[flagged]
Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
11–20 of 87 posts
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
As the article you've linked to makes clear, this problem predates the cut in funding.
I'm not sure what your point is here. Yes, the screwworm problem predates the funding cut. Surely that should prompt an increase or at least a maintenance of existing funding for monitoring programs though, certainly not a decrease. I think atoav is saying the /stupid consequence/ is the cut in funding itself, not the screwworm resurgence.
[deleted]
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#13Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
As the article you've linked to makes clear, this problem predates the cut in funding.
Oh great, then the next admin can blame this one when the problem is still around. Why solve a problem when you can just blame the other guys.
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.
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
As the article you've linked to makes clear, this problem predates the cut in funding.
I'm not sure what your point is here. Yes, the screwworm problem predates the funding cut. Surely that should prompt an increase or at least a maintenance of existing funding for monitoring programs though, certainly not a decrease. I think atoav is saying the /stupid consequence/ is the cut in funding itself, not the screwworm resurgence.
> I'm not sure what your point is here.
My point is that the instinct to be partisan on this issue is inane, but also factually incorrect.
> Yes, the screwworm problem predates the funding cut.
Great, so we're agreed that this is at least a bi-partisan problem.
> Surely that should prompt an increase or at least a maintenance of existing funding for monitoring programs though, certainly not a decrease.
Fortunately, it is. This was linked directly from TFA:
https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nws-visit...
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#16[flagged]
>We have had our access to medications for livestock severely curtailed over recent years.
Oh no, tell me it's not ivermectin...
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#17Chances of current US gov mounting a coordinated scientific campaign to get on top of this seem vanishingly small to me. They’re busy defunding and dismantling any gov operation that smells like science
[dead]
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#18Chances of current US gov mounting a coordinated scientific campaign to get on top of this seem vanishingly small to me. They’re busy defunding and dismantling any gov operation that smells like science
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?"
Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#19Re: Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)
#20[flagged]
Tariffs would not stop the screw worm, which lives half of its life as a winged fly.