Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

marginallycompelling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#71

Post by timr »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #56
timr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current administration is funding an increase in response: https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nws-visit... It's right there, linked in TFA. The press release provided by the GP is instead discussing funding for the "UN Food and Agriculture Organization", which is different. Apparently they also do some unspecified amount of work on the issue.

That aid money went, in part, to preventing the spread of screwworms in Central America. As of 2024, the flies were mostly eradicated in Mexico and efforts were on-going in Panama to wipe them out down to the Darien Gap. In less than 2 years we've gone from them being almost entirely eradicated in North America to infections observed in the United States.

It didn’t happen in less than 2 years. The problem started at least in 2020, and likely long before that.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#72

Post by biophysboy »

timr wrote: post #70
biophysboy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is not that cutting funding caused the problem; the argument is that you have to use money to solve the problem.

…and the current administration is using money to do that. It’s in the article , and I’ve posted links to evidence on multiple sub threads of this thread, which you had to ignore to make this comment. Y’all are just absolutely fixated on blaming one side for this.

Two things can be true at once: one group cut funding early 2025, and another group added funding later. The former group, DOGE, was less responsible, and the latter group, USDA, is more responsible. I do not know why I have to ignore the former group to be fair to the latter.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#73

Post by timr »

hristov wrote: post #57

This article is misleading because it does not mention Trump or Musk or Doge, and they were mostly responsible for the new outbreak in the US. Mexican cattle imports were banned in the US in 2024 because of the screw worm. Then trump allowed mexican cattle imports in February 2025 even though the screw worm situation was not resolved. Then, in March 2025, Musk's DOGE cut funding for COPEG, the organization that suppr…

> This article is misleading because it does not mention Trump or Musk or Doge

The article doesn’t mention those things because you’re wrong about both the facts and the timeline, and you’d know that, had you read the article.

> Mexican cattle imports were banned in the US in 2024 because of the screw worm. Then trump allowed mexican cattle imports in February 2025 even though the screw worm situation was not resolved.

True, but a red herring. The first cases of Mexican screwworm were in late 2024 / early 2025 [1]. The current circumstances began long before the current presidential administration (at least 2020), as TFA correctly notes.

> Then, in March 2025, Musk's DOGE cut funding for COPEG, the organization that suppresses the screw worm in Panama.

No. The funding cut was for an unrelated UN agency (FAO) not COPEG [2]. FAO does not implement the fly eradication program, per their own website [3], but partisan critics have purposely confused the two issues, which you can see an example of at [4]. They mention COPEG, then talk about the FAO issue, then don’t mention that the one is unrelated to the other, because they want the reader to confuse the two.

In fact, the administration did not cut funding to COPEG, funding $165M in FY2025, with a supplemental grant of $21M the same year [5].

I have my problems with the current administration, and certainly don’t think they’re innocent here, but this kind of fact-free political backbiting that actively confuses the issue drives me batty.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexico-confirms-first...

[2] https://www.agri-pulse.com/articles/22636-bird-flu-screwworm...

[3] https://www.fao.org/animal-health/animal-diseases/new-world-...

[4] https://ticotimes.net/2026/06/06/flesh-eating-fly-that-sprea...

[5] https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/IN/HTML/IN125...

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#74

Post by timr »

biophysboy wrote: post #72
timr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…and the current administration is using money to do that. It’s in the article , and I’ve posted links to evidence on multiple sub threads of this thread, which you had to ignore to make this comment. Y’all are just absolutely fixated on blaming one side for this.

Two things can be true at once: one group cut funding early 2025, and another group added funding later. The former group, DOGE, was less responsible, and the latter group, USDA, is more responsible. I do not know why I have to ignore the former group to be fair to the latter.

The point is that you’re trying to blame post-2025 events for a problem that began years ago.

Stop letting partisan politics dominate your thinking. It’s preventing you from seeing the full scope of the problem.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#75

Post by hristov »

timr wrote: post #73
hristov wrote: post #57

This article is misleading because it does not mention Trump or Musk or Doge, and they were mostly responsible for the new outbreak in the US. Mexican cattle imports were banned in the US in 2024 because of the screw worm. Then trump allowed mexican cattle imports in February 2025 even though the screw worm situation was not resolved. Then, in March 2025, Musk's DOGE cut funding for COPEG, the organization that suppr…

> This article is misleading because it does not mention Trump or Musk or Doge The article doesn’t mention those things because you’re wrong about both the facts and the timeline, and you’d know that, had you read the article. > Mexican cattle imports were banned in the US in 2024 because of the screw worm. Then trump allowed mexican cattle imports in February 2025 even though the screw worm situation was not resolve…

I read the article and I am right about everything other than one not very significant detail. I am probably right about that too.

It is not a red herring that Trump allowed cattle imports from mexico when it was widely known that the screw worm was in mexico. It was a very serious lapse in safety and disease prevention.

Furthermore, DOGE did cut federal funding for programs for monitoring and curtailment of the screw worm in Central America in February 2025, and your own links show that. For example your link [2] says the above sentence almost verbatim. The FAO issue is not unrelated to the to the COPEG issue. The FAO also funded programs for detection and curtailment of the screw worm in central america just like COPEG. They were probably complimentary programs.

I could not find any link that COPEG funding was cut, but then again you showed no evidence that it was not cut. DOGE insisted on secrecy and was very vindictive, so a lot of DOGE cuts are not known and there is no definite public list of DOGE cuts. Furthermore, federal employees are scared. Any cuts to FAO programs would be made public because the FAO is an international organization and their employees are not at risk of being fired by Trump. But COPEG is an US organization and everyone in there will be scared to mention funding cuts to the media.

By the way, your statement that the Tump administration funded COPEG with 165 million in 2025 and a supplemental grant of 21 million is an outright falsehood and it is a falsehood proven by your own link [5]. Your own link [5] says that the 165 million funding came in 2024, not 2025 which would make it something done by the Biden administration. The supplemental 21 million funding came in 2025 but that was for fruit flies, not screw worm producing flies, so it did not go to COPEG.

I wonder, did you not read your own links, or did you know you were saying lies and hope that nobody else will read your links.

So in summary, DOGE did cut funding for screw worm detection and prevention in early 2025. Trump did allow Mexican cattle in the US in early 2025, even though it was known that the screw worm is in Mexico. It is not entirely clear whether DOGE cut funding for COPEG exactly or whether it only cut funding for other non-COPEG screw worm detection and prevention programs, but funding for screw worm detection and prevention was cut.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#76

Post by timr »

hristov wrote: post #75
timr wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This article is misleading because it does not mention Trump or Musk or Doge The article doesn’t mention those things because you’re wrong about both the facts and the timeline, and you’d know that, had you read the article. > Mexican cattle imports were banned in the US in 2024 because of the screw worm. Then trump allowed mexican cattle imports in February 2025 even though the screw worm situation was not resolve…

I read the article and I am right about everything other than one not very significant detail. I am probably right about that too. It is not a red herring that Trump allowed cattle imports from mexico when it was widely known that the screw worm was in mexico. It was a very serious lapse in safety and disease prevention. Furthermore, DOGE did cut federal funding for programs for monitoring and curtailment of the scre…

> Your own link [5] says that the 165 million funding came in 2024, not 2025 which would make it something done by the Biden administration.

From the link:

> APHIS received emergency funding of $109.8 million in 2023 and $165 million in 2024 from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for screwworm response activities. In May 2025, USDA announced an additional $21 million transfer of CCC funds to convert an existing fruit-fly-rearing facility in Metapa, Mexico, into a sterile fly-rearing facility.

The Trump administration didn’t start until January of 2025.

If you don’t want to give them credit for funding the project in the current financial year, fine, but then it’s especially dishonest to blame them for “defunding” during the same time period. (Particularly when that’s not true - I cited that explicitly to show that funding was not stopped.)

> I could not find any link that COPEG funding was cut, but then again you showed no evidence that it was not cut.

Other than the part I just quoted for you? The part you obviously read, since you cited it in your comment?

Nobody is arguing with you that the current administration cut funding for FAO. They did. What I’ve shown you is that this is is not the same thing as COPEG, FAO is not the prevention program, and even if it were, the cuts were far too late to have caused a problem that began six years ago.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#77

Post by teachrdan »

timr wrote: post #69
inigyou wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard there was one keeping this under control. It involved transgenic flies, which sounds close to transgender. DOGE ended it. It was also pitched as "why are we studying the mating habits of flies?"

> I heard there was one keeping this under control. It involved transgenic flies, which sounds close to transgender. DOGE ended it. No. First, the problem here predates DOGE by an entire presidential administration or more. If you had read the article, you’d know that the northward migration of flies started at least in 2020 . Second, the thing you’re misremembering has no relation to this program. It was funding for…

> It confirms your political priors while ironically making you feel smug about your scientific knowledge.

You are making the same error. Other Republicans (if not Trump) indeed criticized government-funded research into the screwworm lifecycle. Denying that the party of the president has been opposed to both science and regulation on principle -- including with this particular crisis -- makes you look naive at best, dishonest at worst.

https://cra.org/govaffairs/blog/2012/04/members-of-congress-...

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#78

Post by hristov »

timr wrote: post #76
hristov wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article and I am right about everything other than one not very significant detail. I am probably right about that too. It is not a red herring that Trump allowed cattle imports from mexico when it was widely known that the screw worm was in mexico. It was a very serious lapse in safety and disease prevention. Furthermore, DOGE did cut federal funding for programs for monitoring and curtailment of the scre…

> Your own link [5] says that the 165 million funding came in 2024, not 2025 which would make it something done by the Biden administration. From the link: > APHIS received emergency funding of $109.8 million in 2023 and $165 million in 2024 from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) for screwworm response activities. In May 2025, USDA announced an additional $21 million transfer of CCC funds to convert an existing…

Ok at this point you are just spouting gibberish. I will stop responding.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#79

Post by timr »

teachrdan wrote: post #77
timr wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I heard there was one keeping this under control. It involved transgenic flies, which sounds close to transgender. DOGE ended it. No. First, the problem here predates DOGE by an entire presidential administration or more. If you had read the article, you’d know that the northward migration of flies started at least in 2020 . Second, the thing you’re misremembering has no relation to this program. It was funding for…

> It confirms your political priors while ironically making you feel smug about your scientific knowledge. You are making the same error. Other Republicans (if not Trump) indeed criticized government-funded research into the screwworm lifecycle. Denying that the party of the president has been opposed to both science and regulation on principle -- including with this particular crisis -- makes you look naive at best,…

I'm not arguing that one political team is innocent. When it comes to correctly managing complex scientific problems, all politicians are reliably incompetent.

Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

#80

Post by egberts1 »

Other than chronic South America and Libya outbreaks, screwworm has been around forever.

Coupled with SIT, pyrethroid, doramectin, ivermectin, debriding, dressing are just about 100% effective.

Thanks to our enlarged 230-strong Federal-contracted field workers.

Post reply on HN