Habitat destruction forces wildlife into human environments, where new diseases flourish
“It’s a mix of biodiversity, but one that was created by people, not nature,” Keesing says. “We create a mix of species that don’t naturally occur together, and then it’s kind of like running an uncontrolled experiment. This virus jumps to that species.” Maybe that’s when a pathogen that we didn’t know about, that hadn’t previously made anyone sick (to our knowledge), suddenly becomes virulent and infects humans. “It was only when we did that to biodiversity that that virus became dangerous.” These types of markets pose one of the clearest threats to animal and human health, but they’re not the only threat. A greater risk is posed by the complex mix of habitat loss, population declines in wild species, and population increases among livestock and domesticated animals, invasive species and other more adaptable forms of wildlife.
“The invasive Aedes species, which is what we are seeing a lot of, can transmit Zika, yellow fever, chikungunya and dengue,”
If a visitor comes to LA with active zika, yellow fever, chikungunya or dengue and is bitten by a local LA Aedes, that mosquito can become ground zero for the spread of those diseases in LA! With modern air travel and global warming, it is inevitable that those diseases get a foothold in LA unless LA has a very active and aggressive vector control system.
About 75% of counties on the US mainland have suitable habitat for Aedes mosquitoes, CDC researchers say.
So far, yellow fever is currently being transmitted by two types of mosquitoes on Brazil, the Haemagogus or Sabethes. If yellow fever is introduced to a major urban center, the virus could jump to the Aedes aegypti mosquito, making human transmission more likely.”There is no evidence of human cases of yellow fever virus infection transmitted by Aedes aegypti, the vector that could sustain urban transmission of yellow fever,” the WHO said in its update.
The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) released a risk assessment on yellow fever yesterday, noting a new case of travel-associated disease in a person from the Netherlands. This is the fourth case reported in Europeans who had recently traveled to South America in the past 8 months.The traveler had recently returned from Suriname, a former Dutch colony on the northwestern coast of South America. The patient had traveled to Suriname in February and March, and the case was reported to the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) in the Netherlands on Mar 9.The three other recent yellow fever cases in Europeans with a history of travel to South America include two French nationals who visited several endemic areas of Peru and a Danish citizen got sick in Bolivia after visiting yellow fever endemic areas in the Amazon basin.
Academia.edu is a platform for academics to share research papers.
As of 3 March 2017, yellow fever virus transmission continues to expand towards the Atlantic coast of Brazil in areas not deemed to be at risk for yellow fever transmission prior to the revised risk assessment, supported by the scientific and technical advisory group on geographical yellow fever risk mapping (GRYF), and published by WHO in the Disease Outbreak News of 27 January 2017, and on the WHO International Travel and Health website on 31 January 2017 and 14 February 2017.
Source: WHO | Yellow fever – Brazil
“We wondered if it was just because people were there, but we tested [and] it was actually due to the fragmented forest with people present … as people start to encroach.”Fruit bat populations increase in fragmented forest conditions, while their contact with humans also increases.Deforestation is increasing in West Africa to provide land to grow cocoa and palm oil and in central Africa, where other ebola outbreaks have occurred, to meet demand for hardwoods.”It shows there’s different implications in how you encroach in the environment. We in very rich countries, what are we doing that’s encouraging deforestation and habitat encroachment?
The two technologies could be “transformational,” said Dan Strickman, a senior program officer at the foundation. The next challenge, however, will be to identify the approaches that work best in combination with existing medical treatments so as to shrink the footprint of the disease over the next ten to fifteen years, Karl Malamud-Roam, manager of Rutgers University’s public health pesticides program, told the Seattle Times.
Finding out how human behavior facilitates the expansion of growth of malaria carrying mosquitoes would cost less but would show that industrial farming and deforestation are the chief facilitators of malaria’s continual comebacks.