Federal response to bird flu in cattle sheds little light on virus’ spread

Critics say the U.S. Department of Agriculture has prioritized the dairy industry’s economic health over safety.

By Michael MarksOctober 28, 2024 10:15 am, ,

It’s been more than six months since the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or USDA, confirmed that dairy cows in Texas and Kansas had, for the first time, tested positive for a kind of avian flu, H5N1. A few days later, a Texas dairy worker who’d been around sick cows tested positive for H5N1.

So far no human deaths have been attributed to the virus. But virologists have had a hard time gauging the outbreak’s full impact, in large part because of the lack of data they’re received from the USDA.

That’s according to a new investigation from Katherine Eban, a special correspondent for Vanity Fair who spoke to Texas Standard about her reporting. Listen to the interview above or read the transcript below.

This transcript has been edited lightly for clarity:

Texas Standard: Well, I have to admit, it feels like it’s been months since I’ve heard any significant updates on the avian flu, and I just assumed that it was under control. But that’s not the case.

Katherine Eban: Unfortunately, it is the opposite of under control. What’s been happening in the backdrop is that it’s just been spreading and spreading.

So now it’s in California where it’s really been explosively ripping through dairy herds there. And farmers are reporting that up to 15% of affected dairy cows are dying. And meanwhile, the number of infected farm workers is also ticking upward.

Well, how would you characterize the USDA’s response to this avian flu outbreak?

So they are a lead agency in this federal response. They are working with other agencies – FDA, CDC – and it’s a very complicated, challenging response.

But critics were pretty unsparing in their characterizations of the USDA’s contributions to this. You know, they see inaction. They see conflicting roles because the USDA also has the job of promoting agricultural trade. So what critics see is an industry-led response that has been slow and inadequate.

» GET MORE NEWS FROM AROUND THE STATE: Sign up for Texas Standard’s weekly newsletters

Well, is there evidence that the USDA has been holding back or failing to collect data that could be useful in containing the virus?

Certainly the collection of data has been inadequate, but what has been significantly inadequate is the sharing and posting of data.

So typically, in order to help researchers track mutations to a virus, you take sequences of the virus and you post them to online data sharing platforms. And one of the lead platforms is called GISAID.

And the analysis that we obtained from GISAID is that compared to the CDC – to even Vietnam and Cambodia, which are posting sequences collected within six days – the USDA is not posting data until 24 days after collection. And then when they post the data, they’re not including critical metadata, which says where was the data collected and when was the data collected. And without that information, it’s impossible to track the spread and track the changes.

So there has been just this paucity of data surrounding what’s actually going on on the ground.

Well, and some of this, I guess, comes down to the operators, the dairy operators, because some of this is on them for reporting sick cows. But that’s kind of a conundrum, too.

It’s absolutely a conundrum. There is no question that, you know, farmers are facing a very difficult landscape. They need to be able to sell their milk. Affected herds have lower milk outputs. They’re concerned that dairy processors are not going to want to buy their milk if they essentially raise their hand and say that their cows are infected.

The USDA has created some compensation programs, but farmers say it’s not enough. It’s not sufficient. Many have not volunteered to get that compensation. So what we’re seeing is a number of farmers just deciding to try to keep it under wraps and ride it out.

But the problem is, the longer the virus spreads and mutates and infects farm workers, the greater the chance that it could lead to possible transmission between humans. Changes in the virus can make it more transmissible. And scientists are concerned that a human to human transmissible bird flu could be the next pandemic.

Should people change their habits right now? I mean, the message has been that pasteurized milk is okay, that eating beef is still okay. But what are you hearing?

Well, certainly the FDA has made very clear that pasteurization inactivates the virus inside milk. I’m not aware of anything to contradict that. But they’ve also made it very clear that drinking raw milk is a hazard because you may have live virus in raw milk. So there’s no question – they’ve made it clear that is a hazard.

What was the USDA’s response to your questions about all this?

Well, I mean, they say that they are working tirelessly to try to both control the spread and keep the dairy industry functioning.

They say that they know that this is a real hazard. They are committed to ensuring that the virus is brought under control, that the spread is brought under control. So they do not basically accept the criticism that has been leveled at them, that it’s too little too late.

If you found the reporting above valuable, please consider making a donation to support it here. Your gift helps pay for everything you find on texasstandard.org and KUT.org. Thanks for donating today.