State officials not planning to test wastewater in New Mexico for avian flu

IRRESPONSIBLE & LAZY

Danielle Prokop
Thu, May 16, 2024 

An aeration basin at the Southside Water Reclamation Plant in Albuquerque. A CDC contractor tested for the presence of COVID-19 at this and four other sewer systems in New Mexico. New Mexico health officials say there are no plans at this time to test for avian flu in wastewater.

 (Courtesy Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority)

Experts around the country have called on federal officials to use wastewater testing for the avian influenza strain H5N1, which has broken out in more than 33 dairies across eight states, including New Mexico.

While there are only two documented cases of viral crossover to humans documented in the U.S. since 2022, scientists said that wastewater testing is a crucial tool in watching for emerging threats to public health, including avian flu.

Marc Johnson, a virologist at the University of Missouri, developed a probe to track avian flu in wastewater over a year ago, as he was concerned about avian flu spread in U.S. birds in 2022.

“What wastewater does is gives you an unbiased readout of a community. It will tell you what is circulating, whether it’s showing up in the clinic or not,” he said.

Testing for virus material in wastewater is often cheaper than commercial tests, because states are already collecting the samples, and it just means adding an additional test. He said the federal government or other health agencies could implement a probe and test for H5N1 in sewage. The fact that it has spread so widely in cows before, is cause for concern.

“I just want to know where we’re at. I am astounded that this got this far, and no one noticed,” Johnson said.

The H5N1 probe is currently not being used in his job, which includes wastewater surveillance for SARC-coV-2 and other influenza strains in wastewater in Missouri.

Instead, many communities are using flu probes, which would pick up all variants of Influenza A, including the specific avian flu strain H5N1. But that means even if detected, avian flu would be indistinguishable from other strains.

Without more specific testing, health officials “don’t know whether the signal was actually H5N1 or something else,” Johnson explained.

There’s a need to know how widespread avian influenza is, he said, and the current plan isn’t cutting it.

“Since we’ve already demonstrated our lack of ability to track this lineage using our standard surveillance, it seems prudent to expand the other types of surveillance,” Johnson said.

New Mexico health officials have no plans to implement further wastewater testing for H5N1, said State Public Health Veterinarian Erin Phipps with the Department of Health.

New Mexico has not been asked to be involved in any wastewater-testing plans for avian flu at this point, Phipps said, “although I am aware of many conversations happening amongst many different entities about wastewater.”

There is no standardized probe for avian flu, yet. Researchers from Baylor College of Medicine and University of Texas Health Sciences Center published preliminary findings using their own probe last week. They found H5N1 in wastewater samples from nine Texas cities.

“A variant analysis suggests avian or bovine origin but other potential sources, especially humans, could not be excluded,” the study stated. The data still needs peer-review.

Johnson, who is not involved with the Texas study, said there’s still more to learn from testing for the avian flu in wastewater.

“Most sewersheds in the United States are closed, and you don’t get a lot of wild bird feces in the sewage. But the concern that probes are detecting milk that’s been poured down the drain, or dairy byproducts, is legitimate,” he said. “You won’t know whether it’s circulating in humans or not just from wastewater.”

After several days’ delay, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention launched a dashboard Tuesday, showing national wastewater data for Influenza A, since the past two weeks have shown higher levels of Influenza A in wastewater.

The data can’t tell us specifically how much of that is caused by the bird flu strain H5N1, which is currently indistinguishable from other types of Influenza A.

New Mexico has insufficient data to make any determination on Influenza A levels, according to the dashboard.
Protections for workers

The state has set up additional personal protective equipment for farmworkers in Curry County — where eight herds were confirmed to have been infected by avian flu — as well as in public health offices and the New Mexico State University Extension Office.

Local offices in Curry and Roosevelt counties were also supplied with tests for workers, as well as antiviral treatments for any positive cases.

Anyone who’s been exposed or had contact with an animal that is suspected or confirmed to have avian flu and has symptoms could be tested quickly, Phipps said.

While risk to the general public is still low, she said, people who come in close contact with birds or cows have a higher risk. If experiencing cold or flu-like symptoms and conjunctivitis — that’s a reddening of eyes — they can reach the department, she said, and test for avian flu.

As national wastewater testing expands, Texas researchers identify bird flu in nine cities

Susanne Rust
Thu, May 16, 2024 

As researchers increasingly rely on wastewater testing to monitor the spread of bird flu, some are questioning the reliability of the tests being used. Above, the Hyperion Water Reclamation Plant in Playa Del Rey. (Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)


As health officials turn increasingly toward wastewater testing as a means of tracking the spread of H5N1 bird flu among U.S. dairy herds, some researchers are raising questions about the effectiveness of the sewage assays.

Although the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says current testing is standardized and will detect bird flu, some researchers voiced skepticism.

"Right now we are using these sort of broad tests" to test for influenza A viruses in wastewater, said epidemiologist Denis Nash, referring to a category of viruses that includes normal human flu and the bird flu that is circulating in dairy cattle, wild birds, and domestic poultry.


"It's possible there are some locations around the country where the primers being used in these tests ... might not work for H5N1," said Nash, distinguished professor of epidemiology and executive director of City University of New York’s Institute for Implementation Science in Population Health.

Read more: What you need to know about the bird flu outbreak, concerns about raw milk, and more

The reason for this is that the tests most commonly used — polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, tests — are designed to detect genetic material from a specific organism, such as a flu virus.

But in order for them to identify the virus, they must be "primed" to know what they are looking for. Depending on what part of the virus researchers are looking for, they may not identify the bird flu subtype.

There are two common human influenza A viruses: H1N1 and H3N2. The "H" stands for hemagglutinin, which is an identifiable protein in the virus. The "N" stands for neuraminidase.

The bird flu, on the other hand, is also an influenza A virus. But it has the subtype H5N1.

That means that while the human and avian flu virus share the N1 signal, they don't share an H.

If a test is designed to look for only the H1 and H3 as indicators of influenza A virus, they're going to miss the bird flu.

Marc Johnson, a professor of molecular microbiology and immunology at the University of Missouri, said he doesn't think that's too likely. He said the generic panels that most labs use will capture H1, H3 and H5.

He said while his lab specifically looks for H1 and H3, "I think we may be the only ones doing that."

It's been just in the last few years that health officials have started using wastewater as a sentinel for community health.

Alexandria Boehm, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University and principal investigator and program director for WastewaterSCAN, said wastewater surveillance really got going during the pandemic. It's become a routine way to look for hundreds if not thousands of viruses and other pathogens in municipal wastewater.

"Three years or four years ago, no one was doing it," said Boehm, who collaborates with a network of researchers at labs at Stanford, Emory University and Alphabet Inc.’s life sciences research organization. "It sort of evolved in response to the pandemic and has continued to evolve."

Since late March, when the bird flu was first reported in Texas dairy cattle, researchers and public health officials have been combing through wastewater samples. Most are using the influenza A tests they had already built into their systems — most of which were designed to detect human flu viruses, not bird flu.

Read more: Flu season is over, but there is a viral surge in California wastewater. Is it avian flu?

On Tuesday, the CDC released its own dashboard showing wastewater sites where it has detected influenza A in the last two weeks.

Displaying a network of more than 650 sites across the nation, there were only three sites — in Florida, Illinois and Kansas — where levels of influenza A were considered high enough to warrant further agency investigation. There were more than 400 where data were insufficient to allow a determination.

Jonathan Yoder, deputy director of the CDC's Division of Infectious Disease Readiness and Innovation, said those sites were deemed to have insufficient data because testing hasn't been in place long enough, or there may not have been enough positive influenza A samples to include.

Asked if some of the tests being used could miss bird flu because of the way they were designed, he said: "We don't have any evidence of that. It does seem like we're at at a broad enough level that we don't have any evidence that we would not pick up H5."

He also said the tests were standardized across the network.

"I'm pretty sure that it's the same assay being used at all the sites," he said. "They're all based on ... what the CDC has published as a clinical assay for for influenza A, so it's based on clinical tests."

But there are discrepancies between the CDC's findings and others'.

Earlier this week, a team of scientists from Baylor College of Medicine, the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, the Texas Epidemic Health Institute and the El Paso Water Utility, published a report showing high levels of bird flu from wastewater in nine Texas cities. Their data show that H5N1 is the dominant form of influenza A swirling in these Texas towns' wastewater.

But unlike other research teams, including the CDC, they used an "agnostic" approach known as hybrid-capture sequencing.

"So it's not just targeting one virus or one of several viruses," as one does with PCR testing, said Eric Boerwinkle, dean of the UTHealth Houston School of Public Health and a member of the Texas team. "We're actually in a very complex mixture, which is wastewater, pulling down viruses and sequencing them."

"What's critical here is it's very specific to H5N1," he said, noting they'd been doing this kind of testing for approximately two years, and hadn't ever seen H5N1 before the middle of March.

Blake Hanson, an assistant professor at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health and a member of the Texas wastewater team, agreed, saying that PCR-based methods are "exquisite" and "highly accurate."

"But we have the ability to look at the representation of the entire genome, not just a marker component of it. And so that has allowed us to look at H5N1, differentiate it from some of our seasonal fluids like H1N1 and H3N2," he said. "It's what gave us high confidence that it is entirely H5N1, whereas the other papers are using a part of the H5 gene as a marker for H5."

Boerwinkle and Hanson underscored that while they could identify H5N1 in the wastewater, they cannot tell where it came from.

"Texas is really a confluence of a couple of different flyways for migratory birds, and Texas is also an agricultural state, despite having quite large cities," Boerwinkle said. "It's probably correct that if you had to put your dime and gamble what was happening, it's probably coming from not just one source but from multiple sources. We have no reason to think that one source is more likely any one of those things."

But they are pretty confident it's not coming from people.

"Because we are looking at the entirety of the genome, when we look at the single human H5N1 case, the genomic sequence ... has a hallmark amino acid change ... compared to all of the cattle from that same time point," Hanson said. "We do not see that hallmark amino acid present in any of our sequencing data. And we've looked very carefully for that, which gives us some confidence that we're not seeing human-human transmission."

The Texas' team approach was really exciting, said Devabhaktuni Srikrishna, the CEO and founder of PatientKnowHow.com, noting it exhibited "proof of principle" for employing this kind of metagenomic testing protocol for wastewater and air.

He said government agencies, private companies and academics have been searching for a reliable way to test for thousands of microscopic organisms — such as pathogens — quickly, reliably and at low cost.

"They showed it can be done," he said.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

CDC makes public influenza A wastewater data to assist bird flu probe

Reuters
Tue, May 14, 2024 at 9:38 AM MDT·2 min read

FILE PHOTO: Illustration shows test tubes labelled "Bird Flu" and U.S. flag


(Reuters) - The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Tuesday released data on influenza A found in wastewater in a public dashboard that could assist in tracking the outbreak of H5N1 bird flu that has infected cattle herds.

Last week, an agency official told Reuters about U.S plans to make public data collected by its surveillance system.

While the threat from the virus to people has been classified as low at this time, scientists are closely watching for changes in the virus that could make it spread more easily among humans.

Testing wastewater from sewers proved to be a powerful tool for detecting mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the COVID-19 pandemic.

For the week ended May 4, the agency's surveillance system did not show any indicators of unusual influenza activity in people, including the H5N1 virus. The virus has been detected among dairy cattle in nine U.S. states since late March.

The testing did detect unusually high levels of influenza A in Saline County, Kansas. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has confirmed four herds tested positive in Kansas, the last on April 17. Neither Kansas nor USDA have posted the counties where the herds were located.

CDC said that it is actively looking at multiple flu indicators to monitor for influenza A, of which H5N1 is a subtype, including looking for signs of spread of the virus to, or among, people, in areas where it has been identified.

For monitoring influenza A virus in wastewater, CDC compares the most recent weeks of influenza A virus levels recorded at a wastewater site to levels reported between Oct. 1, 2023 and March 2, 2024 for that same wastewater site. Those at or above the 80th percentile are categorized as high.

However, the testing cannot identify the source of the virus or whether it came from an infected bird, human or milk.

"By tracking the percentage of specimens tested that are positive for influenza A viruses, we can monitor for unusual increases in influenza activity that may be an early sign of spread of novel influenza A viruses, including H5N1," the CDC said in its report.

The public database will allow individuals to check for increases in influenza A cases in their area, or spot any unusual flu activity.

(Reporting by Bhanvi Satija in Bengaluru; Additional reporting by Julie Steenhuysen and Tom Polansek in Chicago; Editing by Bill Berkrot)


CDC launches new dashboard to track bird flu outbreak in your area

James Liddell
Wed, May 15, 2024

Dashboard maps US bird flu cases (CDC)


A new dashboard to monitor the spread of bird flu has been released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as rates rise among dairy cows across the US.

The health agency draws on data from wastewater sampling sites that have tested positive for influenza A.

The newly-curated dashboard, released on Tuesday, presents the data in map form and compares positive tests in a region to the same time last year.

As of 4 May, the dashboard shows that higher-than-average levels of the virus have been detected at 189 wastewater sites across the country.

Upticks, however, do not necessarily mean that bird flu has passed between animals and humans as type A cases of flu are prevalent and make up approximately 70 per cent of cases in people. According to the CDC, no unusual upticks in flu-like illnesses have been recorded in recent weeks.

The dashboard can’t yet distinguish whether high levels of the virus in wastewater indicate infections in humans, cows, birds or other animals.

The CDC is monitoring influenza A infections (CDC)

It follows an outbreak of bird flu strain H5N1, a subtype of influenza A that is circulating in cattle across the US. According to the dashboard, the risk of avian flu to the public remains low.

The US Department of Health and Human Services announced last week that it would pay farms $28,000 each to allow officials on-site to test cattle for bird flu to persuade more farmers to come forward.

One location in Saline County, Kansas, showed upticks of the avian flu for this time of the year. Four herds in Kansas tested positive in April, the CDC said.

It’s unclear whether the Kansas wastewater samples were limited to human waste or whether they included runoff water from farms.

“We’d really like to understand what might be driving that influenza A increase during what we consider the lower transmission season for influenza A,” Jonathan Yoder, deputy director of the CDC’s division of infectious disease readiness and innovation, told NBC.

According to the dashboard’s latest update on Tuesday, 42 herds in nine states had been affected. States include Kansas, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota and Texas.

The CDC is currently monitoring 260 people who have been exposed to dairy cows infected with H5N1. Thirty-three have been tested; one has been diagnosed with bird flu connected with the cattle outbreak.

On 1 April, a Texas dairy worker tested positive for H5N1 and later developed a severe case of conjunctivitis and has since recovered. He marks the second ever case recorded in the US, with spread from person to person never recorded.

As it stands, the risk to the general public is low, scientists say. While cases are rare, of the 873 humans that have been infected with H5N1 globally over the past 20 years, 458 have died, according to the World Health Organisation.

Symptoms in humans can range from non-existent to very mild, all the way through to death in the instance of severe disease, according to the CDC.


Seriously, don't drink the raw milk: Social media doubles down despite bird flu outbreak

Mary Walrath-Holdridge, 

USA TODAY
Tue, May 14, 2024 

No, seriously, don't drink that raw milk, despite what social media may continue to tell you.

Communities online have continued to push the rising trend of seeking out raw milk for consumption in the weeks following an update on the spread of bird flu in the U.S. earlier this month.

In a press conference on May 1, the CDC, FDA and USDA revealed that recent testing on commercial dairy products detected remnants of the H5N1 bird flu virus in one in five samples. However, none contained the live virus that could sicken people and officials said testing reaffirmed that pasteurization kills the bird flu virus, making milk safe to consume.

Even so, anti-pasteurization dairy advocates have continued their crusade online, with some saying they have begun to intentionally seek out milk contaminated with H5N1 to drink to "build up" what they believe will be a "tolerance" or "immunity" to the virus.

This continued insistence on consuming raw dairy, which was already a growing trend and concern prior to the avian flu outbreak, led the CDC to issue additional warnings last week, saying "high levels of A(H5N1) virus have been found in unpasteurized (“raw”) milk" and advising that the CDC and FDA "recommend against the consumption of raw milk or raw milk products."

Bird flu outbreak: Don't drink that raw milk, no matter what social media tells you
Raw milk fans, influencers ignore FDA, CDC warnings

Raw milk has also made headlines separate from bird flu in recent months, with local health agencies putting out warnings about specific products. In Pennsylvania, officials advised those who purchased raw milk from April through early May to discard it due to Campylobacter contamination, while Washington saw an E. Colio outbreak linked to raw milk earlier this year.

Even so, those who believe the science-backed practice pasteurization, which has been used for over 100 years, is unnecessary or even harmful have continued to question such warnings, with advocacy groups like "A Campaign for Real Milk" and the "Raw Milk Institute" putting out responses claiming that illness and deaths linked to the consumption of raw milk, as well as research into the presence of H5N1 in milk, is all a "lie" or inaccurate.

The spread of these claims has led experts to express concern for consumers who may be exposed to or convinced by these messages, as the consumption of raw milk can be especially dangerous for the elderly, children, pregnant people and those with compromised immune systems.

Here's what to know about pasteurization and what it does to the products we consume:

Close up of raw milk being poured into container at dairy farm.

Chicken owners: Here's how to protect your flock from bird flu outbreaks
What is pasteurization and why is it important?

Pasteurization is the process of heating milk to a high enough temperature for a long enough time to kill harmful germs, according to the CDC.

The process of pasteurization became routine in the commercial milk supply in the U.S. in the 1920s and was widespread by the 1950s. As a result, illnesses commonly spread via milk became less prevalent.

While misinformation about the process has led some to believe that pasteurized milk is less nutritious or better for people with lactose intolerance, pasteurization does not significantly compromise the nutritional value or content of milk. In some states, selling raw milk directly to a consumer is illegal.

Raw milk pouring from the pot to milk strainer filter and flowing in to the milk boiling pan or pot.
What can happen if you consume raw dairy?

Raw milk can carry a host of harmful bacteria, including:

◾ Salmonella

◾ E. coli

◾ Listeria monocytogenes

◾ Campylobacter

◾ Coxiella burnetii

◾ Cryptosporidium

◾ Yersinia enterocolitica

◾ Staphylococcus aureus

◾ Other foodborne illness-causing bacteria

Part of the process of making dairy products in modern dairy factory is pasteurization, or the heating of milk to kill bacteria.

The presence of these can cause a variety of health issues and ailments, including:

◾ Listeriosis

◾ Typhoid fever

◾ Tuberculosis

◾ Diphtheria

◾ Q fever

◾Brucellosis

◾ Food poisoning

◾ Miscarriage

◾ Guillain-Barre syndrome

◾ Hemolytic uremic syndrome

◾ Reactive arthritis

◾ Chronic inflammatory conditions

◾ Death
Why are some social media users still pushing unpasteurized milk and dairy?

Fringe ideas of health, wellness and nutrition have become easily widespread and somewhat popular with social media.

On TikTok, many homesteading, "tradwife," "all-natural" and other self-proclaimed wellness influencers push the idea of raw milk, presenting the idea that less intervention of any kind in their food is better.

Some also claim that they have been drinking it for years without illness, that they believe drinking it has cured their lactose intolerance and other health conditions, or that the raw milk contains vital nutrients and ingredients that are done away with by pasteurization.

These claims have all long since been debunked, according to agencies including the FDA, USDA and CDC.

Some big (and controversial) names including Gwyneth Paltrow and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have even publicly touted their consumption of raw milk, pushing the misinformation mentioned above. While some cite an overall distrust of government regulations involving food, some appear to believe they are helping others improve their health or are prone to sharing anecdotal evidence.

Comments under these videos include many justifications for drinking raw milk, from "if government says it's bad for you, there's hidden health benefits they don't want you to know," to "would it help with gut health that's been wrecked by antibiotics?" to sharing phone numbers and information on where to buy it under the table.

Others also have products they're looking to sell, whether that's the milk itself or some form of nutrition/wellness/diet plan or supplement.

Some established names, such as famous author and online creator John Green, have also taken to social media platforms like TikTok to tackle these claims head-on, with many making direct responses to popular videos promoting the consumption of raw milk.

While others, like self-identified dieticians, doctors and scientists have brought their expertise to social apps in an attempt to quell the trend, though it is a common issue for users to discern who is truly qualified and who is not in such posts.

Even without concerns about bird flu, the consumption of raw milk is a well-documented risk that can and does lead to serious health consequences. The recent outbreak of H5N1 is simply another reason to ensure you are drinking properly treated milk and remaining vigilant when making decisions about food safety, experts say.

No matter how magical and all-healing users on social media claim raw milk to be, it is important to remember that science says differently.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Raw milk might not be good for you, even if social media doubles down

How fast is bird flu spreading in US cows? ‘We have no idea’

Nathaniel Weixel
Wed, May 15, 2024 


Avian flu is spreading rapidly among cattle, but public health and infectious disease experts are concerned the United States is too limited in its testing, leaving an incomplete picture of the virus’s spread.

The threat to the general public is currently low, health officials say, and the country’s milk supply is safe. Just one person has been infected.

“It’s critical that we are well-positioned to test, treat, prevent this virus from spreading. I think that’s clear in everything we’re saying,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra told reporters recently.

But the outbreak is widespread; officials have found the virus in 42 herds across nine states. Dairy farm workers are at risk every time they are exposed to potentially infected cattle, and viral mutations could cause an outbreak, experts warn.

Cases are potentially being missed, either in people, cattle or both. In past avian flu outbreaks in other parts of the world, the virus typically kills about half the people it infects.

But even if this strain doesn’t pose a significant risk to the public, many experts see the response as the biggest test of pandemic preparedness since COVID-19.

“There are opportunities that have been missed that we could have absolutely applied from the COVID experience. I think there’s still time. We’re not in trouble yet,” said Erin Sorrell, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

Bird flu was first detected in dairy cows in March, though data from viral samples showed it had been circulating in cattle for at least four months prior. That’s concerning to some experts, who said there could have been widespread human exposure and asymptomatic spread among dairy workers.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is monitoring at least 260 people for symptoms and has tested at least 30 for novel influenza A, the broad category of flu that includes H5N1. Only one positive case has been identified, a farmworker in Texas who has since recovered.

Farmers have been reluctant to allow federal health officials onto their land to test potentially infected cattle amid uncertainty about how their businesses would be impacted.

Farmworkers have also been reluctant to participate in screening, and experts said it’s likely due to a mix of fears over job loss, immigration status, language barriers and general distrust in public health systems.

“They are socioeconomically vulnerable. … In some circumstances, it kind of requires the buy-in of the employer to engage in surveillance of these workers. And that hasn’t happened in a substantial way to date,” said Jessica Leibler, an environmental epidemiologist at Boston University’s school of public health.

Exposure does not necessarily mean infection, but the more workers who are exposed to potentially infected cattle, the greater the risk. Each new infection in mammals provides the opportunity for the virus to mutate.

“Without testing, without surveillance, we have no idea [of the spread],” Sorrell said. “We are not able to essentially move forward with an improved approach to protecting agricultural workers from occupational exposures if we don’t understand how they were exposed, and the potential risk of additional people being exposed and infected.”

A federal order from the end of April requires mandatory testing of dairy cattle herds, but only if they are crossing state lines. CDC workers can’t conduct investigations without an invite from state or private landowners, and the agency doesn’t have the ability to require states to test within their own borders. Becerra said the CDC is engaged in ongoing discussions with multiple states about setting up field investigation.

Stacey Schultz-Cherry, an expert in animal influenza at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, said those limitations are a hindrance but officials should be able to find workarounds, such as wastewater testing.

“There are ways to do surveillance and testing on samples that can’t or maybe don’t have to be traced back to a particular area or particular farm, because people are going to be very sensitive about it,” she said.

Federal officials have been working with state veterinary and agricultural officials to do outreach to dairy farmers and producers and emphasize the need to cooperate with federal health investigations.

“It is important for the public health officials at the state level, or the state veterinarians, or state ag officials, for us, to essentially communicate that it’s in the long-term best interest of the industry and all of us to make sure that we have as much information as possible,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters in a recent briefing.

“Producers obviously look at this circumstance and they see this as an animal health issue … so they may not fully appreciate and understand the approach that public health officials need to take in the circumstance,” Vilsack said.

The agency is also for the first time offering financial incentives for farms impacted by avian flu, including reimbursement for lost milk supply from infected cows.

William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist and professor at the Vanderbilt University school of medicine, said dairy industry producers and workers don’t have the same relationship with public health as the poultry and egg industry does.

“This is new for them; they’re more edgy and concerned,” Schaffner said. “All these diplomatic overtures and discussions are going on and are being led at the local level, because that’s where personnel are more comfortable. COVID developed a political veneer, and that impeded public health. That legacy still exists, and that may influence some of the caution in the dairy industry.”

Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. 

What you need to know about the bird flu outbreak, concerns about raw milk, and more

Susanne Rust
Wed, May 15, 2024 

A California Department of Food and Agriculture technician performs a culture swab on a rooster to test for avian influenza. (Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press)


There is a bird flu outbreak going on. Here is what you need to know about it:
What is bird flu?

Bird flu is what's known as a highly pathogenic avian influenza virus. The "highly pathogenic" part refers to birds, which the virus is pretty adept at killing. In virology speak, the virus is of the Influenza A type, and is called H5N1. The "H" stands for the protein Hemagglutinin (HA), of which there are 16 subtypes (H1-H16). The "N" is short for Neuraminidase (NA), of which there are 9 subtypes (N1-N9). There are many possible combinations of HA and NA proteins. The two known type A human influenza viruses are H1N1 and H3N2. (Two additional subtypes, H17N10 and H18N11, have been identified in bats).

When did this bird flu first appear?

The current strain of H5N1 circulating the globe originated in 1996, in farmed geese living in China's Guangdong province. It quickly spread to other poultry and migrating birds. By the early 2000s, it had spread across southern Asia. By 2005, it was observed in the Middle East, Africa and Europe. In 2014, it showed up in North America, but appeared to peter out here while it still raged in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. In 2021, it showed up in wild birds migrating off Canada's Atlantic coast. Since then, it has spread across North and South America.

Read more: Bird flu spreads to Southern California, infecting chickens, wild birds and other animals

What kinds of animals does bird flu effect?

Birds are the primary carriers and victims of the virus. Across the globe, hundreds of millions of wild and domestic birds have died. Since 2021, hundreds of U.S. poultry farms have had to "depopulate" millions of birds after becoming infected, presumably from sick, migrating wild birds. The virus is highly contagious among birds and has a nearly 100% fatality rate. Mammals, too have been infected and died. In most cases, these are scavenging or predatory animals that ate sick birds — and the virus has died in these animals and not become contagious between them. So far, 48 species of mammals have become infected. However, there have been a few cases in which it appears the virus may have spread between mammals, including on European fur farms, on a few South American beaches where elephant seals came to roost, and now among dairy cattle in the United States.

Read more: California wildlife is vulnerable to an avian flu ‘apocalypse.’ What is driving the spread?

Can humans get bird flu?

Since 2003, when the virus first started spreading through southern Asia, there have been 868 cases of human infection with H5N1 reported, of which 457 were fatal — a 53% case fatality rate. There have been only two cases in the U.S. In 2022, a poultry worker was infected in Colorado and suffered only mild symptoms, including fatigue. In 2024, a dairy worker was infected in Texas and complained only of conjunctivitis, or pink eye.
Why is everyone paying attention to dairy cows?

On March 25, 2024, officials announced that dairy cows in Texas had been infected with bird flu. Since then, the virus has been found in 36 herds across nine states. There are no known cases in California. It is believed that there was a single introduction of the virus from wild bird exposure (either by passive exposure, or maybe from eating contaminated feed), that probably occurred in December in Texas. The virus has since been detected in milk. A study conducted by federal researchers found that 1 in 5 milk samples collected from retail stores had the virus. It is believed that the virus may be passing between cows and that there may be cows that show no symptoms. For the most part, it seems dairy cows only suffer mild illness when infected, and milk production slows. They clear the virus after a few weeks.

Read more: 'Nobody saw this coming'; California dairies scramble to guard herds against bird flu

Is it safe to drink milk?

Yes — if it is pasteurized milk. Federal officials say the virus they have detected in pasteurized milk samples is inactive and will not cause disease. In the case of raw milk, they urge people to avoid it. That's because they have found high viral loads in raw milk samples. In addition, studies of barn cats that have consumed raw milk have reported severe consequences. In one cluster of 24 barn cats, half of them died after consuming raw milk, with others suffering blindness, neurological distress and copious nasal discharge. The virus has not been found in sour cream or cottage cheese.

Read more: Despite H5N1 bird flu outbreaks in dairy cattle, raw milk enthusiasts are uncowed

What's the situation with wastewater?

As health officials and researchers scramble to understand how widespread avian flu is in cattle and the environment, they are analyzing municipal wastewater. One team from Emory University and Stanford University looked at 190 wastewater treatment sites in 41 states. They found a surge of Influenza A virus in the last several weeks at 59 sites. This does not necessarily mean there is bird flu at these sites. However, in places where the team has gone to investigate — including three in Texas where they knew there was H5N1 in dairy cattle — they have found bird flu. Influenza A is generally seasonal in humans — peaking from late fall to early spring. The surge the researchers noticed — including at several sites in California — started after the flu season had died down. Researchers in Texas have also detected H5N1 in the wastewater of nine of 10 cities they tested, all located in Texas. The CDC is also monitoring for Influenza A at roughly 600 sites across the nation.

Read more: Flu season is over, but there is a viral surge in California wastewater. Is it avian flu?

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Column: Inside the effort by two Beverly Hills billionaires to kill a state law protecting farmworkers

Michael Hiltzik
Thu, May 16, 2024 


Wonderful Co.'s billionaire owners Stewart and Lynda Resnick: philanthropists, industrialists and union adversaries. (Ryan Miller/WireImage)

Los Angeles-based Wonderful Co. — the world's largest pistachio and almond grower, the purveyor of Fiji Water, Pom pomegranate juice and Justin wines, and owner of the Teleflora flower service — wants you to know that it's committed to "sustainable farming and business practices" and sees its employees as "a guiding force for good."

Wonderful's owners, the Beverly Hills billionaires Lynda and Stewart Resnick, say their "calling" is "to leave people and the planet better than we found them."

Here's another side of the company. Since February, it has been engaged in a ferocious battle with the United Farm Workers over the UFW's campaign to unionize more than 600 Wonderful Nurseries workers in the Central Valley.

'We ask each of you firmly not to sign an authorization card.'

Anti-union script read to Wonderful Nursery workers by company officials

Having lost a series of motions before the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board to delay a mandate that it reach a contract with the UFW as soon as June 3 or have terms imposed by the board, Wonderful on Monday unleashed a nuclear attack: a lawsuit seeking to have the 2022 and 2023 state laws governing the unionization process declared unconstitutional.

If it succeeds, California's legal protections for farmworkers could be rolled back to conditions that prevailed before César Chavez's campaigns for farm unionization in the 1960s.

"This is an attack on farmworkers' rights," says Elizabeth Strater, the UFW's director of strategic campaigns. Farm employers "will do everything they can to prevent workers from empowering themselves and lifting themselves out of poverty."

Wonderful's lawsuit takes a page from arguments made against the National Labor Relations Board by Trader Joe's and Elon Musk's SpaceX. Both companies, facing NLRB regulatory actions, are contending that the NLRB, which Congress established in 1935, is unconstitutional.

Wonderful contends that provisions of the state's agricultural labor code violate its rights of due process guaranteed by both the state and U.S. constitutions.

At issue is a UFW drive to represent more than 600 of Wonderful Nurseries employees that began in early 2023. The UFW ultimately presented the labor board with signed cards from more than half the employees giving the UFW authority to represent them in collective bargaining on a contract, a process known as a "card check."

Read more: Wonderful Co. sues to halt California card-check law that made it easier to unionize farmworkers

The board certified the union as the workers' representative on March 1, triggering a tight deadline aimed at prompting the union and the company to reach a contract.

Read more: Column: The UAW sends a lightning bolt into anti-union states with a huge victory at a VW plant

As often happens in hard-fought union campaigns, this one has generated a cross fire of allegations of unfair labor practices from both sides — the company asserting that the union defrauded workers into signing the representation cards, the union asserting that the company browbeat more than 100 workers into revoking their authorizations to drive the approval rate below the required 50%.

Accounts from the workers themselves vary. As my colleagues Rebecca Plevin and Melissa Gomez have reported, there have been complaints about poor working conditions at Wonderful along with hope that a union would help upgrade standards. Other workers say they misunderstood that signing an authorization card was tantamount to joining the UFW.

Some workers said they had second thoughts about signing the cards after meetings with a company-hired union-buster, Raul Calvo, who told them the union would take 3% of their pay for dues. In late March, some 100 Wonderful workers staged an anti-union protest at the ALRB offices in Visalia, but the UFW has alleged that the rally was the product of company coercion. Wonderful said at the time that it had no involvement in the protest and didn't pay the workers for their time.

"These workers are so vulnerable," the UFW's Strater says. Many are undocumented or have other reasons to worry about job security, arguably making them receptive to management directives.

In this case, another party has weighed in — the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, an independent state agency. Following an investigation, the board's general counsel, Julia Montgomery, alleged that Wonderful trampled its workers' unionization rights through numerous anti-union actions, including coercing them to submit declarations rescinding their authorizations. Wonderful has denied most of the allegations.

Wonderful says that the workers submitted their declarations voluntarily, "without any request having been made" by the company. Montgomery's allegations, however, are mighty specific. She cites a series of meetings that were overtly aimed at persuading the workers to back away from the union.

That process began with employee meetings addressed by Calvo and proceeded to sessions in which workers met with Wonderful human resources personnel, Montgomery alleged. At those meetings, the company representatives read from a Spanish-language script stating that the union could have obtained workers' signatures without their knowledge, that they would be deprived of the opportunity for a secret vote on unionization and encouraging them to sign a declaration revoking their authorization cards.

Read more: Column: A Trump judge eviscerates a pro-worker regulation at the request of big employers

"We ask each of you firmly not to sign an authorization card," the script read. In a line that sounds like it came fresh out of the playbook of anti-union companies such as Starbucks, the script stated that the company wants "to be able to work one on one with you without the interference of a union."

Some workers were led into a large conference room, where company representatives were assigned "to help the worker draft the declaration" revoking the authorization cards, Montgomery asserted. Some agents typed up declarations for the workers and handed them to the workers to sign.

A few words about the plaintiffs in this lawsuit:

The Resnicks are prominent philanthropists and political donors (mostly to Democrats). Their companies' effects on the environment and California agriculture generally are checkered. Indeed, their most eye-catching charitable donation, a record-breaking $750-million pledge to Caltech in 2019 for research into climate change and “environmental sustainability,” isn't inconsistent with a desire to "greenwash" some of their other activities.

As I previously wrote, while it might be churlish to suggest that the gift was devoid of genuine altruistic impulses, it would be naive to assume that altruism is the whole story.

A few years earlier, the Resnicks' Justin Vineyards had been caught clear-cutting an oak forest near Paso Robles to make room for new grape plantings. The work was halted by San Luis Obispo County authorities, and the firm eventually agreed to donate the 380-acre parcel to a land conservancy.

Although the Resnicks say they are "dedicated to our role as environmental stewards," their Fiji Water subsidiary looks like the antithesis of environmental sustainability. It profits from transporting water in plastic bottles more than 5,500 miles from the island nation to California and beyond, places that already have abundant water.

Wonderful's pistachio and almond orchards have complicated efforts to apportion water among the state's competing stakeholders. Because the trees require watering in wet years or dry, their acreage can't be fallowed during dry spells.

That has made the water demand of the agricultural sector less flexible, and arguably has contributed to the devastating decline of the state's salmon fishery and the drying out of rivers and streams that once supported a diverse population of fish and birds.

Read more: Column: American unions have finally remembered how to win

This isn't the first time that the Resnicks have wrapped themselves in the U.S. Constitution to fend off a regulatory agency. In 2010, they asserted that the Federal Trade Commission infringed their 1st Amendment rights by holding that they made “false and misleading” and “unsubstantiated” representations about the health benefits of their Pom pomegranate juice, which amounted to unlawful marketing.

The company pitched the juice as “health in a bottle.” Wonderful put up billboards with the words “Cheat Death” next to a picture of the bottle. Its ads claimed Pom has beneficial effects on prostate cancer (“Drink to prostate health”), cardiovascular health and even erectile dysfunction — all of which claims were judged scientifically dubious by regulators. The company fought the FTC up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which rejected its appeal.

The 2022 and 2023 laws that Wonderful is challenging — indeed, the very creation of the ALRB in 1975 — reflect a reality known in California for more than a century: Bringing labor rights to farmworkers is notoriously difficult.

The first major farm union organizing drive in the state, among hops pickers in Wheatland, north of Sacramento, was broken up by four companies of the National Guard called out by Gov. Hiram Johnson in 1913. A statewide dragnet for organizers from the Industrial Workers of the World, or Wobblies, ensued, followed by hundreds of arrests. No further significant farm organizing took place for 16 years.

In 1975, a state law passed at the urging of César Chavez's UFW gave union organizers the right to meet with workers on the farms where they toiled. But the Supreme Court, voting on partisan lines, struck it down in 2021—the law allowed organizers to "invade the growers' property," as Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote.

To address the heightened difficulty agricultural unions faced, the state Legislature established the card check process in 2022 and 2023. The laws incorporated a tight timeline governing certification and contract bargaining, and stipulated mandatory mediation if no contract is reached with a set period.

Read more: Column: Julie Su would be a perfect Labor secretary. That's why Big Business hates her

The goal was to address "the basic failing of labor law both at the federal and state level, which is delay," said William B. Gould IV, emeritus professor of law at Stanford and a former chairman of the National Labor Relations Board and the state Agricultural Labor Relations Board.

"Delay works against the interests of workers and unions, because employers hope that they'll grow weary," Gould told me. The tight deadlines were designed to place the burden of delay on the employers.

Wonderful maintains in its lawsuit, filed in Kern County state court, that the accelerated process has deprived employers of constitutionally protected due process rights by allowing a union to be certified by card check before the employers have a chance to object — effectively rendering the certification and the negotiating deadline faits accomplis.

That's not quite true, however. The law allows anyone to file objections within five days of certification. After that, any certification can be revoked if the employers' objections are later upheld at a hearing, and any mandated contract can be invalidated. Indeed, Wonderful filed its objections in time, citing the workers' declarations; an ALRB hearing on its objections has been underway for weeks.

What appears especially to irk Wonderful is that the board has twice rejected its motions to suspend, or stay, the certification and negotiation procedure until after it rules on the company's objections. The board responded that the law doesn't provide for such a stay.

The company's lawsuit thus amounts to an end run around the law. Gould is skeptical that Wonderful's constitutionality claims will win much favor from California judges, but the case may be aimed at the notoriously anti-union U.S. Supreme Court majority.

"This Supreme Court has indicated that they want to reverse much of what was done in the 1930s," a high-water mark for progressive labor and public interest laws, he said. In its lawsuit, Wonderful "has thrown buckets of paint against the wall in the hope that something will stick. Maybe they'll be right on some of it."

Reflections on Student Activism
And the Struggle for a Better World

By William D. Hartung

May 14, 2024
Source: Tom Dispatch



I’ve spent most of my life as an advocate for a more peaceful world. In recent years, I’ve been focused on promoting diplomacy over war and exposing the role of giant weapons companies like Lockheed Martin and its allies in Congress and at the Pentagon as they push for a “military-first” foreign policy. I’ve worked at an alphabet soup of think tanks: the Council on Economic Priorities (CEP), the World Policy Institute (WPI), the New America Foundation, the Center for International Policy (CIP), and my current institutional home, the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft (QI).

Most of what I’ve done in my career is firmly rooted in my college experience. I got a bachelor’s degree in philosophy at Columbia University, class of 1978, and my time there prepared me for my current work — just not in the way one might expect. I took some relevant courses like Seymour Melman’s class on America’s permanent war economy and Marcia Wright’s on the history of the colonization of South Africa. But my most important training came outside the classroom, as a student activist.

Student Activism: Columbia in the 1970s

As I look at the surge of student organizing aimed at stopping the slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza, I’m reminded that participation in such movements can have a long-term impact, personally as well as politically, one that reaches far beyond the struggle of the moment. In my case, the values and skills I learned in movements like the divestment campaign against apartheid South Africa of the 1970s and 1980s formed the foundation of virtually everything I’ve done since.

I was not an obvious candidate to become a student radical. I grew up in Lake View, New York, a rock-ribbed Republican suburb of Buffalo. My dad was a Goldwater Republican, so committed that we even had that Republican senator’s “merch” prominently displayed in our house. (The funniest of those artifacts: a can of “Gold Water,” a sickly sweet variation on ginger ale.)

Although I fit in well enough for a while, by the time I was a teenager my goal had become all too straightforward: get out of my hometown as soon as possible. My escape route: Columbia University, where I expected to join a vibrant, progressive student movement.

Unfortunately, when I got there in 1973, the activist surge of the anti-Vietnam War era had almost totally subsided. By my sophomore year, though, things started to pick up. The September 1973 coup that overthrew the democratically elected socialist government of Chile’s Salvador Allende and the ongoing repression of the Black population in apartheid South Africa had sparked a new round of student activism.

My first foray into politics in college was joining the Columbia University Committee for Human Rights in Chile. It started out as a strictly student organization, but our activities took on greater meaning and our commitment intensified when we befriended a group of Chilean exiles who had moved into our neighborhood on New York’s Upper West Side.

In 1974, I also took time off to work in the New York branch of the United Farm Workers‘ boycott of non-union grapes, lettuce, and Gallo wine. I ran a picket line in front of the Daitch Shopwell supermarket at 110th and Broadway in Manhattan. One of my regulars on that picket line was an older gentleman named Jim Peck. It took a while before I learned that he had been a central figure in the Freedom Rides in the South during the late 1940s and early 1950s. He had first been arrested for civil rights organizing in 1947 in Durham, North Carolina, alongside the legendary Bayard Rustin. He and his fellow activists, black and white, went on to ride buses together across the South to press the case for the integration of interstate transportation. On a number of occasions, they would be brutally beaten by white mobs. In my own brief career as a student activist, I faced no such risks, but Jim’s history of commitment and courage inspired me.

When I got back from my stint with the United Farm Workers, the main political activity on the Columbia campus was a campaign to get the university to divest from companies involved in apartheid South Africa. We didn’t win then, but we did help put that issue on the map. Ten years later, a student divestment movement finally succeeded, and Columbia became the first major university to commit to fully divesting from South Africa. That modest victory, part of sustained anti-apartheid efforts on college campuses and beyond, would be followed nationwide by Congress’s passage of comprehensive sanctions on the apartheid regime, despite a veto attempt by then-President Ronald Reagan.

Many of us kept working on the anti-apartheid issue after graduation. I remained a member of the New York Committee to Oppose Bank Loans to South Africa and, for a while, was also a member of the collective that put out Southern Africa Magazine in support of the anti-apartheid struggle and liberation movements in southern Africa. In New York, our mentors and inspirations in the anti-apartheid movement were people like Prexy Nesbitt, a charismatic organizer from Chicago, and Jennifer Davis, a South African exile who edited our magazine and went on to run the American Committee on Africa. For that magazine, I helped track companies breaking the arms embargo on South Africa as well as multinational corporations propping up the regime, an experience that served me well when I went on to become a researcher in the world of think tanks.

From Student Activist to Think-Tank Expert

By that time, I was fully engaged politically. As I approached the end of my four years at Columbia, however, it slowly dawned on me that I was going to have to get a real job. The good news was that, in my brief career as a student activist, I had learned some basic skills, including how to craft an article, give a speech, and run a meeting.

The bad news was that I had absolutely no idea how to find gainful employment. So, I went home to Lake View for a while and my mom, who was a member of the International Typographical Union, gave me a crash course in proofreading and how to use official proofreading symbols. On the strength of those lessons, I got a job at a New York print shop, where I spent a miserable year proofreading magazines like Psychology Today, Modern Bride, Skiing, Boating, and pretty much any other publication ending in -ing.

Then I got lucky. A friend had just turned down a job, mostly because the pay was so lousy, at the Council on Economic Priorities (CEP), a think tank founded to promote corporate social responsibility. But my expenses at the time were, to say the least, minimal, so I took the job.

The focus of my first CEP project was economic conversion, a process designed to help communities reduce their dependency on Pentagon spending. It had been launched by Gordon Adams (now Abby Ross), then finishing The Iron Triangle, his immensely useful analysis of the military-industrial complex. While at CEP, I wrote about the top 100 Pentagon contractors, the top 25 arms exporting firms, and the economic benefits of a nuclear weapons freeze. My goal: produce research that would help activists and advocates make their case.

And so it went. Other than a stint in New York State government from the mid-1980s through the early 1990s, I’ve been a think-tank analyst ever since. At the moment, most of the issues I’ve advocated for, from reducing the Pentagon budget to cutting nuclear arsenals, are heading in exactly the wrong direction. By contrast, though, the issues I worked on as a student did indeed make progress, though only after years of organizing. South Africa’s apartheid regime actually fell in 1992. In 1975, California Governor Jerry Brown pushed through a state law guaranteeing the right of farmworkers to organize. In Chile, Pinochet was ousted thanks to a 1988 national referendum and lived his last years as an international pariah, even spending 503 days under house arrest in the United Kingdom on charges of “genocide and terrorism that include murder.”

The main difference between the successful solidarity movements I participated in and the other political movements in which I’ve played some small part was that both the South Africa divestment campaign and the United Farm Workers (UFW) boycott took their leads from people and organizations on the front lines of the struggle. Solidarity movements contributed in a significant fashion to those victories, but the central players were those front-line organizations, from the African National Congress and the Black Consciousness Movement in South Africa to UFW organizers working in the fields of California.

The Student Movement for Gaza

Which brings me back to the state of current student activism. I live 10 blocks from the main gates of Columbia University, the site of one of the more active student organizations pressing for a ceasefire in Gaza and an end to government and institutional support for Israel’s brutal military campaign there, which has already killed nearly 35,000 people and left many others without medical care, adequate food, or clean water. The International Court of Justice has already suggested that a plausible case can be made for the Netanyahu government being guilty of genocide. Whether you use that term or simply call Israeli actions “war crimes,” the killing has to stop, which makes me proud of those Columbia student activists and deeply ashamed of the way the leadership of my former university has responded to them.

This April, when the president of Columbia called in the riot police to arrest students engaged in a peaceful protest, she inadvertently brought a whole new level of attention to activism about Gaza. Students at scores of campuses across the country started similar tent cities in solidarity with the Columbia students and protests that had largely been ignored in the mainstream media are now drawing TV cameras from outlets large and small.

Opponents of the student demonstrators, whose real goal is to get them to stop criticizing Israel’s mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza, have hurled claims of antisemitism at them that largely haven’t distinguished between actual acts of discrimination and cases of students feeling “uncomfortable” due to harsh — and wholly justified — criticisms of the Israeli government. As Judd Legum underscored at his substack Popular Information, there was no evidence of antisemitic acts by the students running the pro-ceasefire encampment at Columbia. Individuals and organizations outside the student movement seem to have been responsible for whatever hate rhetoric and related incidents have occurred.

Genuine antisemitism should be roundly condemned but confusing it with criticism of Israeli policies in Gaza will only make that job harder. And keep in mind that the Republican politicians hurling charges of antisemitism at students protesting repression in Gaza are, ironically enough, closely linked to actual antisemites.

To cite just one example, House Speaker Mike Johnson, who visited the Columbia campus last month in a purported effort to express his concern about antisemitism, has long promoted the racist “great replacement theory,” which holds that welcoming non-white immigrants is part of a plot to undermine the culture and power of white Americans. That theory has been cited by numerous perpetrators of racial and antisemitic violence, including the attacker who murdered 11 worshippers at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018.

Despite attempts to slander those student activists and divert attention from the devastation being visited on the people of Gaza, activists associated with groups like Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine continue to bravely build a vibrant movement that refuses to back down in the face of attacks by both college leaders and prominent donors. Such leaders have, in fact, interfered with student rights of assembly and free speech, suspended them for making statements critical of Israel, and used the police to break up protests. As the repression accelerates, with a surge of campus expulsions of protesters and the arrest of more than 2,500 students at more than 40 universities nationwide, the student activists continue to show courage under fire of a kind I was never called on to exhibit in my days in college. In the process, they have echoed the even larger protests of the anti-Vietnam War era.

If you were to look at a list of what the administrations at Columbia and other colleges and universities have done to student protesters in these weeks, without identifying the institutions doing it, you might reasonably assume that theirs was the work of autocratic regimes, not places purportedly dedicated to free inquiry and freedom of speech.

A number of universities — including Brown, Evergreen State, Middlebury, Rutgers, and Northwestern – have agreed to meet various student demands, from making formal statements in support of a ceasefire in Gaza to providing more transparency on university investments and agreeing to vote on divestment. Meanwhile, President Biden has pledged to impose a partial pause on arms transfers to Israel if it launches a major attack on the residents of the vulnerable enclave of Rafah. But far more needs to be done to end the killing and begin to provide reparations for the unspeakable suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza, including a cutoff of the supply and maintenance of all the American weaponry that has been used to support the Israeli military effort. Student organizing will continue, even in the face of ongoing efforts to smear the student rebels and divert attention from the mass killing of Palestinians. Those students remain remarkably (and bravely) determined to end this country’s shameful policy of enabling Israel’s devastating assault and they are clearly not about to give up.

Today’s Campaigns and Tomorrow’s

One thing is guaranteed: the commitment of this generation of student activists will reverberate through the progressive movement for years to come, setting high standards for steadfast activism in the face of the power of repression. Many of the activists from my own years on campus have remained in progressive politics as union organizers, immigration reform advocates, peace and racial justice activists, or even, like me, think-tank researchers. And don’t be surprised if the ceasefire movement has a similar impact on our future, possibly on an even larger scale.

Face it, we’re living through difficult times when fundamental tenets of our admittedly flawed democracy are under attack, and openly racist, misogynist, anti-gay, and anti-trans rhetoric and actions are regarded as acceptable conduct by all too many in our country. But the surge of student activism over Gaza is just one of many signs that a different, better world is still possible.

To get there, however, it’s important to understand that, even as we rally against the crises of the moment, suffering both victories and setbacks along the way, we need to prepare ourselves to stay in the struggle for the long haul. Hopefully, the current wave of student activism over the nightmare in Gaza will prove to be a catalyst in creating a larger, stronger movement that can overcome the most daunting challenges we face both as a country and a world.