With all this bird flu around, how safe are eggs, chicken or milk?

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Enzo Palombo, Swinburne University of Technology

Recent outbreaks of bird flu – in US dairy herds, poultry farms in Australia and elsewhere, and isolated cases in humans – have raised the issue of food safety.

So can the virus transfer from infected farm animals to contaminate milk, meat or eggs? How likely is this?

And what do we need to think about to minimise our risk when shopping for or preparing food?

AS Foodstudio/Shutterstock

How safe is milk?

Bird flu (or avian influenza) is a bird disease caused by specific types of influenza virus. But the virus can also infect cows. In the US, for instance, to date more than 80 dairy herds in at least nine states have been infected with the H5N1 version of the virus.

Investigations are under way to confirm how this happened. But we do know infected birds can shed the virus in their saliva, nasal secretions and faeces. So bird flu can potentially contaminate animal-derived food products during processing and manufacturing.

Indeed, fragments of bird flu genetic material (RNA) were found in cow’s milk from the dairy herds associated with infected US farmers.

However, the spread of bird flu among cattle, and possibly to humans, is likely to have been caused through contact with contaminated milking equipment, not the milk itself.

The test used to detect the virus in milk – which uses similar PCR technology to lab-based COVID tests – is also highly sensitive. This means it can detect very low levels of the bird flu RNA. But the test does not distinguish between live or inactivated virus, just that the RNA is present. So from this test alone, we cannot tell if the virus found in milk is infectious (and capable of infecting humans).

Rows of milk bottles in supermarket fridge
It’s best to stick with pasteurised milk. Amnixia/Shutterstock

Does that mean milk is safe to drink and won’t transmit bird flu? Yes and no.

In Australia, where bird flu has not been reported in dairy cattle, the answer is yes. It is safe to drink milk and milk products made from Australian milk.

In the US, the answer depends on whether the milk is pasteurised. We know pasteurisation is a common and reliable method of destroying concerning microbes, including influenza virus. Like most viruses, influenza virus (including bird flu virus) is inactivated by heat.

Although there is little direct research on whether pasteurisation inactivates H5N1 in milk, we can extrapolate from what we know about heat inactivation of H5N1 in chicken and eggs.

So we can be confident there is no risk of bird flu transmission via pasteurised milk or milk products.

However, it’s another matter for unpasteurised or “raw” US milk or milk products. A recent study showed mice fed raw milk contaminated with bird flu developed signs of illness. So to be on the safe side, it would be advisable to avoid raw milk products.

How about chicken?

Bird flu has caused sporadic outbreaks in wild birds and domestic poultry worldwide, including in Australia. In recent weeks, there have been three reported outbreaks in Victorian poultry farms (two with H7N3 bird flu, one with H7N9). There has been one reported outbreak in Western Australia (H9N2).

The strains of bird flu identified in the Victorian and Western Australia outbreaks can cause human infection, although these are rare and typically result from close contact with infected live birds or contaminated environments.

Therefore, the chance of bird flu transmission in chicken meat is remote.

Nonetheless, it is timely to remind people to handle chicken meat with caution as many dangerous pathogens, such as Salmonella and Campylobacter, can be found on chicken carcasses.

Always handle chicken meat carefully when shopping, transporting it home and storing it in the kitchen. For instance, make sure no meat juices cross-contaminate other items, consider using a cool bag when transporting meat, and refrigerate or freeze the meat within two hours.

Avoid washing your chicken before cooking to prevent the spread of disease-causing microbes around the kitchen.

Finally, cook chicken thoroughly as viruses (including bird flu) cannot survive cooking temperatures.

Are eggs safe?

The recent Australian outbreaks have occurred in egg-laying or mixed poultry flocks, so concerns have been raised about bird flu transmission via contaminated chicken eggs.

Can flu viruses contaminate chicken eggs and potentially spread bird flu? It appears so. A report from 2007 said it was feasible for influenza viruses to enter through the eggshell. This is because influenza virus particles are smaller (100 nanometres) than the pores in eggshells (at least 200 nm).

So viruses could enter eggs and be protected from cleaning procedures designed to remove microbes from the egg surface.

Therefore, like the advice about milk and meat, cooking eggs is best.

The US Food and Drug Administration recommends cooking poultry, eggs and other animal products to the proper temperature and preventing cross-contamination between raw and cooked food.

In a nutshell

If you consume pasteurised milk products and thoroughly cook your chicken and eggs, there is nothing to worry about as bird flu is inactivated by heat.

The real fear is that the virus will evolve into highly pathogenic versions that can be transmitted from human to human.

That scenario is much more frightening than any potential spread though food.

Enzo Palombo, Professor of Microbiology, Swinburne University of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • What is pathological demand avoidance – and how is it different to ‘acting out’?
  • Antihistamines’ Generation Gap
    Brace for allergy season with the right remedy: swap old-school antihistamines for safer, targeted options, or consider the powerful relief of systemic corticosteroids.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Parsnips vs Potatoes – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing parsnips to potatoes, we picked the parsnips.

    Why?

    To be more specific, we’re looking at russet potatoes, and in both cases we’re looking at cooked without fat or salt, skin on. In other words, the basic nutritional values of these plants in edible form, without adding anything. With this in mind, once we get to the root of things, there’s a clear winner:

    Looking at the macros first, potatoes have more carbs while parsnips have more fiber. Potatoes do have more protein too, but given the small numbers involved when it comes to protein we don’t think this is enough of a plus to outweigh the extra fiber in the parsnips.

    In the category of vitamins, again a champion emerges: parsnips have more of vitamins B1, B2, B5, B9, C, E, and K, while potatoes have more of vitamins B3, B6, and choline. So, a 7:3 win for parsnips.

    When it comes to minerals, parsnips have more calcium copper, manganese, selenium, and zinc, while potatoes have more iron and potassium. Potatoes do also have more sodium, but for most people most of the time, this is not a plus, healthwise. Disregarding the sodium, this category sees a 5:2 win for parsnips.

    In short: as with most starchy vegetables, enjoy both in moderation if you feel so inclined, but if you’re picking one, then parsnips are the nutritionally best choice here.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • How To Stay A Step Ahead Of Peripheral Artery Disease

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Far less well-known than Coronary Artery Disease, it can still result in loss of life and limb (not in that order). Fortunately, there are ways to be on your guard:

    What it is

    Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) is the same thing as Coronary Artery Disease (CAD), just, in the periphery—which by definition means “outside of the heart and brain”, but in practice, it starts with the extremities. And of the extremities, it tends to start with the feet and legs, for the simple reason that if someone’s circulation is sluggish, then because of gravity, that’s where’s going to get blocked first.

    In both CAD and PAD, the usual root cause is atherosclerosis, that is to say, the build-up of fatty material inside the arteries, usually commensurate to LDL (“bad”) cholesterol, especially in men (high LDL is still a predictor of cardiovascular disease in women though, just more modestly so, at least pre-menopause or in cases of treated menopause whereby HRT has returned hormones to pre-menopause levels).

    See also: Demystifying Cholesterol

    And for that about sex differences: His & Hers: The Hidden Complexities of Statins and Cardiovascular Disease (CVD)

    Why it is

    This one’s straightforward, as it’s the same things as any kind of cardiovascular disease: high blood pressure, high cholesterol, older age, obesity, smoking, drinking, diabetes, and genetic factors (so, a risk factor is: family history of heart disease).

    However, while those are the main causes and/or risk factors, it absolutely can still strike other people, so it’s as well to be watch out for…

    What to look out for

    Many people first notice signs and symptoms that turn out to be PAD when they experience pain or numbness in the foot or feet, and/or a discoloration of the feet (especially toes), and slow wound healing.

    At that stage, chances are you will need to go urgently to a specialist, and surgery is a likely necessity. With a little luck, it’ll be a minimally-invasive surgery to unblock an artery; failing that, an amputation will be in order.

    At that stage, under 50% will be alive 5 years from diagnosis:

    Cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in patients with intermittent claudication and critical limb ischaemia

    You probably want to avoid those. Good news is, you can, by catching it earlier!

    What to look out for before that

    The most common test for PAD is one you can do at home, but enlisting a nurse to do it for you will help ensure accurate readings. It’s called the Ankle-Brachial Index (ABI) test, and it involves comparing the blood pressure in your ankle with the blood pressure in your arm, and expressing them as a ratio.

    Here’s how to do it (instructions and a video demonstration if you want it):

    Do Try This At Home: ABI Test For Clogged Arteries

    If you need a blood pressure monitor, by the way, here’s an example product on Amazon.

    • A healthy ABI score is between 1.0 and 1.4; anything outside this range may indicate arterial problems.
    • Low ABI scores (below 0.8) suggest plaque is likely obstructing blood flow
    • High ABI scores (above 1.4) may indicate artery hardening

    Do note also that yes, if you have plaque obstructing blood flow and hardened arteries, your scores may cancel out and give you a “healthy” score, despite your arteries being very much not healthy.

    For this reason, this test can be used to raise the alarm, but not to give the “all clear”.

    There are other tests that clinicians can do for you, but you can’t do at home unless you have an MRI machine, a CT scanner, an x-ray machine, a doppler-and-ultrasound machine, etc. We’ll not go into those in detail here, but ask your doctor about them if you’re concerned.

    What to do about it

    In the mid-to-late stages of the disease, the options are medication and surgery, respectively, but your doctor will advise about those in that eventuality.

    In the early stages of the disease, the first-line recommend treatment is exercise, of which, especially walking:

    Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: Diagnosis and Treatment

    Given that this more often happens when someone hasn’t been walking so much, it can be a walk-rest-walk approach at first (a treadmill on a low setting can be very useful for this):

    See also: Exercise Comparison Head-to-Head: Treadmill vs Road

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • In Praise of Slowness – by Carl Honoré

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    This isn’t just about “taking the time to smell the roses” although yes, that too. Rather, it’s mostly about looking at what drives us to speed everything up in the first place, and correcting where appropriate.

    If your ancestors had time to eat fruit and lie in the sun, then why, with all of modern technology now available, are you harangued 16+ hours a day by the pressures of universally synchronized timepieces?

    Honoré places a lot of the blame squarely on the industrial revolution; whereas previously our work would be limited by craftsmen who take a year to complete something, or the pace of animals in a field, now humans had to keep up with the very machines that were supposed to serve us—and it’s only got worse from there.

    This book takes a tour of many areas affected by this artificial “need for speed”, and how it harms not just our work-life balance, but also our eating habits, the medical attention we get, and even our love lives.

    The prescription is deceptively simple, “slow down”. But Honoré dedicates the final three chapters of the book to the “how” of this, when of course there’s a lot the outside world will not accommodate—but where we can slow down, there’s good to be gained.

    Bottom line: if you’ve ever felt that you could get all of your life into order if you could just pause the outside world for a week or two, this is the book for you.

    Click here to check out In Praise of Slowness, and make time for what matters most!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • What is pathological demand avoidance – and how is it different to ‘acting out’?
  • Could ADHD drugs reduce the risk of early death? Unpacking the findings from a new Swedish study

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can have a considerable impact on the day-to-day functioning and overall wellbeing of people affected. It causes a variety of symptoms including difficulty focusing, impulsivity and hyperactivity.

    For many, a diagnosis of ADHD, whether in childhood or adulthood, is life changing. It means finally having an explanation for these challenges, and opens up the opportunity for treatment, including medication.

    Although ADHD medications can cause side effects, they generally improve symptoms for people with the disorder, and thereby can significantly boost quality of life.

    Now a new study has found being treated for ADHD with medication reduces the risk of early death for people with the disorder. But what can we make of these findings?

    A large study from Sweden

    The study, published this week in JAMA (the prestigious journal of the American Medical Association), was a large cohort study of 148,578 people diagnosed with ADHD in Sweden. It included both adults and children.

    In a cohort study, a group of people who share a common characteristic (in this case a diagnosis of ADHD) are followed over time to see how many develop a particular health outcome of interest (in this case the outcome was death).

    For this study the researchers calculated the mortality rate over a two-year follow up period for those whose ADHD was treated with medication (a group of around 84,000 people) alongside those whose ADHD was not treated with medication (around 64,000 people). The team then determined if there were any differences between the two groups.

    What did the results show?

    The study found people who were diagnosed and treated for ADHD had a 19% reduced risk of death from any cause over the two years they were tracked, compared with those who were diagnosed but not treated.

    In understanding this result, it’s important – and interesting – to look at the causes of death. The authors separately analysed deaths due to natural causes (physical medical conditions) and deaths due to unnatural causes (for example, unintentional injuries, suicide, or accidental poisonings).

    The key result is that while no significant difference was seen between the two groups when examining natural causes of death, the authors found a significant difference for deaths due to unnatural causes.

    So what’s going on?

    Previous studies have suggested ADHD is associated with an increased risk of premature death from unnatural causes, such as injury and poisoning.

    On a related note, earlier studies have also suggested taking ADHD medicines may reduce premature deaths. So while this is not the first study to suggest this association, the authors note previous studies addressing this link have generated mixed results and have had significant limitations.

    In this new study, the authors suggest the reduction in deaths from unnatural causes could be because taking medication alleviates some of the ADHD symptoms responsible for poor outcomes – for example, improving impulse control and decision-making. They note this could reduce fatal accidents.

    The authors cite a number of studies that support this hypothesis, including research showing ADHD medications may prevent the onset of mood, anxiety and substance use disorders, and lower the risk of accidents and criminality. All this could reasonably be expected to lower the rate of unnatural deaths.

    Strengths and limitations

    Scandinavian countries have well-maintained national registries that collect information on various aspects of citizens’ lives, including their health. This allows researchers to conduct excellent population-based studies.

    Along with its robust study design and high-quality data, another strength of this study is its size. The large number of participants – almost 150,000 – gives us confidence the findings were not due to chance.

    The fact this study examined both children and adults is another strength. Previous research relating to ADHD has often focused primarily on children.

    One of the important limitations of this study acknowledged by the authors is that it was observational. Observational studies are where the researchers observe and analyse naturally occurring phenomena without intervening in the lives of the study participants (unlike randomised controlled trials).

    The limitation in all observational research is the issue of confounding. This means we cannot be completely sure the differences between the two groups observed were not either partially or entirely due to some other factor apart from taking medication.

    Specifically, it’s possible lifestyle factors or other ADHD treatments such as psychological counselling or social support may have influenced the mortality rates in the groups studied.

    Another possible limitation is the relatively short follow-up period. What the results would show if participants were followed up for longer is an interesting question, and could be addressed in future research.

    What are the implications?

    Despite some limitations, this study adds to the evidence that diagnosis and treatment for ADHD can make a profound difference to people’s lives. As well as alleviating symptoms of the disorder, this study supports the idea ADHD medication reduces the risk of premature death.

    Ultimately, this highlights the importance of diagnosing ADHD early so the appropriate treatment can be given. It also contributes to the body of evidence indicating the need to improve access to mental health care and support more broadly.The Conversation

    Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Understanding Cellulitis: Skin And Soft Tissue Infections

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    What’s the difference between a minor passing skin complaint, and a skin condition that’s indicative of something more serious? Dr. Thomas Watchman explains:

    More than skin-deep

    Cellulitis sounds benign enough, like having a little cellulite perhaps, but in fact it means an infection of the skin and—critically—the underlying soft tissues.

    Normally, the skin acts as a barrier against infections, but this barrier can be breached by physical trauma (i.e. an injury that broke the skin), eczema, fungal nail infections, skin ulcers, and other similar things that disrupt the skin’s ability to protect us.

    Things to watch out for: Dr. Watchman advises we keep an eye out for warm, reddened skin, swelling, and blisters. Specifically, a golden-yellow crust to these likely indicates a Staphylococcus aureus infection (hence the name).

    There’s a scale of degrees of severity:

    • Class 1: No systemic toxicity or comorbidities
    • Class 2: Systemic toxicity or comorbidities present
    • Class 3: Significant systemic toxicity or comorbidities with risk of significant deterioration
    • Class 4: Sepsis or life-threatening infection

    …with antibiotics being recommended in the latter two cases there, or in other cases for frail, young, old, or immunocompromised patients. Given the rather “scorched earth” results of antibiotics (they cause a lot of collateral iatrogenic damage), this can be taken as a sign of how seriously such infections should be taken.

    For more about all this, including visual guides, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Patient Underwent One Surgery but Was Billed for Two. Even After Being Sued, She Refused To Pay.

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Jamie Holmes says a surgery center tried to make her pay for two operations after she underwent only one. She refused to buckle, even after a collection agency sued her last winter.

    Holmes, who lives in northwestern Washington state, had surgery in 2019 to have her fallopian tubes tied, a permanent birth-control procedure that her insurance company agreed ahead of time to cover.

    During the operation, while Holmes was under anesthesia, the surgeon noticed early signs of endometriosis, a common condition in which fibrous scar tissue grows around the uterus, Holmes said. She said the surgeon later told her he spent about 15 minutes cauterizing the troublesome tissue as a precaution. She recalls him saying he finished the whole operation within the 60 minutes that had been allotted for the tubal ligation procedure alone.

    She said the doctor assured her the extra treatment for endometriosis would cost her little, if anything.

    Then the bill came.

    The Patient: Jamie Holmes, 38, of Lynden, Washington, who was insured by Premera Blue Cross at the time.

    Medical Services: A tubal ligation operation, plus treatment of endometriosis found during the surgery.

    Service Provider: Pacific Rim Outpatient Surgery Center of Bellingham, Washington, which has since been purchased, closed, and reopened under a new name.

    Total Bill: $9,620. Insurance paid $1,262 to the in-network center. After adjusting for prices allowed under the insurer’s contract, the center billed Holmes $2,605. A collection agency later acquired the debt and sued her for $3,792.19, including interest and fees.

    What Gives: The surgery center, which provided the facility and support staff for her operation, sent a bill suggesting that Holmes underwent two separate operations, one to have her tubes tied and one to treat endometriosis. It charged $4,810 for each.

    Holmes said there were no such problems with the separate bills from the surgeon and anesthesiologist, which the insurer paid.

    Holmes figured someone in the center’s billing department mistakenly thought she’d been on the operating table twice. She said she tried to explain it to the staff, to no avail.

    She said it was as if she ordered a meal at a fast-food restaurant, was given extra fries, and then was charged for two whole meals. “I didn’t get the extra burger and drink and a toy,” she joked.

    Her insurer, Premera Blue Cross, declined to pay for two operations, she said. The surgery center billed Holmes for much of the difference. She refused to pay.

    Holmes said she understands the surgery center could have incurred additional costs for the approximately 15 minutes the surgeon spent cauterizing the spots of endometriosis. About $500 would have seemed like a fair charge to her. “I’m not opposed to paying for that,” she said. “I am opposed to paying for a whole bunch of things I didn’t receive.”

    The physician-owned surgery center was later purchased and closed by PeaceHealth, a regional health system. But the debt was turned over to a collection agency, SB&C, which filed suit against Holmes in December 2023, seeking $3,792.19, including interest and fees.

    The collection agency asked a judge to grant summary judgment, which could have allowed the company to garnish wages from Holmes’ job as a graphic artist and marketing specialist for real estate agents.

    Holmes said she filed a written response, then showed up on Zoom and at the courthouse for two hearings, during which she explained her side, without bringing a lawyer. The judge ruled in February that the collection agency was not entitled to summary judgment, because the facts of the case were in dispute.

    More From Bill Of The Month

    Representatives of the collection agency and the defunct surgery center declined to comment for this article.

    Sabrina Corlette, co-director of Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms, said it was absurd for the surgery center to bill for two operations and then refuse to back down when the situation was explained. “It’s like a Kafka novel,” she said.

    Corlette said surgery center staffers should be accustomed to such scenarios. “It is quite common, I would think, for a surgeon to look inside somebody and say, ‘Oh, there’s this other thing going on. I’m going to deal with it while I’ve got the patient on the operating table.’”

    It wouldn’t have made medical or financial sense for the surgeon to make Holmes undergo a separate operation for the secondary issue, she said.

    Corlette said that if the surgery center was still in business, she would advise the patient to file a complaint with state regulators.

    The Resolution: So far, the collection agency has not pressed ahead with its lawsuit by seeking a trial after the judge’s ruling. Holmes said that if the agency continues to sue her over the debt, she might hire a lawyer and sue them back, seeking damages and attorney fees.

    She could have arranged to pay off the amount in installments. But she’s standing on principle, she said.

    “I just got stonewalled so badly. They treated me like an idiot,” she said. “If they’re going to be petty to me, I’m willing to be petty right back.”

    The Takeaway: Don’t be afraid to fight a bogus medical bill, even if the dispute goes to court.

    Debt collectors often seek summary judgment, which allows them to garnish wages or take other measures to seize money without going to the trouble of proving in a trial that they are entitled to payments. If the consumers being sued don’t show up to tell their side in court hearings, judges often grant summary judgment to the debt collectors.

    However, if the facts of a case are in dispute — for example, because the defendant shows up and argues she owes for just one surgery, not two — the judge may deny summary judgment and send the case to trial. That forces the debt collector to choose: spend more time and money pursuing the debt or drop it.

    “You know what? It pays to be stubborn in situations like this,” said Berneta Haynes, a senior attorney for the National Consumer Law Center who reviewed Holmes’ bill for KFF Health News.

    Many people don’t go to such hearings, sometimes because they didn’t get enough notice, don’t read English, or don’t have time, she said.

    “I think a lot of folks just cave” after they’re sued, Haynes said.

    Emily Siner reported the audio story.

    After six years, we’ll have a final installment with NPR of our Bill of the Month project in the fall. But Bill of the Month will continue at KFF Health News and elsewhere. We still want to hear about your confusing or outrageous medical bills. Visit Bill of the Month to share your story.

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: