on CDC publications and web sites
> > explains, only a minute proportion of people who become infected
> > with WNV (generally less than a half or tenth of 1%) get 
> seriously ill
> > (of these about 10% die). The vast majority experience NO 
> SYMPTOMS AT
> > ALL.  They are only discovered when random serologic surveys are
> > conducted in presumed endemic areas.
> >
> > Compared with the 2400 deaths in New Jersey from influenza 
> and pneumonia
> > in the year 2000, the one death from West Nile seems paltry 
> (except to
> > the family of the victim, of course).
> >
> > Moreover, West Nile isn't even a major cause of 
> encephalitis/meningitis,
> > causing only about 5% of the cases that occurred in the 
> tri-state area
> > in 2000.
> >
> > Call me when there is an epidemic of Eastern Equine, a disease that
> > kills 25% or more of those infected, and shows a propensity 
> for young
> > people and children (who are apparently resistant to WNV).
> >
> > And while we're at it, compare the risks of slathering 
> toddlers with the
> > neurotoxic DEET to the negligible risk of West Nile infection in
> > children.
> >
> > Balancing risks is important. MICHAEL GOCHFELD
> >
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  ------------------------------------------------------------ 
> 
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> 
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl 
>  
> 

 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl