Illnesses from Mosquito, Tick, and Flea Bites Increasing in the US
cdc.gov
cdc.gov
Get at me if you're 'bout it: eng at clayrichardson.me
For instance here in Australia there has been a rise of shark attacks recently. The reason isn't necessarily because sharks were attacking more people or acting more aggressively, it was because more people were in the water.
It's interesting how statistics can point you in the wrong direction.
“Bites from certain ticks, such as the lone star tick in the US, [...] have been implicated in the development of this delayed allergic response which is triggered by the consumption of mammalian meat products.”
https://aeon.co/essays/how-lyme-disease-became-the-first-epi...
The article is by the author of Lyme - The First Epidemic of Climate Change. [1]
It lookes like that would increase the ticks habitats very little over a whole century. Now take a look at the dramatic changes in just few years presented in the article.
[1] https://globalclimate.ucr.edu/resources.html
[2] https://climate.ncsu.edu/images/edu/IsobarsIsotherms.gif
A small average change is small but it's something. There was some separate issue about saiga antelope undergoing catastrophic die off a few years ago. The best theory now is a temperature change enabling bacterial infection by bacteria that were always present but not killing the antelope. The average temperature would not change that much as per your data but the extremes are going to swing more with climate change. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-42720955
A laymen's explanation:
https://qz.com/441583/lyme-disease-is-spreading-faster-than-...
"But our rapidly changing climate also seems to be making it easier for Lyme to spread, by shifting when blacklegged ticks typically feed."
This means it's simply a matter of waiting for the temperature to rise just a bit more for the Lyme disease to be a problem in the USA everywhere there are deer.
There is the difficulty with temperature theory helping the spread the same way in Europe which the article covers, but Lyme disease in Europe is a slightly different bacteria as well.
The National Science Foundation explanation: https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/ecoinf/lyme.jsp
First, an increase in the natural vectors for parasites. We have eliminated wolves and reduced other predators, and since we don't hunt small mammals for food anymore there could be an explosion in their population. Even deer, which we continue to hunt, have seen rapid population growth over the last century[1]. Looking at the population minimum from the deer population chart, I suspect that other potential disease vector hosts might have gone through a similar minimum followed by a rebound, and parasites are recovering with them.
Second, an increased awareness of these diseases is probably a big factor. I've known many people who have contracted Lyme disease. It used to be a big fight to get a doctor to take the possibility seriously, even in Connecticut where I used to live (the epicenter of Lyme disease)! As of even 5 years ago friends and family of mine could not get a prescription for the required antibiotic until they had a positive test result, which is finicky and allows the disease to progress over the weeks of delay. And Lyme is an incredibly debilitating disease. Diseases like Zika that have much more subtle symptoms (except in babies) could easily go unnoticed.
Finally, keep in mind that malaria, dengue fever, and yellow fever used to be common in the United States. This is a natural range for these kind of mosquito borne diseases. We used to take mosquito population control much more seriously, perhaps we have become too apathetic about it. How many people do you know that are part of the local mosquito control association? Do you make sure there is no standing water on your property? Do we spray for mosquitos any more?
[1] http://www.deerfriendly.com/_/rsrc/1474256275604/decline-of-...
https://www.thetimesherald.com/story/sports/2017/08/17/ecker...
- Pants should always be tucked into socks.
- Wear light-colored clothing so that ticks are easier to see before they get onto your skin.
- Wear something like boxer briefs where there is tight elastic on both the wasteband and thighs.
- If you get a tick in a certain park, never go back to that park. The distribution of ticks is highly uneven, so this is surprisingly effective.
- Always check yourself in the mirror as soon as you get home, and then immediately take a shower and make sure you check every square inch of your body.
- Any clothes you wore into the woods should either go into the laundry, or else be stored in a sealed container so that any ticks on your clothing can't start running around your bedroom.
Tickborne illnesses are extremely serious, difficult or impossible to diagnose, and often deadly. But if you always follow these basic steps then you can eliminate the vast majority of the risk.
Scientists used to believe that it took 24 hours after getting bitten to transmit tickborne illnesses, but this is no longer the case. When in doubt just do the 21 days of doxycycline, although obviously this isn't something you ever want to have to do. (Some tickborne illnesses aren't treatable with doxycycline, but this is a good starting point absent other specific symptoms.)
[citation needed] - I haven't been able to find anything that says this is any /more/ dangerous than either chemical on its own
Somewhat relevant, but involving other chemicals:
http://articles.latimes.com/1996-04-17/news/mn-59595_1_gulf-...
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/syndrome/abou....
For healthy adults, stuff like Zika and West Nile pose a small risk of serious infection or complications.
Also little gaiters I find are better than tucking in your pants.
Tho you have a point, ticks get in the unlikeliest places: One time I had a tick on the inside of my wrist, right under the watch I was wearing. Which wasn't a good place for the tick, it was crushed dead between the wrist/my watch and simply fell off after I took off the watch.
We can leave the remaining ~3,500 species of mosquitos—which don’t bite humans—alone.
Edit I guess I should build some prototypes as a first step.
Disclaimer: I'm a Software Engineer at Verily, though my main focus is on Baseline / Clinical Studies, however I helped build the website for Debug which was fun.
Let me know if you have any questions!
[0]: https://verily.com/roles/#open-roles [1]: https://debug.com/
They suck for humans, but what % of a critical link are they to their immediate neighbors along the chain?
The 1% of mosquito species which do can fuck off and die, as they’re literally responsible for killing tens of billions of humans.
Seriously, we do a lot of damage to this world, but eradicating human blood suckers wouldn’t be one of them.
I have never been bitten by a mosquito anywhere along the coast near the ocean and certainly not in any of the dryer/desert areas. I've spent a lot of time in the Mojave and other parts of SoCal, it's far too dry. Rattlesnake bites while hiking are a far greater concern of mine than mosquito bites, there are simply _zero_ mosquitoes in my daily life, it's a complete non-issue.
The midwest is where I grew up, so I know what it means to have the outdoors made hostile by mosquitoes. It was relatively trivial to move to greener pastures, and I'm glad to have found absence of mosquitoes was one of the rewards.
I react awfully to mosquito bites, and absolutely detest them and it's a big part of what keeps me from visiting home now that I prefer to spend so much time outdoors.
The simple fact is there are pros to California's perma-drought condition.
And also "it's a big part of what keeps me from visiting home now".
Surely you see how maybe some people would like to visit home, etc.
Also displayed in this thread, there are people ignorant of the possibility of simply moving somewhere no mosquitoes exist - operating under the assumption that it's unavoidable. Indeed, prior to my leaving the midwest, I had no idea there were places people could enjoy nights being active outside year-round without insect bites.
Obviously everyone is going to have different priorities, for many mosquitoes are a minor inconvenience sufficiently mitigated with bug spray and candles. I assume those people wouldn't be willing to move to escape them, but I presume they also wouldn't be vehemently raging about extincting the species as a priority.
I'm here to tell you - yes, you can move to such places, and it's not even particularly difficult or costly. There's _plenty_ of incredibly affordable desert land in California, where there are effectively no mosquitoes. If moving is too inconvenient for you, buy a recreational desert property and vacation there! It's that cheap. The fall-winter climate is ideal and remains good into the spring, there's no humidity, and of course - no mosquitoes!
Or don't make any changes in your life, and fill yourself with rage about the environment you find yourself in, as if that's going to help.
Maybe your diet/genetics/clothing choices are just not as attractive to the mosquitoes in your area - I've seen huge differences in mosquito attention between individuals within a group.
It's also typical that reaction to mosquito bites decreases with age after adolescence (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2571626) so maybe you moved as your reaction to mosquito bites disappeared (and maybe you can visit home again).
The last time I experienced mosquitoes in California was camping in a rainforest. I am not immune or unattractive to them, they are quite attracted to me.
But I'm also not putting myself in residential areas that would be desert if not for the constant irrigation. You're certainly able to find places with mosquitoes if you're looking for them - why would you do that if you're averse to them?
The Debug FAQ [1] under "Challenges and Impact" actually has a good answer on this that I'll copy below:
> What’s the ecological impact of reducing Aedes aegypti mosquito populations?
> Globally, there are already extensive attempts underway to reduce Aedes aegypti populations in urban environments to protect human health. Aedes aegypti is an invasive species that almost exclusively feeds on humans in order to reproduce. They are native to some parts of Africa, but international trade and other human activity have allowed Aedes aegypti to spread widely. These mosquitoes invade and proliferate in new communities every year, putting more and more people at risk for mosquito-borne diseases.
> The general consensus among scientists is that the ecological impact of removing Aedes aegypti mosquitoes from urban environment would be small. They are not a significant food source for other animals and don't help pollinate crops. The main ecological impact would be to restore the ecosystem to how it was before the mosquitoes invaded.
> For these reasons, the ecological risk of this project is low, particularly when compared to the impact of existing control methods that can be broadly toxic to humans and the environment, and the Debug team is committed to working with communities and regulators to ensure the safety and acceptability of our field trials and releases.
Would introducing bat colonies - kind of like bee hives, which could be moved around serve to help eat some mosquitos?
To put some things in context also, there are 34 millions of new citizens in USA since 2004. We can expected some increase in people bitten just by this. The population had increased therefore the cases also did (but does not explain all the increase)
Some bats are good to hunt mosquitos, some birds are good also, but there are other options. One of them is well known, easy to manage, hard (can starve for weeks), totally silent, harmless and can adapt easily to a human environment: spiders. Would be much much easier to promote than bats.
The other big group is inexplicably neglected, their real role and statistics as mosquito predators are poorly studied, and most people is not even aware of their existence even if they are 100% designed to overpower mosquitoes in its own game. They can fight them in the open air where spiders can't. I'm talking of flies. Some flies are big mosquito killers.
But I bet that most experts on Asilidae struggle each month to find enough funds for keeping their research alive.
I used to use the running trail around our downtown lake frequently and I could hear the bats making sounds above me as I ran under the bridge. Occasionally, I would wonder about those stories of spelunkers getting rabies from just breathing the virus from a large subterranean colony, but thousands of people use Austin’s most popular running trail with apparently no ill effects from the close proximity to so many bats.
[1] https://www.cnn.com/videos/travel/2017/07/28/with-me-as-your...
There still could be knock-on effects from removing them, but restricting it to the human-biting species might mitigate that.
I admit I don't know if that's true of all species or in all locations.
Automobiles, sugary foods, an opiods would like a word.
But yes, in terms of threats from other animals, they're at the top of the list.
edit: Holy heck with the instant downvotes. Look: I'm not trying to downplay the threat of malaria and other mosquito-borne illnesses. Malaria is the #9 cause of death in developing nations today and totally worth the efforts to fight it. But it's also true that, if you get in a car or live around cars, they are more likely to kill you than a mosquito. Heart disease (which I'm representing here with the phrase "sugary foods" obviously) kills more people everywhere on earth than malaria, including developing nations.
So depending on how we define "the most dangerous thing", it's not entirely crazy to say that the mosquito isn't it.
From the abstract of this paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16250876
But even if it is, it's certainly not the case today.
It's not in the top-10 causes of death at the moment. If we limit the scope to developing nations only, it's #9, which is huge, but still killing less than half the number that heart disease does.
Furthermore, most mosquitoes don't carry malaria, but all sugary foods are capable of causing heart disease if consumed in excess.
So it's not unfair to say that sugary foods are more dangerous to humans than mosquitoes.
0: http://factmyth.com/factoids/malaria-killed-half-the-people-...
~50 billion lives.
And second, if we're talking about present day, malaria is way behind heart disease (largely caused by sugary foods). And in developed nations, its way behind automobiles. And in the USA, it's way behind opioids. So my comment wasn't totally off.
0: http://factmyth.com/factoids/malaria-killed-half-the-people-...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/02/05/heal...
Edit: I hate Amp but don't know, at a glance, how to get the full URL.
What is the difference between the two for you? I'm on a desktop, and both the AMP and the non-AMP version look literally identical - somewhat mobile-optimized, but not particularly.
I definitely would personally welcome research on efforts to more specifically target the mosquito and the mosquito alone. Chemical based insect control isn't going to go away in the absence of alternatives, meaning that, should an alternative, mosquito specific approach be developed, it probably will have much less "knock on effects" to the ecosystem compared to what we are already doing.
[0]: https://ecdc.europa.eu/en/disease-vectors/facts/mosquito-fac...
Runner here. No thanks. I would like to run in peace.
Permethrin SFR 36.8%
*Edit - Nevermind - this WILL harm bees. Sorry about that.
When I got up, I wiped all the leafy detritus off me - and I found a tick. I killed it immediately and gouged his head out of me.
What should I do? Should I be worried about Lyme? How test?
I had a tick only once before on a camping trip in Big Sur - and that one was much bigger than this one - but nothing happened.
Any advice?
Whatever.
So, in a thread about Redshift on AWS, with Jeff here talking about the service, I should probably go hire a DBA rather than ask a simple question like "how often should one perform a vacuum?
This is not the place to ask about redshift, you should probably go hire an AWS solutions architect.
Sure.
If you go, they'll tell you to monitor the site for the characteristic rash, and be alarmed if you have any flu-like symptoms in the next couple of weeks.
Where I live the worry is TBE and Lyme, and people tend to take vaccination shots against TBE. Lyme is terrible but normally only causes chronic problems if undiscovered/untreated. My 6yo has had dozens of ticks, (a handful every season) and had antibiotics for the first time after a bite already when he was 3. We check him after he has been out, and every now and then we find 1 or 2.
Why? I suspect that climate change is a factor, but how do we know whether that's true and the CDC isn't allowed to report it, or whether it's false?
Major citation needed: I’ve read tons of coverage over at least three decades. What makes you think it’s being covered up?
I’m more convinced that there’s a conflict of interest there than anything else.
AFAICT, the CDC position is the usual conservative scientific process: “chronic Lyme” isn’t a recognized diagnosis, the proposed treatments aren’t clinically proven, and there are significant risks: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6623a3.htm
Kinda makes me just want to stay in Colorado, which has never originated a case of human Lyme disease: http://extension.colostate.edu/topic-areas/insects/colorado-...
Could this also be that people who live in mosquito areas are getting older and thus more susceptible to illness? (Since young people flock to cities on the coast)
They kind of alluded to this in the article, saying that people are traveling more, and thus spreading diseases to mosquitoes, but the data shows a dramatic uptick (pun intended) from last year!
The full text of the report is more informative than the pamphlet (less likely to get on the nightly news though).
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6717e1.htm?s_cid=mm...
Website and donate link: http://livlymefoundation.org/
“She went from this sweet, bubbly kid with a twinkle in her eye, to a child who could not track you, who was completely checked out”.
They went to doctor after doctor but no one could provide an answer. Finally, 51 doctors and 18 months later, they found out Goodreau had Lyme disease.
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/lifestyle/health/denver-gir...
I blame this problem on the fact that some maladies just don't have any answers yet, but people want to provide them. For some, it's chronic lyme. For others, it's biofilms (Cf. the Marshall protocol), subluxations (chiropractic), or unbalanced qi (reiki).
Afaik proper diagnosis still poses quite a bit of challenge. The red ring doesn't always happen, in a German trial only 23% of neuroborreliosis patients actually had the "wanderröte". [0] Similar problems with the antibody assays: They can only detect if the pathogen had been present/not present, but not if it's an acute or a chronic infection. That's why some physicians keep on giving long-term antibiotics regimes, based on the assumption that it's a chronic infection.
[0] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00115-003-1560-z#...
Speculating on the risks of treatment is premature when the cost is a few $k a year and the alternative is shitty quality of life.
Prove that long-term antibiotic treatment is harmful, and then prove that there exists a better treatment. Daraprim may be extremely toxic, and cost $750/pill, but people still take it.