Corona Virus Advice for Public as per WHO

WHO’s standard recommendations for the general public to reduce exposure to and transmission of a range of illnesses are as follows, which include hand and respiratory hygiene, and safe food practices:

• Frequently clean hands by using alcohol-based hand rub or soap and water;
• When coughing and sneezing cover mouth and nose with flexed elbow or tissue – throw tissue away immediately and wash hands.
• Avoid close contact with anyone who has fever and cough.
• If you have fever, cough and difficulty breathing seek medical care early and share previous travel history with your health care provider.
• When visiting live markets in areas currently experiencing cases of novel coronavirus, avoid direct unprotected contact with live animals and surfaces in contact with animals.
• The consumption of raw or undercooked animal products should be avoided. Raw meat, milk or animal organs should be handled with care, to avoid cross-contamination with uncooked foods, as per good food safety practices.

Referecnce: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public

Caution: Protect Yourself first as ‘Prevention is Better than Cure’

The weather pattern in the Bay of Bengal this month has produced heavy rainfalls in India. As a result many regions have severely flooded which can lead to a great deal of standing water or stagnant water. Although flood water eventually will recede or will be removed, but these water accumulations or post flooding can pose severe health risks.

These flood water are breeding ground for mosquitoes, which carry diseases such as dengue and malaria. Flood water and stagnant water may contain chemicals and sewage along with cholera, leptospira bacteria and many disease causing agents.

How can we protect ourselves from getting infection or disease?

Kindly read ahead:

1. Avoid standing flood water whenever possible. If it’s necessary to be in flooded water for helping others use safety gears, waterproof clothing and gumboots.
2. Don’t allow children to play in flood waters.
3. Use mosquito repellent and nets to avoid mosquito bites.
4. Wash hands if you’ve come in contact with flood water or touch objects that have.
5. Disinfect items that have touched flood water.
6. Never expose an open wound to flood water — use a waterproof bandage at all times.
7. Don’t eat foods that may have come into contact with flood water, even if they are packaged.
8. Possibly use clean water for drinking, use alum to settle turbid and dirty water then boil and then use or use domestic filters.

Protect your near ones and dear ones

Kindly, share and spread awareness.

Regards,
Dr. Varun Vishwanath Dhup
Pet and Public Health Consultant

9766939702

First report of identification of livestock-associated MRSA ST9 in retail meat in England

First report of identification of livestock-associated MRSA ST9 in retail meat in England

V. DHUP,A. M. KEARNS,B. PICHON and H. A. FOSTER (2015).
Epidemiology and Infection, Volume 143, Issue14, October 2015, pp 2989-2992
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?aid=9947180

Abstract

Sixty percent of all meat consumed in the UK is imported from European countries where there have been increasing reports of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) identified in food-producing animals, but rarely from such animals in the UK. Thirty samples each of raw chicken, pork and beef, sourced in England, were collected from retail outlets in Greater Manchester. MRSA was recovered from three chicken samples and one each of pork and beef, all from prepackaged supermarket meat. Four isolates were identified as representatives of the most common human healthcare-associated MRSA clone in the UK [EMRSA-15, spa type t032, belonging to multilocus sequence type clonal complex 22 (MLST-CC22)], suggesting contamination from human source(s) during meat processing. The fifth isolate (from chicken) was multiply-resistant (including oxacillin, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, clindamycin and tetracycline), identified as ST9-SCCmecIV, spa type t1939 and lacked the immune evasion cluster, a characteristic of livestock-associated strains. This lineage has been identified previously from animals and meat products in Asia and mainland Europe but not the UK.

Typical blue colored MRSA colonies on MRSA ID Agar

My 2014 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for my blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 730 times in 2014. If it were a cable car, it would take about 12 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.

Buying a Puppy, avoiding Scams

DogLine UK (Safepets)

A humorous but real life look at puppy buying scams.   Laugh, but pass this on to everyone you know, all of these things happen daily.

Don’t be fooled into supporting puppy farmers and back yard breeders.  Do your research and ask for advice.

View original post 545 more words

Bravo Working Dog Rescue, urgent appeal

Spread the word

DogLine UK (Safepets)

I have run my own rescue for many years, specialising in the bigger and more difficult dogs and problems.  Offering specialist rehab and rehoming.  Out of this, came opportunities to make good contacts in the world of working dogs.

We were always helping retiring and failed working dogs to go into a pet retirement or into a safe, working home.  The numbers of this increased until we decided to give this rescue its own identity.  So Bravo Working Dog Rescue was born a couple of years ago.

We now need your help urgently.

Until April we had the use of a kennel block, but were told earlier in the year that site development meant we would lose it, which happened in April.  A few months ago we started a fund raising effort to raise £5,000 for kennels.  This has gone slowly, but we thank Five Mile Media for their amazing…

View original post 176 more words

ARE MANGOES GOOD OR BAD FOR DOGS?

   

Summer time is the time for mangoes nobody can deny having a mango these days. It’s also called as king of fruits. Many pet owners wonder should I feed my dog a mango? And many complain my dog eats lot of mangoes. Some think mangoes are not good for pets. So what’s the deal is it good or bad?

Mangoes are very refreshing, fulfilling and delicious and tempt us to have as many as we can! Mangoes are good for dogs! But remember anything in excess is poison.

Mangoes contain many essential nutrients, fibres, vitamins and enzymes which are good for health of human as well as dogs. Essential nutrients lower bad cholesterol in body, fibres enhances digestion and vitamin C and A keep our immune system and eye sight healthy.

Can I have some mangoes then?

Yes why not, make sure it is peeled off and mango kernel is removed as it is not edible, can cause choking and may contain cyanide which may lead to poisoning and ultimately death.

Thank you and I love it…!!!

Republic Day 65th Year

 

In India, Republic Day is celebrated every year on 26th January. 

What is it for, any ideas? Well let me explain shortly, the Constitution of India came into force on 26th January, 1950, this Constitution was passed by Constituent Assembly of India on 26th November, 1949. The Constitution of India replaced the Government of India Act 1935 as the governing document of India. This led our country on the path of becoming independent republic adopting a democratic government system. So this is what we celebrate.

Below are some rare photographs of such celebration (Courtesy: IBNlive.com)

Influence of Risk on US and UK Regulatory Authority towards Incineration of Hazardous Waste

Hazardous Waste and Incineration:

Hazardous waste is waste that is dangerous or potentially harmful to human and animal health or the environment. Hazardous wastes can be liquids, solids, gases, or sludges. They can be discarded commercial products, like cleaning fluids or pesticides, or the by-products of manufacturing processes (US-EPA, 2009).

Before a material can be classified as a hazardous waste, it must first be a solid waste as defined under RCRA. Hazardous wastes are divided into (US-EPA, 2009)

1. listed wastes,
2. characteristic wastes,
3. universal wastes and
4. mixed wastes

Incineration is “an engineered process using controlled flame combustion to thermally degrade waste materials” (Travis, 1989). It involves the process of complete combustion of solid or liquid waste, an oxidative process used for; detoxification and sterilization, volume reduction, energy recovery, by-product chemical recovery (Cheremisinoff, 1995).

Regulatory Considerations for Hazardous Waste Incineration:

The regulatory bodies are:

• United States – Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA),
• United Kingdom’s – Environmental Agency & DEFRA – Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted in 1976, were written to provide “cradle to grave” tracking of hazardous waste. Pursuant to RCRA, EPA developed hazardous waste management regulations for generators and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs). In 1984, Congress expanded the scope of RCRA with passage of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA). HSWA directed EPA to adopt regulations governing small quantity hazardous waste generators (SQGs) such as many small labs. Most labs routinely generate hazardous waste and, therefore, are subject to RCRA hazardous waste management regulations (40 CFR Parts 260 to 270) (US-EPA, 2009).

These regulations include requirements governing waste classification, accumulation, disposal, recordkeeping, and emergency preparedness. EPA has delegated authority to implement and enforce hazardous waste management programs to the states and tribes. State and tribal regulations are at least as stringent as EPA’s hazardous waste regulations. Still, it is important to keep up with the EPA regulations since EPA regularly publishes new hazardous waste management regulations that are enforceable in the states even though they may not yet be included in a given state’s hazardous waste regulations (US-EPA, 2009).

The Hazardous Waste Regulations in UK which came into force on 16 July, 2005 set down the regime for the control and tracking of the movement of hazardous waste for the purpose of implementing the Hazardous Waste Directive (Directive 91/689/EC). The Regulations include a requirement for hazardous waste producers to notify their premises to the Environment Agency before hazardous wastes can be removed from the premises. They also exempt certain low risk premises from the requirement as long as they produce less than a specified amount of hazardous waste per annum (DEFRA, 2009).

Emissions from Hazardous Waste Incinerators: 

EPA promulgated MACT standards for the Phase I facilities on September 30, 1999 (64 FR 52828). The hazardous waste combustor MACT, codified in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart EEE, subjects affected sources to stringent emission limits for the following HAPs:

1. dioxins/furans,
2. hydrocarbons,
3. carbon monoxide (CO),
4. particulate matter,
5. non-dioxin organic HAPs (principal organic hazardous constituents [POHCs]),
6. mercury,
7. semi-volatile metals (i.e., lead and cadmium),
8. low volatility metals (i.e., arsenic, beryllium, and chromium), and
9. Hydrochloric acid/chlorine gas.

POHCs include halogenated and non-halogenated organic compounds (e.g., polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls). Particulate matter is composed of sulphate, nitrate, ammonium, and other ions; elemental carbon; particle-bound water; various organic compounds; and numerous elements contained in various compounds (US-EPA, 2005).

Recent studies show, the major toxic metals are lead (Pb), chromium (Cr), cadmium (Cd), and arsenic (As). Mercury (Hg) and Beryllium (Be), is more frequently encountered in this range for hazardous waste incinerators (if at all), even though may be present at higher or lower concentrations with other types of incinerators. The traces of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semi-volatile compounds (SVOCs) would include dozens of volatile compounds and perhaps hundreds of semi-volatile compounds, but each compound is present at a very low (sub-ppb) level. Examples include xylenes, ethylbenzene, chlorinated aliphatics, and chlorinated aromatics, as well as various oxygenated compounds (aldehydes, ketones, alcohols) (Hinshaw and Trenholm, 2001).

Risk Associated with Hazardous Waste Incineration:

A risk assessment is an analysis that uses information about toxic substances at a site to estimate a theoretical level of risk for people who might be exposed to these substances. The information comes from scientific studies and environmental data from a site. A risk assessment provides a comprehensive scientific estimate of risk to persons who could be exposed to hazardous materials present at a site (ATSDR, 1999).

Risk assessments, prepared by EPA and other agencies, which are used to determine if levels of toxic substances at hazardous waste sites pose an unacceptable risk as defined by regulatory standards and requirements. It helps regulatory officials determine hazardous site cleanup strategies that will ensure overall protection of human health and the environment. A risk assessment does not measure the actual health effects that hazardous substances at a site have on people. Risk assessments often are conducted without considering actual or possible exposure (ATSDR, 1999).

The potential adverse effects i.e. risk, of hazardous waste incinerators (HWI) continue to be a subject of worry (Carmen Agramunt et al., 2003).

Risk assessment is considered to be an effective scientific tool which enables decision makers to manage hazardous waste-contaminated sites in a cost-effective manner while preserving public health. However, the current risk assessment framework proposed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has limitations in addressing the true variability of population characteristics (Zhao and Kaluarachchi, 2002).

Human activities have always generated waste. This was not a major issue when the human population was relatively small and nomadic, but became a serious problem with urbanisation and the growth of large conurbations. Some highly publicised pollution incidents with incorrect waste management practices, led to public concerns about lack of control, inadequate environmental and human health impact. This forced many national regulatory bodies to implement new regulatory framework to deal with the hazardous and unsustainable waste management operations, which are based on waste prevention or minimisation, re-use, recycling and composting. But in many countries large percentage of waste cannot be recycled and re-used or composted as the main disposal methods are land filling and incineration (Giusti, 2009).

The studies so far have uncovered inconsistent and implausible evidence for a low level of risk. It is only natural that people living near huge incineration plants want more assurance — but epidemiology simply cannot provide it. The type of study needed is financially, logistically and ethically out of the question and there are, of course, genuine reasons to be concerned about incinerators. They are noisy, they damage air quality and they increase traffic levels. You don’t need subtle statistical analysis to detect the roar of a waste-laden truck (Matthews, 2006).

The UK government estimates that dioxin emissions from hazardous waste incineration reduced by around 99% between 1990 and 2000, even though the amount of waste being incinerated remained largely the same during this period. Dioxin emissions from incineration have been dramatically reduced in recent years, thanks to technology developments, which in turn were prompted by stricter regulations, particularly the EU Waste Incineration Directive which came fully into force in December 2005. The conditions under which dioxins are formed are well understood, making it possible to limit dioxin formation in incineration plants (2009).

Recent research for the government showed that all waste processes – including recycling and composting – are responsible for some emissions, but that none poses a threat to human health or the environment (DEFRA, 2004).

Changes in US and UK Regulations: 

Recent finalization of air emission standards under the Clean Air Act (CAA) have some standards, which are premised on the concept of maximum achievable control technology (MACT), impose stricter limits on hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from all regulated major and area sources. Under CAA Section 112(d)(5), EPA must regulate area sources in a given source category if the emissions from such sources are a threat to human health or the environment. To find the existing source MACT floor for each HAP discharged, EPA has identified the primary emission control technology that is employed by sources with emission levels equal to or lower than the median of the best performing 12% of sources (USEPA, 2005).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued standards that would decrease emissions of key pollutants from waste incinerators. The EPA rules require incinerators to reduce emissions to a standard known as “maximum achievable control technology,” or MACT. The Research Council report says compliance with MACT regulations will diminish the exposure of local populations to emissions, but it is unclear what effect compliance will have on a metropolitan or regional scale, since little is known about the risks posed by collective emissions from several incinerators. The committee noted that cumulative emissions of dioxins and metals are of substantial concern since those pollutants are capable of traveling long distances and persisting in the environment. It also recommended that all medical- and municipal-waste incinerators have uniform limits for each pollutant irrespective of plant size, age, or design, as is currently the case for hazardous-waste incinerators (USEPA, 2005).

A new European Regulation (1272/2008) on the classification, labelling and packaging of chemicals was adopted by Europe on December 2008 (the CLP Regulation). The Globally Harmonised System for chemical will be implemented in stages between now and 2015. CHIP3 was replaced by CHIP 4 in April 2009 to adopt this into UK legislation (EA, 2009).

The immediate changes are (EA, 2009);

1. The Approved Supply List is no longer used for chemical classification,
2. The Approved Classification and Labelling Guide has been reissued,
3.  Test methods are now found in the Annex of European Regulation 440/2008/EC. which sets out the test methods under REACH Legislation

Conclusion: 

From above explanation, I would like to comment, certain changes have been made in a period from 2005-2009 in incineration regulations depending upon the risk to the public health, up-to some extent. Regulatory bodies have been successful in implementing the laws regarding hazardous waste incineration and bust the emissions from the same. From this study it concludes both US and UK regulatory bodies have controlled emissions levels till date, but still some strict rules regarding long-term health effects for the people living in vicinity of hazardous waste incinerators is necessary.

References:

(2009) Emission and Health.

ATSDR (1999) ‘A Citizens Guide to Risk Assessments and Public Health Assessments at Contaminated Sites’ 3.

CARMEN AGRAMUNT, M., DOMINGO, A., DOMINGO, J. L. & CORBELLA, J. (2003) Monitoring internal exposure to metals and organic substances in workers at a hazardous waste incinerator after 3 years of operation. Toxicology Letters.

CHEREMISINOFF, N. (1995) Handbook of Emergency Response to Toxic Chemical Releases.

DEFRA (2004) Review of Environmental and Health Effects of Waste Management.

DEFRA (2009) Explanatory Memorandum to Hazardous Waste (England and Wales)(Amendment) Regulation. 9.

EA (2009) Hazardous Waste – August 2009 Update.

GIUSTI, L. (2009) A review of waste management practices and their impact on human health. Waste Management, 29, 2227-2239.

HINSHAW, G. D. & TRENHOLM, A. R. (2001) Hazardous waste incineration emissions in perspective. Waste Management, 21, 471-475.

MATTHEWS, R. (2006) No such thing a zero risk. New Scientist, 189, 24-24.

TRAVIS, C. (1989) Hazardous Waste Incineration and Human Health.

US-EPA (2005) MACT Standards for Hazardous Waste Combustors Finalized. Hazardous Waste Consultant, 23, 4.1-4.33.

US-EPA (2009) Waste – Hazardous Waste. United States – Environmental Protection Agency.

ZHAO, Q. & KALUARACHCHI, J. J. (2002) Risk assessment at hazardous waste-contaminated sites with variability of population characteristics. Environment International.

H7N9 flu scare…!!!

I came across an article about poultry could be the possible source of H7N9 flu among humans but no evidence of person-to-person transmission. Reported 4 cases of human H7N9 flu determined that all the patients were exposed to poultry, either through their occupation or visiting so called wet poultry markets.

Researchers say “this is the first time that definite bird-to-human transmission has been shown for the H7N9 virus.”

“Nobody else who came into contact with the H7N9-infected patients began to show any symptoms within 14 days from the beginning of surveillance, suggesting that the virus is not currently able to transmit between human beings,” the article said. Researchers also cautioned, further adaptation of the virus could lead to infections with less severe symptoms and “more efficient person-to-person transmission.

I believe, proper hygiene and sanitation will not work, but the set of standards to curb possible chances of leak of infection in community. Sooner or later adaptation of virus will make it much more efficient for person-to-person and animal-to-animal transmission. As we know more than 70% of the human diseases came from animals itself. So we have to be cautious all the time! No matter however advanced we are, as the world of resistant micro-organisms is growing and growing while researchers are trying every possible tool against them! Protecting ourselves had made us more vulnerable than leading to immortality.