Zika in Cozumel
- Thread starter El Graduado
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
"The expert panel recognizes that Zika virus alone may not be sufficient to cause either congenital brain abnormalities or GBS. It is not known whether these effects depend on as yet uncharacterized co-factors being present. Nor is it known whether dengue virus plays a part; dengue virus is carried by the same species of mosquito and has circulated in many countries during the same period."
Brand new from the WHO Zika causality statement
Brand new from the WHO Zika causality statement
Chavodel8en
Contributor
Someone help me out, because this article, and the headline seems really "this is a conspiracy!!" dumb.
CNSNews objects that the CDC reports only Zika-infected pregnancies with birth defects, but not Zika- infected pregnancies w/ healthy babies. OMG, they're hiding information!!!
But if CDC reports 1,595 U.S. Zika-infected pregnancies, and also reports that "17 babies from those pregnancies .... with birth defects related to Zika.”... then all you need to do is subtract 17 from 1,595, to get 1,578 babies without reported Zika-related birth defects. Not to say these are all 1,578 healthy babies, but 1,578 babies without Zika-related defects.
Im failing to see what CNSNews claims is being hidden here. Looks like from this data - which is preliminary - if a pregnant women is Zika-infected, with U.S. medical care provided, its been about 1% that have had Zika-related birth defects. Those numbers can change as more info comes in.
1% may not seem like much, but you can be damn sure that prospective parents should be concerned (and yes they should also be concerned about dengue, etc). Now, Im a confirmed non-breeder, and often malign over-protective parents -- but I don't understand this reaction against folks concerned about their future kids. Let them worry and respond properly.
I'm going to be in the Yucatan in Dec, im packing the repellent.
The part of the article that is just ridiculously stupid, however, is what I bolded:
"In fact, there is evidence that many women infected with the Zika virus have healthy babies."
No $h!+ Sherlock. I mean, nobody claims that Zika is 100% fatal. This sentence just seems like it completely misses the point. "No worries, pregnant moms, there's a good chance your baby just might be healthy"
I don't know who CNSNews are, but Im pretty sure theyre a bunch of idiots.
That being said, I know that pesticide use is another side of the coin, where there is a need to balance danger on both sides, but aside from that, theres no need to push back against any over-reaction by prospective parents w/ Zika concerns.
Last edited:
If airlines boasted that only 1% of their flights ended in a fiery crash with no survivors, would you ever get on a plane? I wouldn't.
- Messages
- 19,814
- Reaction score
- 18,681
- Location
- Philadelphia and Boynton Beach
- # of dives
- 1000 - 2499
Zika-releated microcephaly is catastrophic. I would advise pregnant women, and women who would like to become pregnant, to avoid endemic areas. Why is this so difficult for some to understand?
How hard is 'herd' to understand? Don't get it, don't spread it. Easy to understand. Wear DEET or a similar repellent that passed actual tests, ESPECIALLY if you have it.
Don't screw over the herd.
deepsea21
Contributor
By Dr. Mercola
Amidst growing fear-based propaganda warning of the threat of Zika virus comes a quiet admission from health officials in Brazil: Zika alone may not be responsible for the rise in birth defects that plagued parts of the country.
While there is some evidence suggesting Zika virus may be linked to the birth defect microcephaly, and the virus has been spreading throughout Brazil, rates of the condition have only risen to very high rates in the northeast section of Brazil.
Since the virus has spread throughout Brazil, but extremely high rates of microcephaly have not, officials are now being forced to admit that something else is likely at play.
Dr. Fatima Marinho, director of information and health analysis at Brazil's ministry of health, told the journal Nature, "We suspect that something more than Zika virus is causing the high intensity and severity of cases."1
Nearly 90 Percent of Brazil Microcephaly Cases Occurred in the Northeast
Since last November, more than 1,700 confirmed cases of congenital microcephaly or other birth defects of the central nervous system have been reported in Brazil.
When the cases first began and were reportedly linked to Zika virus, health officials believed they'd see "an explosion of birth defects" across Brazil, according to Marinho.2 But that hasn't happened.
Data compiled by Marinho and colleagues, which has been submitted for publication, suggest socio-economic factors may be involved. Most of the women who gave birth to babies with microcephaly were poor and lived in small cities or on the outskirts of big cities.
In addition, the outbreak occurred in a largely poverty-stricken agricultural area of Brazil that uses large amounts of banned pesticides.
Between these factors and the lack of sanitation and widespread vitamin A and zinc deficiency, you have the basic framework for an increase in poor health outcomes among newborn infants in that area.
Environmental pollution and toxic pesticide exposure have been positively linked to a wide array of adverse health effects, including birth defects. For instance:
• Vitamin A deficiency has been linked to an increased risk of microcephaly3
• The CDC lists malnutrition and exposure to toxic chemicals as known risk factors4
• The CDC also notes certain infections during pregnancy, including rubella, cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis and others, are risk factors
Data Is Lacking to Confirm Zika-Microcephaly Link
It's also been suggested that microcephaly may be the result of Zika virus occurring alongside other infections, such as dengue and chikungunya.
The Brazilian doctor who first reportedly established the link between Zika virus and microcephaly is even considering whether another disease, Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), may be involved, as BVDV proteins were also detected in the brains of three fetuses with microcephaly.
BVDV causes birth defects in cattle but is not known to infect people. Researchers suggested that infection with Zika virus may make it easier for BVDV to infect humans.5
Adding to the complexities, much of the microcephaly data from Brazil comes from incomplete hospital reports. In most cases, tests to confirm Zika infection were not carried out.
In June 2016, the Zika in Infants and Pregnancy Study was launched in Puerto Rico. It aims to monitor up to 10,000 pregnant women to examine Zika virus along with nutritional, socio-economic and environmental factors and their potential link to birth defects. However, the results of a similar study have only raised further doubts.
12,000 Zika Cases Confirmed in Pregnant Colombian Women — Zero Microcephaly Cases
According to a report by the New England Complex Systems Institute (NECSI), there are serious questions about whether Zika virus is the cause of microcephaly. They cite the preliminary results of a New England Journal of Medicine study, which followed nearly 12,000 pregnant Colombian women infected with Zika virus.6
No cases of microcephaly were reported in their babies as of May 2016, yet four cases of microcephaly were reported among women who had Zika infection with no symptoms and were therefore not included in the study.
The researchers then speculated that this means there could be four times as many cases of Zika infection that are unreported, for a total of at least 60,000 Zika-infected pregnancies in Colombia.
Using this data, an analysis revealed the rate of microcephaly to be what would be expected in any area, whether Zika is in the picture or not, which is 2 cases in 10,000 births.7 According to NECSI:8
By June 2016, 11 total microcephaly cases had been reported in women with Zika infections in Colombia. If Zika and microcephaly are linked, NECSI pointed out that the total number of microcephaly cases should rise dramatically in the next few months, reaching more than 10 microcephaly-Zika births each week.9
NECSI also suggested, "An alternative cause of microcephaly in Brazil could be the pesticide pyriproxyfen, which is cross-reactive with retinoic acid, which causes microcephaly, and is being used in drinking water."10
WHO Expert: Zika Response 'Completely Hysterical'
Florence Fouque, a World Health Organization (WHO) expert on animals that carry viruses, called the public response to the Zika virus "completely hysterical."11 She blamed the hysteria on the findings that the virus affects pregnant women and can be sexually transmitted.
"It's like AIDS," she told PRI. "People make this link and that's why they are really afraid."12 At one restaurant in downtown Miami, Florida, where a handful of Zika cases were detected in August 2016, insect repellent was placed on all the tables.13
Even Oliver Brady, an epidemiologist with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine who was asked by Brazilian officials to assess the Zika-microcephaly situation, said there's no conclusive evidence that Zika causes birth defects in humans.
He told PRI that while animal studies have shown the virus attacks brain cells, this isn't "final proof:"14
"You see that with a lot of arboviruses [viruses spread by mosquitoes and other insects] … They have pathogenic qualities and if you put them in the right tissue then they will cause some sort of damage. And they tend to be quite transmissible across a variety of barriers anyway.
So it doesn't necessarily mean that that's the mechanism that's happening out there in the field, even if it does work in the lab."
National Institutes of Health Launches Trial for Experimental Zika Vaccine
The U.S. is among those ignoring data and rushing to launch a vaccine against Zika virus before it's even known whether it's causing birth defects. What is known, however, is that experimental vaccines have real risks, which are often downplayed in the wake of perceived global "emergencies" such as Zika.
In August 2016, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced it launched a clinical trial of an experimental Zika vaccine — again, before there is conclusive proof that Zika causes microcephaly.
Eighty healthy volunteers between the ages of 18 and 35 will be vaccinated with varying doses of the experimental vaccine. No placebos will be given. The vaccine is said to be similar to a West Nile Virus vaccine that was previously developed by the NIH, but has not yet been approved. This alone should be a red flag, as should the disastrous outcome of the CYD-TDV vaccine, the first dengue vaccine approved by WHO in April 2016.
Aerial Mosquito Spraying May Increase Autism Risk
Unfortunately, many may suffer as a result. In research presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies 2016 Meeting, aerial pesticide exposure was linked to an increased risk of developmental delays and autism spectrum disorder among children.20 The study compared children living in zip codes where aerial pesticide spraying was used each summer to combat mosquitoes that carry the eastern equine encephalitis virus with children living in non-aerial-spraying zip codes.
Children exposed to the aerial pesticide spraying were about 25 percent more likely to be diagnosed with autism or have a documented developmental delay than those living in areas that used other methods of pesticide application (such as manual spreading of granules).
If authorities use the supposed threat of Zika to increase aerial spraying, it could increase children's risk of brain disorders, which is the opposite of what anti-Zika campaigns are supposed to achieve.
Amidst growing fear-based propaganda warning of the threat of Zika virus comes a quiet admission from health officials in Brazil: Zika alone may not be responsible for the rise in birth defects that plagued parts of the country.
While there is some evidence suggesting Zika virus may be linked to the birth defect microcephaly, and the virus has been spreading throughout Brazil, rates of the condition have only risen to very high rates in the northeast section of Brazil.
Since the virus has spread throughout Brazil, but extremely high rates of microcephaly have not, officials are now being forced to admit that something else is likely at play.
Dr. Fatima Marinho, director of information and health analysis at Brazil's ministry of health, told the journal Nature, "We suspect that something more than Zika virus is causing the high intensity and severity of cases."1
Nearly 90 Percent of Brazil Microcephaly Cases Occurred in the Northeast
Since last November, more than 1,700 confirmed cases of congenital microcephaly or other birth defects of the central nervous system have been reported in Brazil.
When the cases first began and were reportedly linked to Zika virus, health officials believed they'd see "an explosion of birth defects" across Brazil, according to Marinho.2 But that hasn't happened.
Data compiled by Marinho and colleagues, which has been submitted for publication, suggest socio-economic factors may be involved. Most of the women who gave birth to babies with microcephaly were poor and lived in small cities or on the outskirts of big cities.
In addition, the outbreak occurred in a largely poverty-stricken agricultural area of Brazil that uses large amounts of banned pesticides.
Between these factors and the lack of sanitation and widespread vitamin A and zinc deficiency, you have the basic framework for an increase in poor health outcomes among newborn infants in that area.
Environmental pollution and toxic pesticide exposure have been positively linked to a wide array of adverse health effects, including birth defects. For instance:
• Vitamin A deficiency has been linked to an increased risk of microcephaly3
• The CDC lists malnutrition and exposure to toxic chemicals as known risk factors4
• The CDC also notes certain infections during pregnancy, including rubella, cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis and others, are risk factors
Data Is Lacking to Confirm Zika-Microcephaly Link
It's also been suggested that microcephaly may be the result of Zika virus occurring alongside other infections, such as dengue and chikungunya.
The Brazilian doctor who first reportedly established the link between Zika virus and microcephaly is even considering whether another disease, Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), may be involved, as BVDV proteins were also detected in the brains of three fetuses with microcephaly.
BVDV causes birth defects in cattle but is not known to infect people. Researchers suggested that infection with Zika virus may make it easier for BVDV to infect humans.5
Adding to the complexities, much of the microcephaly data from Brazil comes from incomplete hospital reports. In most cases, tests to confirm Zika infection were not carried out.
In June 2016, the Zika in Infants and Pregnancy Study was launched in Puerto Rico. It aims to monitor up to 10,000 pregnant women to examine Zika virus along with nutritional, socio-economic and environmental factors and their potential link to birth defects. However, the results of a similar study have only raised further doubts.
12,000 Zika Cases Confirmed in Pregnant Colombian Women — Zero Microcephaly Cases
According to a report by the New England Complex Systems Institute (NECSI), there are serious questions about whether Zika virus is the cause of microcephaly. They cite the preliminary results of a New England Journal of Medicine study, which followed nearly 12,000 pregnant Colombian women infected with Zika virus.6
No cases of microcephaly were reported in their babies as of May 2016, yet four cases of microcephaly were reported among women who had Zika infection with no symptoms and were therefore not included in the study.
The researchers then speculated that this means there could be four times as many cases of Zika infection that are unreported, for a total of at least 60,000 Zika-infected pregnancies in Colombia.
Using this data, an analysis revealed the rate of microcephaly to be what would be expected in any area, whether Zika is in the picture or not, which is 2 cases in 10,000 births.7 According to NECSI:8
By June 2016, 11 total microcephaly cases had been reported in women with Zika infections in Colombia. If Zika and microcephaly are linked, NECSI pointed out that the total number of microcephaly cases should rise dramatically in the next few months, reaching more than 10 microcephaly-Zika births each week.9
NECSI also suggested, "An alternative cause of microcephaly in Brazil could be the pesticide pyriproxyfen, which is cross-reactive with retinoic acid, which causes microcephaly, and is being used in drinking water."10
WHO Expert: Zika Response 'Completely Hysterical'
Florence Fouque, a World Health Organization (WHO) expert on animals that carry viruses, called the public response to the Zika virus "completely hysterical."11 She blamed the hysteria on the findings that the virus affects pregnant women and can be sexually transmitted.
"It's like AIDS," she told PRI. "People make this link and that's why they are really afraid."12 At one restaurant in downtown Miami, Florida, where a handful of Zika cases were detected in August 2016, insect repellent was placed on all the tables.13
Even Oliver Brady, an epidemiologist with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine who was asked by Brazilian officials to assess the Zika-microcephaly situation, said there's no conclusive evidence that Zika causes birth defects in humans.
He told PRI that while animal studies have shown the virus attacks brain cells, this isn't "final proof:"14
"You see that with a lot of arboviruses [viruses spread by mosquitoes and other insects] … They have pathogenic qualities and if you put them in the right tissue then they will cause some sort of damage. And they tend to be quite transmissible across a variety of barriers anyway.
So it doesn't necessarily mean that that's the mechanism that's happening out there in the field, even if it does work in the lab."
National Institutes of Health Launches Trial for Experimental Zika Vaccine
The U.S. is among those ignoring data and rushing to launch a vaccine against Zika virus before it's even known whether it's causing birth defects. What is known, however, is that experimental vaccines have real risks, which are often downplayed in the wake of perceived global "emergencies" such as Zika.
In August 2016, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced it launched a clinical trial of an experimental Zika vaccine — again, before there is conclusive proof that Zika causes microcephaly.
Eighty healthy volunteers between the ages of 18 and 35 will be vaccinated with varying doses of the experimental vaccine. No placebos will be given. The vaccine is said to be similar to a West Nile Virus vaccine that was previously developed by the NIH, but has not yet been approved. This alone should be a red flag, as should the disastrous outcome of the CYD-TDV vaccine, the first dengue vaccine approved by WHO in April 2016.
Aerial Mosquito Spraying May Increase Autism Risk
Unfortunately, many may suffer as a result. In research presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies 2016 Meeting, aerial pesticide exposure was linked to an increased risk of developmental delays and autism spectrum disorder among children.20 The study compared children living in zip codes where aerial pesticide spraying was used each summer to combat mosquitoes that carry the eastern equine encephalitis virus with children living in non-aerial-spraying zip codes.
Children exposed to the aerial pesticide spraying were about 25 percent more likely to be diagnosed with autism or have a documented developmental delay than those living in areas that used other methods of pesticide application (such as manual spreading of granules).
If authorities use the supposed threat of Zika to increase aerial spraying, it could increase children's risk of brain disorders, which is the opposite of what anti-Zika campaigns are supposed to achieve.
Yes, we get it. The Zika virus may not be the harbinger of the fall of civilization and the end of life as we know it. We get it. We really do.
But the absence of proof is not proof of absence. When there is statistical data, even if some of it is flawed, that suggests that something may be a significant danger to life and the quality thereof, it behooves us to factor it along with everything else into the risk assessment exercise we perform every day when we walk out the door to go to work or whatever. That is not a panic response, just prudence.
Dr. Mercola???
"An article in BusinessWeek was critical of his website's aggressive direct-marketing tactics and complained of Mercola's "lack of respect" for his site's visitors, writing:
"Mercola gives the lie to the notion that holistic practitioners tend to be so absorbed in treating patients that they aren't effective businesspeople. While Mercola on his site seeks to identify with this image by distinguishing himself from "all the greed-motivated hype out there in health-care land", he is a master promoter, using every trick of traditional and Internet direct marketing to grow his business... He is selling health-care products and services, and is calling upon an unfortunate tradition made famous by the old-time snake oil salesmen of the 1800s."
"Dr. Joseph Mercola has been the subject of a number of United States Food and Drug Administration warning letters related to his activities:
Yea, that is the kind of quality science I subscribe to. NOT....
"An article in BusinessWeek was critical of his website's aggressive direct-marketing tactics and complained of Mercola's "lack of respect" for his site's visitors, writing:
"Mercola gives the lie to the notion that holistic practitioners tend to be so absorbed in treating patients that they aren't effective businesspeople. While Mercola on his site seeks to identify with this image by distinguishing himself from "all the greed-motivated hype out there in health-care land", he is a master promoter, using every trick of traditional and Internet direct marketing to grow his business... He is selling health-care products and services, and is calling upon an unfortunate tradition made famous by the old-time snake oil salesmen of the 1800s."
"Dr. Joseph Mercola has been the subject of a number of United States Food and Drug Administration warning letters related to his activities:
- 02/16/2005 - Living Fuel RX(TM) and Coconut Oil Products - For marketing products for a medical use which classifies those products as drugs in violation of 201(g)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.[7][54]
- 09/21/2006 - Optimal Wellness Center - For both labeling and marketing health supplements for purposes that would render them to be classified as regulated drugs as well as failing to provide adequate directions for use on the label in the event that they were legally sold as drugs.[7][55]
- 03/11/2011 - Re: Meditherm Med2000 Infrared cameras - Mercola was accused of violating federal law by making claims about the efficacy of certain uses of a telethermographic camera exceeding those approved by the FDA concerning the diagnostic and therapeutic potential of the device (regulation of such claims being within the purview of the FDA).[56]
- 12/16/2011 - Milk Specialties Global - Wautoma - Failure to have tested for purity, strength, identity, and composition his "Dr. Mercola Vitamin K2" and other products.[57]"
Yea, that is the kind of quality science I subscribe to. NOT....
- Messages
- 53,688
- Reaction score
- 7,869
- # of dives
- 500 - 999
Great, deepsea21 is following an anti-vaxing quack and trying to sell his snake oil ideas here.
Similar threads
