#BioSecurity

[danlwarren]

Video by me and Ainsley Seago trying to explain the important work insect taxonomists do

[techploration]

How Do You Hide DNA?

The TV trope answer is rubber gloves and bleach. You do your best to not leave any, and destroy what is left. This is also the Gattaca approach, where in a society stratified by DNA you avoid detection of your ‘inferior’ DNA by … exfoliating?

This approach has obvious flaws. Imagining that you’ll never shed a hair or eyelash or slough off some skin cells seems naive. Encasing your body in a DNA encapsulating shroud is hardly subtle or convenient (hazmat chic has yet to happen). So what do you do?

You add some Noise

You know what is a lot easier than making sure no one ever gets a hold of your DNA? Making sure no one can reliably get a hold of your DNA, and that your DNA never shows up on its own.

You might think I’m going to suggest hacking your own DNA so that it changes constantly— let’s call that phase 2.

Phase 1– DNA spore cloud

Imagine this but all DNA

You set up simple bioreactor farms to churn out DNA strands (this tech already exists), get your sequence source from Ancestry.com and you get to work laundering DNA.

A misting of this DNA soup would make all other DNA functionally invisible— how are you going to separate out one set of DNA from the others?

And with the randomness of the seed data (and data breaches), your DNA being present has no legal bearing on you having been there in person.

Oh, and Phase 3 is we hack lichens to generate human DNA spore clouds and add them to architecture as a passive form of DNA cloaking

[probablyasocialecologist]

As the climate shifts and global trade quickens, plant diseases are becoming increasingly frequent, severe and widespread. Each year, pests and diseases rip through global food crops, where they cause losses of up to 30% of staple crop yields, and dramatically alter the Earth’s natural forest ecosystems. It was plant disease that made the once-dominant “Gros Michel” banana nearly commercially extinct (Fusarium wilt), turned the towering American chestnut into a mere shrub (Cryphonectria parasitica) and is currently threatening the future of coffee (Hemileia vastatrix). “There is basically always a plant disease pandemic ongoing,” said Schornack. “But most people don’t know it.”

[eopederson]

Signs: Falkland Islands Biosecurity, Stanley, 2022.

[vaticinatrix]

ah yes the four biosafety levels:

1: if you get sick from this, you're a weapons-grade dumbass and it's almost impressive

2: you can get sick from this, but you'd still have to fuck something up seriously

3: honestly pretty risky, but with proper procedures, there's no reason to be scared

4: honestly, you should be scared

[bucketofdeltav]

ah I gotcha. Thank you for being so patient in explaining your point.

In my experience NZ biosecurity is pretty much like you describe, in the declare line (I'm told they're more suspicious in the Nothing To Declare line) and you pass about ten amnesty bins on the way from the plane. I haven’t noticed them being racist but I wouldn't, I'm Pākehā usually traveling alone or with other Pākehā. If you've seen that, I believe you, and I'll keep an eye out for it next time I'm traveling home.

Haven't entered Australia in almost ten years and remember them being pretty much the same as Kiwi biosecurity, but I transited five years ago, and the security-security were dicks.

[nsemkekanews]

Chamber of Aquaculture, UK’s DEFRA train women farmers in aquaculture biosecurity - Nsemkeka

Chamber of Aquaculture, UK’s DEFRA train women farmers in aquaculture biosecurity – Nsemkeka To mark World Environment Day and the International Day for the Fight Against Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing 2025, the Chamber of Aquaculture has taken a major step toward inclusive and sustainable aquaculture development. The Chamber in collaboration with the UK’s Department for…

[theglobeandatlas]

After forcing resignations, USDA tries to walk back staff cuts

After forcing the departure of several hundred U.S. Department of Agriculture scientists and inspectors who prevent invasive pest and disease outbreaks, the Trump administration is trying to reverse course and bring some of them back, according to a Wednesday email that Investigate Midwest reviewed. Like other federal agencies, the USDA has tried to drastically reduce its workforce through mass…

[internutter]

Challenge #04493-L109: Purity Flaw

They wanted their population sick enough to be too tired to fight back, but strong enough to work. Then someone introduced the immunoflu and when they tried desperately to stop the spread, their secret came out. -- Anon Guest

Any time a polity's leader starts going on about 'purity' and the strength derived from it, you know that polity is in for a bad time. And so are its people. Not just the ones who are deemed imperfect or impure.

Worse still are the ones who get a bug in their heads about medical purity, and what that means.

It's always about "the chemicals" when they despise preventative measures. It's always about "protecting the children" when it comes to keeping injections away from them. Disease? Poison? Pathogens? Those are profitable, and can therefore go straight ahead. So long as the populace were too sick to rise up and too scared to protest, then all was well according to the glorious leaders.

[Check the source for the rest of the story]

[danlwarren]

Video by me and Ainsley Seago trying to explain the important work insect taxonomists do for America.

[hasellia]

This reminds me of the time I posted a picture of a cute fly on my table and got a hit by some nerd called "Biosecurity_Queensland."

Obligatory_yes_I'm_aware_it's_a_representative_of_the_Australian_government_that's-the-joke-_

I love when you post a species on inat and seconds later someone called "salamandergirl" "solidagoman" or "troutlilly_identifier" swoops in to ID it. Like yeah, you know what youre about. I trust your ID of my Bombus bimaculatus, "bombusboy200"

[executive-orders]

World Health Organization; U.S. Withdrawal (EO 14155)

Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-01957

Analysis of Executive Order 14155

Purpose and Background:

Withdrawal from WHO: The executive order aims to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO). This action is justified by citing the WHO's alleged mishandling of the COVID-19 response, lack of reforms, and perceived political influence from member states, particularly China.

Financial Disparity: The order highlights a significant disparity in contributions between the U.S. and China to the WHO, suggesting that the U.S. pays disproportionately more.

Key Actions:

Revocation of Previous Orders:

Revokes a previous presidential letter from January 20, 2021, which had retracted an earlier withdrawal notice from July 6, 2020.

Revokes EO 13987 which focused on global health leadership and response to pandemics.

Immediate Actions:

Stops all future funding and support to the WHO.

Recalls U.S. personnel or contractors from WHO activities.

Seeks new partners for activities previously handled by the WHO.

Policy and Structural Changes:

Establishes new mechanisms within the National Security Council for public health and biosecurity.

Directs the review and replacement of the U.S. Global Health Security Strategy.

International Relations:

Notifies the United Nations and WHO leadership of the withdrawal.

Halts U.S. participation in ongoing WHO negotiations regarding pandemics and health regulations, ensuring no binding commitments.

Implications:

Global Health Leadership: The U.S. withdrawal could lead to a significant shift in global health governance, potentially diminishing U.S. influence in international health policy and crisis response.

Domestic Impact: The order might lead to new domestic policies or mechanisms for dealing with health emergencies independently from WHO guidelines, which could either foster innovation or lead to isolation in global health responses.

International Relations: This move might strain relationships with allies who support the WHO and could impact global health cooperation efforts, especially in pandemics or other health crises.

Funding and Resource Allocation: Redirecting funds and resources previously committed to the WHO could lead to new investments in alternative health organizations or domestic health infrastructure.

Potential Challenges:

Coordination and Information Sharing: Without WHO, coordinated global responses to health crises might become more complex.

Public Perception and Health Security: There might be concerns about the U.S.'s ability to respond effectively to future pandemics without the global network provided by WHO.

Conclusion: This executive order signifies a major shift in U.S. policy towards global health governance, emphasizing national autonomy while potentially weakening international health cooperation. The long-term effects on both U.S. health security and global health will depend on how the U.S. manages its new approach to global health challenges.

Legal Evaluation

Constitutional Authority:

Foreign Affairs Powers: The President has significant authority over foreign affairs, including the power to enter into and withdraw from international agreements. This is derived from Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives the President the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate. However, withdrawal from international organizations like the WHO might typically involve Congressional consultation or approval, especially if treaties or laws are involved.

Legislation and Treaties:

WHO Constitution: The U.S. is a signatory to the WHO Constitution. Withdrawal from such an organization generally involves formal notice according to the terms of the agreement. The WHO Constitution requires one year's notice for withdrawal, which suggests that the immediate effects of this EO would be procedural, leading to actual withdrawal a year later.

Congressional Role: The order revokes previous executive actions and policies, which might have been enacted partly through legislative or budgetary means. While the President can revoke his own executive orders, changes in policy that affect funding or established law would likely require Congressional action. For instance, pausing funding to WHO would need to align with appropriations made by Congress.

Executive Orders:

Revoking Previous Orders: The revocation of Executive Order 13987 by this order is within the President's authority. However, the implications of this revocation on existing programs, commitments, and international relations need careful legal and diplomatic consideration.

Creation of New Directives: The creation of new structures or mechanisms within the National Security Council or other government bodies needs to comply with bureaucratic and administrative law, ensuring no conflict with existing statutes or agency missions.

Potential Legal Challenges:

Separation of Powers: Courts might scrutinize this EO if it's seen as an overreach, particularly if it affects legislative appropriations or if it attempts to unilaterally alter U.S. commitments without Congressional input.

Administrative Procedure: Any reassignment of personnel or changes in policy might be subject to administrative law, potentially leading to lawsuits if perceived as arbitrary or capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Treaty Obligations: The U.S. withdrawal from international health agreements like the WHO's Pandemic Agreement could be legally contested if seen as violating treaty obligations without proper process.

Practical Implementation:

Notification and Diplomacy: The immediate notification to the UN and WHO as stipulated in Sec. 3 would follow the legal pathway for withdrawal, but the process and its implications would need careful diplomatic handling.

Funding and Personnel: The practical steps of pausing funding and recalling personnel would require coordination with Congress for budgetary changes and could face legal challenges if not executed in line with federal employment laws or international commitments.

Conclusion: While the President has broad authority to issue executive orders affecting foreign policy, the implementation of this order would likely face several legal hurdles. It would require careful navigation through existing laws, treaties, and the separation of powers doctrine. Congress might need to be involved for full legal effect, especially concerning financial and personnel decisions. Legal challenges could arise based on how the order impacts established legal frameworks or if seen as an overstep of executive power.

Evaluation of Implications

Immediate Effects: Withdrawal from WHO: The U.S. officially withdrawing from the World Health Organization would significantly reduce the global health governance role traditionally played by the U.S. This could lead to:

Decreased influence in global health policy: The U.S. would no longer participate in decision-making processes at WHO, potentially reducing its ability to shape global health standards, responses to pandemics, and health security measures.

Reduction in funding: WHO might face a substantial funding gap, as the U.S. is one of its largest contributors. This could impact WHO's operational capabilities globally.

Financial Reallocation: The redirection of U.S. funds from WHO could mean:

New or enhanced funding for other initiatives: The U.S. might increase support for alternative health organizations or bilateral health programs, possibly focusing on areas where U.S. interest is more directly involved or where they can exert more control.

Personnel and Expertise:

Recall of U.S. personnel: This would pull back expertise and leadership from WHO, potentially weakening the organization's effectiveness and the U.S.'s influence in international health dialogues.

Global Health Security:

New Strategy Development: The revocation of the 2024 U.S. Global Health Security Strategy means new policies or strategies need to be developed, which could either be more isolationist or focus on alternative alliances for health security.

Long-term Implications: International Relations:

Shift in alliances: The U.S. might strengthen ties with other countries or organizations outside the WHO framework, possibly leading to a new bloc or coalition focused on health that aligns more closely with U.S. geopolitical interests.

Perception of U.S. Global Leadership: This move could be seen as a retreat from global leadership in health, potentially affecting U.S. soft power and international cooperation in other areas.

Health Policy and Pandemics:

Vulnerability to Future Pandemics: Without the collaborative framework of WHO, the U.S. might face challenges in coordinating with other nations for rapid response to global health threats.

Innovation and Research: The global exchange of health data, research, and innovations might suffer, possibly slowing down advancements in health technology and disease management.

Legal and Diplomatic Effects:

Binding International Agreements: Withdrawal from ongoing negotiations like the WHO Pandemic Agreement would mean the U.S. avoids commitments that might be seen as infringing on national sovereignty, but it also means missing out on shaping these agreements to favor U.S. interests.

Domestic Impact:

Public Health Infrastructure: Funds or personnel redirected from international commitments might bolster domestic public health systems, but at the cost of global engagement.

Conclusion: The implications of this Executive Order are multifaceted, affecting not just the U.S.'s role in global health but also its standing in the international community. The shift could lead to more autonomy in health policy but might also isolate the U.S. from key global health networks and knowledge sharing, potentially impacting future health security. It would be critical for the U.S. to establish robust alternative frameworks or alliances to mitigate these risks.

Quality of Reasoning

Clarity and Specificity: The order is clear in its intent and actions, detailing specific steps like pausing funding and recalling staff. However, the document could benefit from more detailed justification or evidence for claims about financial contributions and political influences.

Legal and Administrative Considerations: The order ensures that it does not infringe on existing legal authorities or budget considerations, which suggests a careful legal review has been conducted.

Potential Impact and Consideration:

Health Implications: Withdrawal from WHO could potentially weaken international health cooperation, which might be detrimental during global health crises. The order does not detail how alternative mechanisms will fill this gap beyond vague references to "credible and transparent partners."

Diplomatic and Political: The decision might affect U.S. international relations, particularly with countries that view WHO as an essential body for global health governance. The reasoning for withdrawal seems heavily weighted towards financial and political grievances rather than a comprehensive analysis of health outcomes.

Feasibility and Execution: While the steps for withdrawal are explicitly laid out, the practicality of finding and establishing new global health partnerships in a short timeframe is not discussed.

Conclusion on Reasoning Quality: The reasoning behind the executive order is straightforward but somewhat one-sided in its critique of WHO. It lacks a thorough exploration of potential negative impacts on global health security or a detailed plan for how the U.S. will manage its responsibilities and influence in global health post-withdrawal. The order would be stronger with more balanced arguments or at least acknowledgment of the complexities involved in such a significant policy shift.

[omexcsms]

Say Goodbye to Paper-Based Container Operations 📦🚫

With Omex Cold Storage Management System , we provide easy-to-use web and mobile applications to simplify your most important container handling processes:

Customs and Compliance Processing 📑✅ Cargo Receiving and Delivery Operations 🚚📦 Fumigation and Bio-Security 🦠🌿 Pack and Unpack Containers 📦🔄 Coordinate Inbound and Outbound Yard Transport 🚛🛣️ Invoicing Auto-Rate Revenue Activities as They Are Completed 💵🧾

Make your container operations seamless and efficient with https://www.omexcsms.com ! 🌍

[market-insider]

Exploring the ASEAN Poultry Vaccines Market: Detailed Insights on Size, Share, Growth Potential

The ASEAN poultry vaccines market size is expected to reach USD 253.22 million by 2030, registering a CAGR of 8.97% from 2025 to 2030, according to a new report by Grand View Research, Inc. The key factors driving the market growth include the increasing prevalence of poultry diseases, growing population, rapid urbanization, rising government initiatives, and reducing antibiotic usage.

For instance, The U.S. Bureau of Census data suggests that the ASEAN region’s (inclusive of 10 countries) total population grew by 11.6% in 2017 from 2008 and is expected to reach 720.0 million by 2027. In addition, according to Bloomberg, the urban population in the ASEAN region will grow by 100.0 million people by 2030. The region’s per capita GDP has grown annually by 3.4% in the last decade and is expected to grow by 3.5% in the next decade.

ASEAN Poultry Vaccines Market Report Highlights

The attenuated live vaccines segment led the market with the largest revenue share of 36.00% in 2024. The most traditional immunization technique in use in the veterinary industry is live attenuation.

Based on disease, the avian influenza segment led the market with the largest revenue share of 9.93% in 2024 and is anticipated to grow at the fastest CAGR over the forecast period.

Based on application, the breeder segment led the market with the largest revenue share of 44.80% in 2024.

Based on distribution channel, the hospital/clinic pharmacy segment led the market with the largest revenue share of 47.01% in 2024.

The poultry vaccines market in Indonesia led the market with the largest market share of 18.99% in 2024, owing to the increasing chicken meat consumption and poultry production rates in the country, which further boosts the demand for import of technology for keeping, feeding, & storage.

For More Details or Sample Copy please visit link @: ASEAN Poultry Vaccines Market Report

Furthermore, owing to the increasing poultry production in developing economies, concerns regarding food safety are growing. To prevent the spread of deadly diseases such as avian influenza in poultry farms, the governments of ASEAN countries are individually taking several measures. For instance, based on the Ministry of Agriculture Decree No. 4026, pathogenic Avian Influenza (AI) has been considered a notifiable disease in Indonesia, and the government has implemented actions to maintain AI control via vaccination, improved biosecurity measures, education & awareness, and routine surveillance. As part of its strategy, the country implemented intense vaccination among layer and breeder types.

Recently, Vietnam reported its first human H5 bird flu case as a result of infected chicken consumption in October 2022, which alerted the country to take strict measures with avian influenza vaccination drives. Similarly, governments of other ASEAN countries are taking a wide range of measures to control such severe infectious diseases to prevent economic loss. For instance, the Vietnamese government has collaborated with international organizations such as World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the UN, and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to implement the national animal disease control program 2019-2025. These measures improve the country’s poultry disease management and help develop safe meat supply chains.

Asian countries such as Malaysia, India, Nepal, South Korea, Vietnam, and the Philippines have reported Newcastle disease outbreaks in chickens. Due to these sudden outbreaks, governments are taking severe actions to implement vaccination drives and biosecurity measures. Moreover, according to an article published in the International Journal of Poultry Science, a study was conducted to determine how Malaysian government policies have affected broiler output in Peninsular Malaysia. Three different production sizes of chickens were produced and sold by contract and noncontract farmers in the study.

The effect of government protection on broiler production in Peninsular Malaysia was assessed using a policy analysis matrix including policy protection indicators. A field survey was used to gather information from 310 farms in Peninsular Malaysia. According to the findings, contract farming is more profitable than noncontract farming when producing broilers. The notional protection coefficient calculation results show that current regulations do not adequately safeguard producers. It came to the conclusion that the broiler industry needs government support to increase its competitiveness.

List of major companies in the ASEAN Poultry Vaccines Market

Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH

Ceva

HIPRA

Zoetis

Phibro Animal Health Corporation

Elanco

Merck & Co., Inc.

Medion Farma

For Customized reports or Special Pricing please visit @: ASEAN Poultry Vaccines Market Report

We have segmented the ASEAN poultry vaccines market on the basis of application, product, disease, distribution channel, and country.

[goatvetoz]

(via ) SA Biosecurity Bulletin - read how this sheep property ensures good Biosecurity to keep diseases off their property

[kj-bishop]

"If you find sick or dead wild birds, do not touch them. Report them to the Emergency Animal Disease Hotline on 1800 675 888."