(CNN) A new study finds spikes in Flu virus in wastewater could be linked to the spread of Bird Flu affecting cattle.
The spikes of influenza virus were seen in wastewater samples from 59 sewer systems across 18 states this spring.
So far, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has reported more than 30 herds of diary cows infected with H5N1 Bird Flu in 9 states.
The researchers notes the H5 genetic material theyre picking up in the wastewater could come from sources other than diary cattle.
Health
Share on Facebook Share on X Share by Email
Posted: April 30, 2024
While federal officials say there's still no sign of a dangerous form of bird flu in Canadian dairy cows, scientists warn limited surveillance means Canada might not be staying ahead of an explosive H5N1 outbreak among dairy cattle south of the border.
So far, dozens of herds across various U.S. states have been infected with this form of influenza A. While it appears to cause milder infections in cows, H5N1 has also been linked to stunning death rates of 50 per cent or more in other species, including various birds, catsand even humans, though more data and research is needed to fully understand the risks.
"I think we're way behind the virus," warned Matthew Miller, an immunologist and vaccine developer with McMaster University, who's among the Canadians working on H5N1 research.
Without a "robust national surveillance program, there's no way to know if there are infections here or not."
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) told CBC News on Mondayit has not detected this form of bird flu yet in dairy cattle or any other livestock in Canada. (In birds, however, the disease is already widespread across the country, impacting an estimated 11 million farmed birds to date.)
The disease is federally reportable in any species, cattle included, the CFIA said.The agency requires dairy producers to monitor for signs of infection, follow biosecurity measures, and contact their local CFIA office if there is a "high degree of suspicion" of the disease.
It appears that cross-country trade is still allowed. Asked whether dairy cattle can currently be transported between the U.S. and Canada, the CFIAsaid the World Organisation of Animal Health "does not recommend restrictions on the movement of healthy cattle and their products at this time."
As well, following a U.S. federal order last Wednesday requiring H5N1 testing for many dairy cattle moving between states, "Canada will also require testing for [avian flu] on imported lactating dairy cattle from the U.S.," the CFIA said.
When asked about testing milk samples, the agency said ifH5N1 is detected in Canadian cattle, it will help provide testing support.
(The agency was more clear in an earlier statement on social media, saying it is "not currently testing raw or pasteurized milk," addingthat the virus isn't a food safety concern.)
Multiple Canadian scientists, however, stressthat widespread testing and surveillance efforts should already be underwayrather than set to ramp up after a first detection.
Canada should "absolutely be doing active surveillance for H5N1 in cattle," other animals and humans who are in close contact with them, said Dr. Isaac Bogoch, an infectious diseases expert with the University Health Network in Toronto, in correspondence with CBC News.
He said those efforts could include a range of approaches such as wastewater surveillance, blood sample studiesand nasal swabs.
The goal should be going "all-in on prevention," Miller said, adding "pandemics always have the highest risk of happening when we have a virus in animals that humans are heavily exposed to."
Given H5N1's unprecedented leap into cattle, followed by explosive cow-to-cow spread across the U.S. in mere weeks, the potential for human-to-human transmission seems more likely as the virus adapts to more mammals, he warned.
"If we see more human infections, cat's out of the bag, it's way too late," Miller said. "We need to be sparing no amount of effort, and no amount of expense, in doing absolutely everything to prevent even those initial infections in humans because the stakes are just too high."
The U.S. has reported one human infection linked to the cattle outbreaks so far, in an individual whose only symptom was eye inflammation. However, some scientists have warned there are likely more that aren't being detected, amid growing calls for mass testing on farms.
WATCH | Texan contracts bird flu:
Show more
"Since the issue in the [U.S.] seems to be bigger than we thought and was brewing before it was recognized, and since we have a plausible route for exposure here, we should be proactive," said Dr. Scott Weese, a professor at the Ontario Veterinary College and director of the University of Guelph's Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses.
At a minimum, he added, that would involve milk surveillance. It may not be particularly sensitivethe milk supply is diluted because it comes from so many farms, Weese said.
"But if there are positives, we know we have it and then need to look more aggressively at the farm level."
Despite sick cows being pulled from production lines, U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials said its recent nationwide survey of milk sold on store shelves found viral remnants of H5N1 in one in five samples. (More reassuringly, federal tests suggest pasteurization a heating process meant to neutralize harmful pathogens does ensure milk is safe to drink.)
On Monday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) also announced there will be testing of ground beef in states with bird flu outbreaks, and recently warned the virus may be passing back and forth between cattle and poultry farms.
The first known cattle infected with H5N1 were reported in late March. Since then, at least 34 herds across nine U.S. states have been impacted, and scientists suspect the outbreak is already far bigger than official figures suggest.
Newly released research from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also showed profound impacts on farm cats with a death rate of around 50 per cent among those fed raw milk products from infected cows.
The study raises "new concerns regarding the potential for virus spread within mammal populations," the team continued.
WATCH | Quebec poultry industry suffers avian flu outbreaks:
Show more
On Monday, other U.S. researchers shared a preprint research not yet formally published or peer-reviewed outlining efforts to monitor influenza A at dozens of wastewater sites this spring.
The team tested samples from three plants where spring rises in influenza A were observed, and found a marker for the H5 gene at all three facilities. Those plants were also located in an unnamed state with confirmed H5N1 outbreaks among dairy cattle, and two of the facilities discharged animal waste and milk byproducts into sewers, the researchers noted.
It all paints a picture of a fast-spreading outbreak that's impacting new species, appearing in new areas, and is likely past the point of containing, several outside scientists agreed.
Here in Canada, funding and support for veterinarians and farmers to test needs to be clear, stressed Weese.
"If farmers have to pay for sampling and testing, and don't know what will happen if there's a positive, and have no direct personal gain from it, why would they do it voluntarily?" he questioned. "We need a clear program that supports good testing and supports farms."
Toronto-based infectious diseases specialist Dr. Allison McGeer, from Sinai Health System, said she's "personally hoping we are not going to get caught off guard" here in Canada.
What's reassuring, McGeer added, is that Canada does have robust human testing in place to catch severe flu infections. Typically, she says, Canadian hospitals use combined viral testing for COVID, influenzaand RSV which can pick up a certain protein that is stable across all strains of influenza A.
If a human infection of avian flu showed up in a hospital, the test would label it along the lines of "influenza A, subtype not detected," she explained. And, if the patient had also been in contact with poultry or wildlife, that combination of factors could trigger extra lab work to pinpoint the specific type of influenza including H5N1.
But that's only if someone is sick enough to visit a healthcare facility.
"It's not a perfect system," McGeer acknowledged, "but it's [a sensitive system] for detecting severe disease from H5N1."
Lauren Pelley Senior Health & Medical Reporter
Lauren Pelley covers health and medical science for CBC News, including the global spread of infectious diseases, Canadian health policy, pandemic preparedness, and the crucial intersection between human health and climate change. Two-time RNAO Media Award winner for in-depth health reporting in 2020 and 2022. Contact her at: lauren.pelley@cbc.ca
TUESDAY, April 30, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- As bird flu continues to spread among dairy cows, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said Monday it is now testing ground beef for any presence of the virus.
The agency said it is sampling ground beef bought in grocery stores in states where dairy cattle have tested positive for the virus, also known as H5N1, CNN reported. Officials are also testing samples of muscle tissue from sick cows that have been culled from their herd.
Last but not least, the USDA is injecting a virus surrogate into ground beef and then cooking it at different temperatures, to see how much virus is killed under each heat setting.
Still, the agency stressed this testing does not mean the beef supply isn't safe.
USDA is confident that the meat supply is safe. USDA has a rigorous meat inspection process and multiple safeguards in place to protect consumers, the agency said in a statement, CNN reported.
We recommend consumers properly handle raw meats and cook to a safe internal temperature, which kills germs in meat, the agency added.
U.S. health officials are already testing retail milk samples for live bird flu virus, and none has been found in any of the first batch of samples tested, federal health officials said Friday.
Those early findings should reassure the public that the milk sold in stores remains safe, officials added.
In the online update, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said the initial test findings likely mean the pasteurization process is killing the virus.
These results reaffirm our assessment that the commercial milk supply is safe, the agency wrote, but testing efforts are continuing.
"The FDA is further assessing retail samples from its study of 297 samples of retail dairy products from 38 states," the agency added. "All samples with a PCR-positive result are going through egg inoculation tests, a gold standard for determining if infectious virus is present."
"These important efforts are ongoing, and we are committed to sharing additional testing results as soon as possible," the FDA added.
FDA officials also tested infant and toddler formulas, which used powdered milk, and did not find any evidence of the virus, the agency noted.
The story is different when it comes to viral fragments of bird flu: genetic bits of the virus have been discovered in roughly 20% of retail milk samples tested in a national survey, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said last week.
That earlier finding suggests bird flu has spread far more widely among dairy cows than officials first thought.
Samples from parts of the country that have infected dairy herds were more likely to test positive, the agency noted, and regulators stressed there is no evidence yet that cow milk poses a danger to consumers.
Still, 33 herds across eight states have been confirmed to have been infected with bird flu, also known as H5N1.
It suggests that there is a whole lot of this virus out there, Richard Webby, a virologist and influenza expert at St. Jude Childrens Research Hospital, told the New York Times.
While it is still possible to eradicate bird flu from the nations dairy farms, Webby noted it is hard to control the outbreak without knowing its full scope.
To that end, the USDA announced last week that it is now requiring mandatory testingof dairy cows moving across state lines. Before that, testing of cows had been voluntary and focused on cows with obvious symptoms of illness.
As of Wednesday, 23 people had been tested for the virus, while 44 people were being monitored after exposure to H5N1, the Times reported. Justone human infectionhas been reported so far, in a dairy worker in Texas who had direct contact with sick cows. The case was mild.
Still, sustained spread among cows would give the virus more chances to become more transmissible among humans.
Experts believe pasteurization, in which milk is briefly heated, should kill the virus.
And when you destroy the virus, its going to release genetic material, Samuel Alcaine, a microbiologist and food scientist at Cornell University in New York, told the Times.
Its not surprising to find them in milk, he added. It doesnt mean that the milk is not safe.
More information
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more on bird flu.
SOURCES: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, updates, April 25/26, 2024; CNN; New York Times
Health Second Opinion
Share on Facebook Share on X Share by Email
Lauren Pelley, Amina Zafar - CBC News
Posted: April 27, 2024
This story is part of CBC Health's Second Opinion, a weeklyanalysis of health and medical science news emailed to subscribers on Saturday mornings. If you haven't subscribed yet, you can do that by clicking here .
A dangerous type of bird flu virus discovered in the lung of a U.S. dairy cow that didn't show symptoms. Viral particles identified in processed, pasteurized milk. Genetic sequences showing distinct changes in this H5N1 strain that's been rapidly spreading throughout American cattle.
Those were just a handful of the rapid-fire developments this week as an unprecedented H5N1 outbreak among U.S. dairy cattle continued to evolve.
Scientists now warn this form of avian influenza is likely more widespread in cows, and was transmitting for longerthan official reports suggest. And while American officials are ramping up testing all in an effort to keep sick cows from being moved between states others say we're already several steps behind the spread of a disease that could pose a major threat to human health.
Michael Worobey, a researcher from B.C. who's now head of the department of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Arizona, said these cattle infections may have been "flying under our radar for months," providing ongoing opportunities for this virus to acquire adaptations that could lead to a flu pandemic.
"I think, in many ways, this is the biggest news story in the world right now."
After the U.S. Department of Agriculture posted more than 230 genetic sequences from the country's growing H5N1 outbreak last Sunday, Worobey was among the scientists racing to analyze the complex set of data.
The sequences were from cattle amid anoutbreak impacting more than two-dozen herds across nine U.S. states but also several bird species, cats, skunksand raccoons.
It's possible that local birds passed the virus to local farms, in different states, and they're all spreading a genetically similar lineage, he said. But Worobey believes what's far more likely is that the cattle outbreak has a single origin point.
In an interview with CBC News, he outlined H5N1's evolutionary tree, with a distinct branch of sequences linked to cattle. All those sequences share the same mutations, Worobey added.
"This is the hallmark of a single jump, that's at the root of this outbreak," he said.
And that jump likely occurred earlier than the first known cattle infections reported in late March.
A single introduction could have happened as far back as November or December, with a distinct lineage of H5N1 then spreading undetected for months, Worobey said. He added missing details in the initial U.S. data dump including exact cattle locations and dates madeit tough to know for sure.
The cattle sequences also contain "at least two distinct mutations" that are known for increasing the risk of a flu virus infecting and transmitting in humans, Worobey added.
"We just are producing more and more [opportunities] for evolution to arrive at something that can transmit in humans, and potentially kill a large proportion of them," he said.
What's not yet clear is how, exactly, the virus is spreading among cattle, though several scientists told CBC News that possibilities include close contact between cows being transported between states or contaminated milking equipment.
"If the cattle indeed have [infection] in the udders, then transmission could be through milking equipment," said Michelle Wille, a senior research fellow with the University of Melbourne's Centre for Pathogen Genomics andthe department of microbiology and immunology.
"A number of infected states have indicated that [avian flu] was detected in dairy herds that recently received cattle from Texas so transport of cattle is likely playing a role in spread."
At this point, it's still unclear how the virus is "sustaining transmission" in cattle populations, added virologist Angela Rasmussen, from the University of Saskatchewan's Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization.
It's also likely the virus is being transmitted even when cows aren't showing symptoms which have so far been mild, including low appetite and reduced milk production several scientists agreed.
WATCH | Bird flu spreads in U.S. cows:
Show more
This week, officials announced dual discoveries of H5N1 in the lung of an asymptomatic cow in North Carolina, along with viral particles in pasteurized milk, suggesting infected cows almost slipped into the food supply chain.
Ohio State University researchers also saidthey recently did their own independent sleuthing, collecting 150 commercial milk products from dairy processing plants across 10 states. The team found fragments of viral RNA in close to 60 samples nearly 40 per cent of the products, all of it available on store shelves.
Rasmussen stressed that the discovery of viral RNA in milk doesn't necessarily mean it can make people sickif it'sfragments of a virus, not something infectious. Dairy products also go through pasteurization, a heating process meant to eliminate a variety of pathogens.
But in a Thursday update, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said additional testing is still needed "to determine whether intact pathogen is still present and if it remains infectious, which would help inform a determination of whether there is any risk of illness associated with consuming the product.
The FDA added retail milk studies so far have shown no results that would change its assessment that the commercial milk supply in the U.S. is safe.
What's more concerning, Rasmussen said, is that these developments suggest the cattle outbreak is "much larger than originally thought."
To better understand the scope of H5N1's spread among cattle, increased testing of dairy cows is now a key facet of the American response.
The U.S.will require dairy cattle moving between states for commerce to be tested for bird flu, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack told reporters this week. All labs and states must also report positive tests for any form of influenza.
The concern from both officials and scientists alike stems from the potential impacts on animal health and the food supply chain, and the possibility that this virus is inching closer to a pandemic-level threat to humans as well.While the reported cattle infections haven't been serious, scientists warn they could fuel adaptations that could make it easier to infect more mammals.
Since 2022, only two human infections have been reported in the U.S., with the latest one tied to these recent cattle outbreaks. Both were mild. But sporadic human cases linked to contact with infected animals in previous outbreaks have been happening around the world, with many causing serious symptoms, severe pneumonia, or even death.
Based on available human case data to date, the death rate of this form of bird flu is thought to be a staggering 52 per cent, though scientists say there are likely far more mild cases going underreported and skewing that data.
Even so, with so many cattle being infected and coming into contact with farm workers every day, the number of human exposures is going up, Worobey warned. "It's kind of like buying more and more lottery tickets in the lottery of, 'Can a new pandemic virus actually evolve?'"
Infectious disease physicians in Canada are keeping a close eye on the places where livestock, wildlife and humans intersect.
Officials at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency have not yet responded to a series of questions fromCBC News, but said online it has not detected this type of avian influenza in Canadian cattle, so it's not currently testing raw or pasteurized milk.
"[Highly pathogenic avian influenza] is not a food safety concern as pasteurization kills harmful bacteria and viruses," the agency said on X, formerly Twitter.
Dr. Samira Mubareka, a clinician scientist at Sunnybrook Research Institute and the University of Toronto, is watching for any signs of the virus becoming more adept at transmitting between mammals, including humans.
"From the virus's perspective, the more transmission there is, the more opportunities to adapt," Mubareka said. "That is concerning."
Mubareka said any enhanced change in transmission among mammals would also signal an enhanced ability to transmit among humans, which is why it's so important to find out whether those in close contact with cattle or wildlife are at higher risk.
She said even if this H5N1 virus doesn't infect more people, the virus has already hit animal health significantly and could affect food prices, food security and livelihoods.
Rasmussen agreed, and said the impacts could be grim if human-to-human transmission begins.
"It would have a devastating impact on human and animal health, on the economy, on the food supply," she said. "It would be a worst case scenario."
Lauren Pelley Senior Health & Medical Reporter
Lauren Pelley covers health and medical science for CBC News, including the global spread of infectious diseases, Canadian health policy, pandemic preparedness, and the crucial intersection between human health and climate change. Two-time RNAO Media Award winner for in-depth health reporting in 2020 and 2022. Contact her at: lauren.pelley@cbc.ca
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said last week that 1 in 5 retail milk samples across the U.S. showed genetic traces of bird flu virus. So why isn't it more concerned?
Highly pathogenic avian influenza is an infectious viral illness that spreads primarily among wild and domestic birds, but the virus that causes bird flu can sometimes jump into animals, including dairy cows and, in some cases, humans.
A "multistate outbreak" of the virus has emerged among dairy cattle since mid-March, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and two cases have been confirmed in humans. But if 1 in 5 commercial milk samples is testing positive for the virus, why have we not heard any warning regarding its safety?
The method used to test the milk samples involved analyzing them for traces of genetic material that can be found in the circulating strain of the bird flu virus. But just because there are traces of its DNA doesn't mean the milk contains active forms of the virus itself.
Following these initial findings, the FDA conducted further analysis to determine whether any infectious virus was present in the samples. "This additional testing did not detect any live, infectious virus," the agency said in a statement on April 26. "These results reaffirm our assessment that the commercial milk supply is safe."
The FDA will continue to test positive milk samples as part of an ongoing study in coordination with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. However, its results so far have confirmed that "pasteurization is effective against this virus."
Pasteurization involves heating milk to a specific temperature to kill off any harmful bacteria or viruses it might contain. "Even if virus is detected in raw milk, pasteurization is generally expected to eliminate pathogens to a level that does not pose a risk to consumer health," the FDA said.
"Based on available information, pasteurization is likely to inactivate the virus," the agency said. "However, the process is not expected to remove the presence of viral particles."
The CDC will continue to monitor bird flu in people with animal exposure, but for now it is confident that "the current public health risk is low."
However, it still recommends the following actions to keep yourself safe from bird flu:
Is there a health problem that's worrying you? Do you have a question about eating meat? Let us know via health@newsweek.com. We can ask experts for advice, and your story could be featured in Newsweek.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
A dose-sparing intradermal mpox (formerly monkeypox) vaccination regimen was safe and generated an antibody response equivalent to that induced by the standard regimen at six weeks (two weeks after the second dose), according to findings presented today at the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Global Congress in Barcelona. The results suggest that antibody responses contributed to the effectiveness of dose-sparing mpox vaccine regimens usedduring the 2022 U.S. outbreak.
Thempoxvirus has been present in west, central and east Africa for decades, with the first human case identified in 1970. In May 2022, a global mpox outbreak caused by theclade IIb strain of the virusprovided the first epidemiologic evidence of community mpox transmission outside of historically affected countries.
The Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic vaccine (MVA-BN, sold as Jynneos) was made available to help contain the outbreak in the United States. The National Institutes of Healths (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) sponsored a study of dose-sparing strategies to extend the limited vaccine supply.
The mid-stage study enrolled 225 adults aged 18 to 50 years in the United States who had not previously been vaccinated against mpox or smallpox. Participants were randomized to receive either the standard Food and Drug Administration-approved MVA-BN regimen, a regimen containing one-fifth of the standard dose, or one with one-tenth of the standard dose. The standard dose was injected under the skin (subcutaneously), while the dose-sparing regimens were injected between layers of the skin (intradermally). Participants in all study arms received two injections 28 days apart and were monitored for safety and immune response.
Two weeks after the second dose (study day 43), participants who received one-fifth of the standard dose had antibody levels equivalent to those of participants receiving the standard MVA-BN regimen, based on predefined criteria. By day 57, participants who received one-fifth of the standard dose had lower antibody levels than those in the standard regimen arm; the clinical significance of this difference is unknown. Participants who received one-tenth of the standard dose had inferior antibody levels at all measurements.
The most reported adverse events were mild, local injection-site reactions. Adverse events were similar across all arms of the trial, and no serious adverse events related to the vaccine were reported.
The authors note that because there are no defined correlates of protection against mpoximmune processes confirmed to prevent diseasethese findings cannot predict the efficacy of dose-sparing regimens with certainty. Real-world data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others have shown similar vaccine effectiveness for the dose-sparing regimen given intradermally and the standard regimen given subcutaneously. A study of the standard MVA-BN regimen in adolescents is ongoing and will report findings later this year.
NIH is grateful to the research sites and volunteers who participate in studies to improve the mpox response.
For more information about this study, please visit ClinicalTrials.gov and use the identifierNCT05512949.
This news release waspublishedby the National Institutes of Health on April 27, 2024.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}
EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak is expected to publicly testify on Wednesday before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.
According to congressional lawmakers, EcoHealth a U.S.-based nonprofit whose mission is to prevent pandemics used taxpayer dollars "to fund dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)" in China.
COVID ORIGINS: ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE PRESIDENT TO TESTIFY PUBLICLY BEFORE CONGRESS NEXT MONTH
Committee Chair Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, is set to lead the hearing, butHouse Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith, R-Va., and House Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., are also expected to attend to ask questions of Daszak.
Peter Daszak, right, Thea Fischer, left, and other members of the World Health Organization team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 coronavirus arrive at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)
The hearing is expected to begin at 10 a.m.
Daszak testified behind closed doors in November, but House Republicans said his testimony contained many "discrepancies," according to a letter from Wenstrup and other GOP committee chairs sent to Daszak last month.
"These revelations undermine your credibility as well as every factual assertion you made during your transcribed interview," Wenstrup and the others wrote. "The Committees have a right and an obligation to protect the integrity of their investigations, including the accuracy of testimony during a transcribed interview. We invite you to correct the record."
FBI DIRECTOR SAYS COVID PANDEMIC 'MOST LIKELY' ORIGINATED FROM CHINESE LAB
Lawmakers are calling on Daszak to address the discrepancies in his testimony and publicly explain EcoHealths relationship with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Lawmakers also said the discrepancies raise "serious questions about the veracity of EcoHealths public statements, including their insistence that the research they funded at the WIV could not have caused the pandemic."
Security personnel stand outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)
But Daszak's public hearing is of interest to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
A spokesperson for Democrats on the COVID subcommittee told Fox News Digital that throughout the Congress, they have "underscored the importance of pursuing and prioritizing forward-looking reforms that enhance biosafety standards in the United States and around the globe so that we can reduce the threat of future outbreaks and prevent future pandemics."
"In the Select Subcommittees probe of federally funded research, testimony and documents reviewed by Select Subcommittee Democrats raise serious concerns that EcoHealth Alliance disregarded federal reporting requirements that ensure grantees are accountable to the American people," the spokesperson told Fox News Digital. "We look forward to Dr. Daszaks testimony before the Select Subcommittee on this matter."
Fox News Digital previously reported that EcoHealth Alliance received millions of dollars in grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). U.S. taxpayer funds flowed to Chinese entities conducting coronavirus research through EcoHealth Alliance.
This view shows the P4 laboratory, center left, at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, on May 27, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)
That money at least $600,000 was redirected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and went toward research to assess the transmission of bat coronaviruses to humans. The research included conducting RNA extractions and DNA sequencing on bat samples as well as biological experiments on pathogen spillover from bats to humans.
EcoHealth Alliance also received more than $200,000 that was redirected to Wuhan University and went toward disease surveillance research activities, including collection of biological samples from people in China with high levels of exposure to bats for Wuhan Institute of Virology to conduct further screening.
Former U.S. government officials, like former NIH Director Francis Collins, said the U.S. taxpayer money was not approved to conduct gain-of-function research, which is research that involves modifying a virus to make it more infectious among humans.
"Dr. Daszaks closed-door testimony raised serious concerns about EcoHealth Alliances relationship with the Wuhan Institute of Virology," Wenstrup told Fox News Digital in a statement. "Even after the Select Subcommittee reminded Dr. Daszak that he could be subject to criminal prosecution if he lied to the Committees, Dr. Daszak made numerous claims that seemed to be inconsistent with outside evidence and previous revelations."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"We are looking forward to an honest forum where the American people can hear directly from the President of EcoHealth Alliance and finally receive the answers about the origins of COVID-19 that they deserve," Wenstrup said.
The U.S. Energy Department and the FBI have determined that COVID-19 likely emerged from a lab leak in China.
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails Sign up to our free breaking news emails
The first scientist to publish a sequence of the Covid-19 virus in China has staged a sit-in protest after authorities locked him out of his lab.
Virologist Zhang Yongzhen wrote in an online post that he and his team were suddenly notified they were being evicted from their lab, the latest in a series of setbacks, demotions and evictions since he first published the sequence in early January 2020.
The move shows how the Chinese government continues to pressure and control scientists, seeking to avoid scrutiny of its handling of the coronavirus outbreak.
Mr Zhang gave the news in a post on Chinese social media platform Weibo but it was later deleted.
In protest, the scientist had been sitting outside his lab since Sunday despite pouring rain, he said in the post. When reached by phone on Tuesday, he said it was inconvenient for him to speak, but a collaborator confirmed to AP on Monday the protest was taking place.
Mr Zhang was a leading virologist at the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre when his team cracked the viruss genetic code and concluded that it could be contagious. Unlike other labs, he said he felt a duty to publish the information to help researchers work on tests, treatments and vaccines.
After the team finished sequencing the virus on 5 January 2020, his centre warned leaders in Shanghai and health officials in Beijing, recommending protective steps in public spaces.
He also prepared to release the data, a step that took on added urgency after he visited Wuhan to speak at a university on 9 January. That day, the government confirmed the new disease was a coronavirus, but officials continued to play down the potential danger.
There were 5,615 COVID hospitalizations in the most recent week data available.
April 30, 2024, 3:16 PM ET
4 min read
Weekly COVID-19 hospitalizations have hit their lowest level ever reported since the pandemic began, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
There were 5,615 COVID hospitalizations in the most recent week data that is available. In comparison, there were over 150,000 weekly admissions at the peak of the Omicron variant circulating in early 2022.
"The significant decline in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths to these new lows is encouraging, showing that our public health measures and vaccination efforts have paid off," said Dr. John Brownstein, chief innovation officer at Boston Childrens Hospital and an ABC News medical contributor.
Forecasts of new hospitalizations from the CDC indicate that admissions will likely remain stable for the next four weeks.
"Its important to continue monitoring for new variants and maintaining protective health behaviors to prevent possible surges," Brownstein added.
The news comes as the requirements for hospitals to report respiratory illness data, like COVID hospital admissions, expire at the end of April. Federal officials plan to use other data sources such as wastewater, laboratory tests and emergency department data to stay informed about the spread of illnesses.
"A key lesson we learned from the COVID-19 pandemic is the importance of having reporting systems in place before an active emergency," a CDC spokesperson said in part of a statement. "These data have a significant and ongoing value for protecting patient health and safety as well as public health," the statement continued.
Data from the CDC shows that about 22.6% of adults as well as 14% of children have received the updated COVID vaccine, which is formulated to better protect against current sub variants. Older adults over the age of 65 were recommended to receive an additional updated COVID vaccine this spring due to their increased risk of severe disease, according to the CDC.
The Food and Drug Administrations independent panel of advisors is set to meet in mid-March to discuss the recommended strains to be selected in the next formulation of COVID vaccines. As the virus has evolved since the beginning of the pandemic, vaccines have been adjusted to better protect against current strains.
COVID deaths have also been steadily declining this year, reaching new lows. There were an estimated 231 deaths from COVID in the most recent week data that is available, according to the CDC. However, death data are delayed and may be incomplete.
At the height of the pandemic, there were over 25,000 Americans dying weekly from the virus as the Delta variant swept across the country.
"It's crucial that we maintain robust surveillance and data collection to quickly respond to any changes in the virus's behavior," Brownstein said.
In 2015, Ralph S. Baric, arguably the worlds most accomplished coronavirologist, published groundbreaking research with Shi Zhengli, the leading coronavirus researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
They had mixed components of different coronaviruses and created an artificial virus, or chimera, that could infect human cells. The research helped crystallize the threat posed by bat coronaviruses lurking in nature. But the experiments were dangerous too. In 2014, while their research was underway, the Obama administration enacted a pause on so-called gain-of-function research that could increase the virulence or transmissibility of certain viruses. Baric and Shi even flagged the dangers of the research themselves, writing, Scientific review panels may deem similar studiestoo risky to pursue.
The experiments were done in Barics well-secured laboratory in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Afterward, however, Shis team at the WIV continued to utilize Barics cutting-edge research techniques. Their work was funded in part with a US research grant.
Baric testified that he had specifically warned Shi Zhengli that the WIVs critical coronavirus research was being conducted in labs with insufficient biosafety protections.
Amid competing theories about the origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19including whether it could have originated in a Wuhan laboratoryBaric has become a figure of intense interest. After all, he had pioneered techniques the WIV was using, including one that allows researchers to invisibly splice components of viruses together without leaving a trace.
For the last three years, as the COVID-19 origins debate has grown increasingly toxic, a small army of global sleuths and Freedom of Information petitioners have taken aim at Barics emails and research documents, hoping to uncover information about the true genetic-engineering capabilities of the WIV scientists, the ongoing research they were pursuing, and the viral genome sequences they had in their possession prior to the pandemic.
Through it all, Baric has kept mostly silentuntil now. On January 22, he gave a six-hour interview to investigators from two Republican-led House committees: the Oversight and Accountabilitys Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, and Energy and Commerces Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Though the committees have not yet made his testimony public, Vanity Fair has exclusively reviewed his statements. While not formally under oath, Baric was required by federal law to answer truthfully. (Through a University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill spokesperson, Baric declined to comment for this article.)
While there is little in the 212-page transcript that is likely to markedly shift the debate on how COVID-19 originated, the picture that emerges is of an American scientist who is deeply wary of his Chinese counterparts and has no way of knowing if or how they may have made use of the groundbreaking research techniques he developed.
Perhaps most notably, Baric testified that he had specifically warned Shi Zhengli that the WIVs critical coronavirus research was being conducted in labs with insufficient biosafety protections. When he urged her to move the work to a more secure biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) lab, he testified that she did not heed his recommendation. Because the WIV continued to perform coronavirus research at what he considers an inappropriately low biosafety level, Baric said of a laboratory accident, You cant rule that out. You just cant.
Clearly, the market was a conduit for expansion, Baric testified. Is that where it started? I dont think so.
In an email turned over to the Select Subcommittee as part of its investigation, Baric told Peter Daszak, president of the scientific nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, that it was a load of BS to suggest that the WIV conducted coronavirus research in labs with sufficient biosafety protocols.
Baric told congressional investigators that he believes its far more likely that SARS-CoV-2 spilled over naturally from animals to humans, given the sheer abundance of viruses in nature. But he also said in his testimony that he disagrees with the most widely promulgated spillover argument: that the virus leapt from infected animals to people at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, where it first burst into public view in December 2019. The argument does not hold up, he said, because genomic evidence suggests that COVID-19 was already circulating in the human population by mid-to-late October. Clearly, the market was a conduit for expansion, he testified. Is that where it started? I dont think so.
Baric also weighed in on a controversy that has pitted Dr. Anthony Fauci against Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), who has leveraged his credentials as an eye doctor to position himself as a crusader against Americas scientific and medical establishments. In contentious Senate hearings, Fauci has repeatedly denied Pauls claims that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which Fauci led at the time, had funded gain-of-function research at the WIV. However, Baric told investigators that the experiment in dispute, in which technicians created a chimeric virus that made lab mice sicker, was absolutely gain-of-function research: You cant argue with that. He also said he felt that the experiments results should have triggered regulatory review.
