Bird flu found in sample of California raw milk: Officials
Pierre Crom/Getty Images
(FRESNO, CA) — After bird flu was detected in a retail sample of raw milk produced and packaged by Raw Farm, LLC, the California Department of Public Health warned consumers on Sunday to avoid consuming any from the same lot.
At the state’s request, the Fresno County-based company also issued a voluntary recall of the affected product: cream top, whole raw milk from lot No. 20241109 with a “best by” date of Nov. 27.
Anyone in possession of the product will be able to pursue a refund from the location where the item was originally purchased.
Retailers have also been notified to take affected products off of their shelves.
The CDPH has also emphasized that pasteurized milk remains safe to drink.
Most cases of bird flu discovered in humans in the current outbreak are with people that worked directly with birds or cows. There are not any cases known to be associated with raw milk consumption, but the risks associated with raw milks have been long established.
The Food and Drug Administration has previously warned of the possible dangers of drinking raw milk.
In a statement from May 2024, it warned, “Raw milk can carry dangerous germs such as Salmonella, E. coli, Listeria, Campylobacter, and others that cause foodborne illness, often called ‘food poisoning.'”
Raw milk products do not undergo pasteurization, which is a heating process that kills bacteria and viruses.
Pasteurized milk and dairy products, however, are safe to consume because the heating process kills pathogens that can cause illness — including bird flu.
However, raw milk does have its proponents, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Last month, in a post on X, called the FDA’s “aggressive suppression” of it part of the agency’s “war on health.”
In November, President-elect Donald Trump selected RFK Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. The appointment requires Senate confirmation.
As of Sunday evening, no illnesses had been reported in association with the finding of bird flu in the single lot of raw milk.
The contaminated sample was discovered as part of routine testing performed by the County of Santa Clara Public Health Laboratory, which tests raw milk products from retail stores as a second line of consumer protection. The finding was then verified by the California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory System.
In response to the positive test, the California Department of Food and Agriculture provided onsite testing at the Raw Farms facilities, which were negative for bird flu. CFDA will continue testing raw milk banks twice per week.
ABC News’ Claire E. Strindberg contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — If you’re feeling hungover from New Year’s Eve champagne or had one too many boozy eggnogs over the holidays, let January be a fresh start.
Taking the challenge of going dry in January, or Dry January, i.e. having no alcohol for the entire month, is one resolution that might actually make you healthier.
The Dry January campaign was started in 2013 by Alcohol Change U.K., a charity focused on reducing alcohol harm. For the past several years, the initiative has proved popular in the United States and other countries too.
What are the health benefits of Dry January?
While research on how quitting alcohol for a month affects your body is still limited, several studies have shown psychological and health benefits.
Over one dozen staff members at the magazine New Scientist teamed up with researchers at the Institute for Liver and Digestive Health at the University College London Medical School in 2013 to investigate the benefits of Dry January.
The staff members, who all considered themselves “normal” drinkers, underwent baseline testing with blood samples, liver ultrasound scans and questionnaires. For the next five weeks, 10 of them stopped drinking and four drank their normal amounts.
The people who stopped drinking had lower levels of liver fat (which can be a precursor to liver damage), improved blood sugars and lower cholesterol than they did at the beginning of the month. They also reported improved sleep and concentration. In contrast, the four people who kept drinking saw no benefit.
Another study out of the U.K. had nearly 100 participants abstain from drinking alcohol for a month and another nearly 50 participants continue drinking alcohol as normal.
They found that moderate-heavy drinkers who took a break from alcohol had improved insulin resistance, weight, blood pressure, and cancer-related growth factors.
The researchers do warn, however, that the study does not show that a short-term ‘detox’ period is all that is required to ‘refresh’ the liver or achieve other health gains. Abstaining from alcohol for a month is only one part of addressing negative effects from longer-term alcohol consumption.
People who drink excessive amounts of alcohol are at higher risk of death and many medical conditions.
People who drink unhealthy amounts of alcohol are more likely to have high blood pressure, heart disease, liver disease, nerve damage, infections including pneumonia and even certain cancers like breast cancer.
Dr. Fulton Crews, director of the Center for Alcohol Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said attempting to stop drinking for Dry January is a good opportunity for people to see if they have an actual addiction to alcohol.
“Many people are in denial about their drinking and hazardous drinking, and if they try to stop and are not able to, it really points out to them their weakness,” Crews told ABC News. “If they can’t stop for a month, they would realize that they have a problem.
“Either that or they do it, and they realize it’s not that hard for them,” said Crews, who described Dry January as a “good idea.”
Experts say Dry January may be especially helpful to those who consistently drink over the recommended amount of two drinks per day for men and one drink per day for women.
Excessive drinking includes binge drinking, defined as consuming five or more drinks for men in a single occasion and four or more drinks for women, and heavy drinking, defined as consuming 15 or more drinks per week for men or eight drinks or more for women). A standard drink is 12 ounces of a regular beer, 8 ounces of a malt liquor, 5 ounces of a glass of wine, and 1.5 ounces of a spirit, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
For those individuals who drink alcohol within the recommended limits, Crews said he is “not sure there would be any observable benefits.”
“I don’t see any clear potential for a moderate drinking person to stop drinking,” he said.
If you do choose to participate in Dry January, Crews shared his advice for sticking to the program.
“Try to avoid temptation by maybe putting all the alcohol out of the house,” he said.
Does Dry January prompt bigger change for some?
Staying dry for January may also help jump-start people to give up alcohol for longer.
Although most people who participate in Dry January return to drinking, up to 8% stay dry six months later, according to Public Health England and the British Medical Journal.
And those who go back to drinking drink less. A 2015 study conducted in the U.K. and published in the journal Health Psychology found that people who participated in Dry January drank less often, had fewer drinks when they did drink and were drunk less often six months after Dry January was completed.
Dry January participants were also better able to refuse alcoholic drinks. These benefits were even seen in people who did not complete the whole month of Dry January.
It might seem daunting to stop drinking alcohol for a whole month. But a 2020 Alcohol and Alcoholism study found that nearly 70% of people completed the Dry January Challenge in 2019.
If you are concerned about yourself or a loved one, call the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMSA) confidential, free, 24-hour-a-day, 365-day-a-year helpline at 1-800-662-HELP (4357). For information and resources about alcohol-related problems and health, visit the website of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) HERE.
Editor’s note: This piece was originally published on Jan. 3, 2018.
(LOS ANGELES) — As devastating wildfires continue to spread across southern California, thousands of structures have been destroyed or damaged and at least five people have been killed.
Residents and firefighters have suffered physical injuries, but doctors say the wildfires can also take a heavy mental health toll on civilians and first responders.
“I think when disaster like this is unfolding, it makes sense to prioritize people’s lives and mortality but, over time, we have to think about mental health consequences too,” Dr. Sarah Lowe, associate professor of social and behavioral sciences at Yale School of Public Health, told ABC News.
“We also know that mental and physical health are connected,” she continued. “While mental health symptoms might not necessarily be linked to the exposure itself, they could be linked to or exacerbated by physical health ailments.”
Mental health experts say that most people are resilient and do not develop a mental health condition as a result of trauma from a natural disaster.
However, those with more exposure to the event — such as losing a home, losing a loved one or experiencing injury — are at higher risk, the experts said.
“It is common to experience emotional distress during these traumatic events, where people often lose a sense of control,” Dr. Jace Reed, director of emergency psychiatry for the department of psychiatry & behavioral neurosciences at Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles, told ABC News. “The current wildfires have led to evacuations, the destruction of homes and property, the loss of beloved pets, physical injuries and even death, all of which can be profoundly distressing.
“Individuals may feel a range of emotions, including denial, anger, sadness, shock and hopelessness,” he added. “This emotional response can evolve into later stages, such as acceptance, further sadness, depression and bitterness.”
Research has shown wildfires can lead to increased rates of anxiety and depression and symptoms may become worse among people who already have these conditions.
Additionally, people can develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which can include intrusive thoughts and nightmares.
Leaving PTSD untreated can result in the use of or dependence on drugs and alcohol, increased risk of chronic health conditions and increased risk of self-harm.
Dr. Ian Stanley, an assistant professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, told ABC News that untreated PTSD can put a strain on relationships including familial relationships, romantic relationships and friendships.
“It can really begin to eat away at, not just the person’s well-being, but also the social environment in which they live,” he said.
Wildfire smoke can also put you at risk
The experts said it’s not just people directly affected by the fire who are at risk of mental health impacts. People exposed to wildfire smoke are at risk as well.
Wildfire smoke can travel long distances, meaning cities hundreds of miles away may be experiencing unhealthy air quality.
A 2024 study from Emory University found that wildfire smoke was linked with emergency department visits for anxiety disorders with higher risks among girls, women and older adults.
“Even people who aren’t directly affected by fires, the smoke from them, coming into their neighborhoods and communities, even if it’s imperceptible, can have impacts on mental health,” Lowe said. “We’re seeing more and more, and that’s with a range of mental health conditions, including depression, anxiety.”
Firefighters, first responders also at risk
Firefighters battling the flames and first responders helping treat those who are injured or are in need are also at risk of experiencing mental health impacts.
Firefighters and other rescue personnel are at greater risk of developing PTSD compared to the general population. An August 2016 study found approximately 20% of firefighters and paramedics meet the criteria for PTSD at some point in their career compared to a 6.8% lifetime risk for the general population, according to the U.S. Fire Administration.
“They’re on the front lines, and first responders, firefighters, police, EMS have potentially pre-existing vulnerabilities to developing mental health problems at a higher rate than the civilian population,” Stanley said.
The duties of first responders — facing challenging situations, reaching out to survivors, providing support — can be strenuous and put them at an increased risk of trauma, according to a 2018 report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
“They’re trained to do this; this is their job, and yet it can still take a toll on them, especially the crews that are away from home, spending weeks away from home and maybe lacking the traditional support system that are used to,” Stanley said.
How to help those with mental health impacts
Lowe said it will be important for California to make sure it is providing enough licensed professionals to the areas where people may be in need.
This can be challenging in the face of a large-scale mental health crisis in the U.S. in which there is a shortage of mental health professionals.
“Having good coverage for mental health services, increasing access to services” is important, she said. “A lot of times, we can’t practice outside of our jurisdiction, but there’s declarations during disasters, folks can practice outside … so just ways to increase access.”
The experts also recommend limiting time reading news coverage and social media posts of the wildfires, much of which can be distressing.
“This can lead to increased anxiety, sleep difficulties and stress, causing many people to feel the urge to consume more information,” Reed said. This increased consumption is likely more anxiety-provoking than comforting. … I recommend that people consume this content in moderation and focus on activities that help reduce their stress levels.”
Family members and friends can help by providing a sense of support for their loved one and confidently checking in, the experts said.
“You can think of kind of the 3 Hs here: Do you want to be helped? Do you want to be hugged? Or do you want to be heard?” Stanley said. “Some people just want a shoulder to cry on. Some people want you to go into problem-solving mode and some people just want a listening ear.”
Flu activity is increasing slightly among children while RSV activity is elevated in the southern, central and eastern U.S., according to data updated Monday from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
As of the week ending Nov. 23, the latest date for which data is available, 0.6% of emergency department visits were for flu and 0.4% were for RSV. While the overall percentages are low, they are higher than the percentages at the beginning of October, CDC data shows.
Meanwhile, about 5.6% of weekly tests are coming back positive for RSV and 2.5% are coming back positive for flu, according to CDC data.
Currently 14 states are experiencing moderate levels of overall respiratory illness: Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin. The remaining states are seeing low levels.
Dr. John Brownstein, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer for Boston Children’s Hospital and an ABC News contributor, said the current season is trending similarly to pre-pandemic seasons.
“Compared to the pandemic years, we’re witnessing a return to more traditional seasonal patterns of respiratory illnesses,” he said. “During the pandemic, measures like masking and social distancing significantly reduced the spread of viruses like flu and RSV. Now, with those measures relaxed, the circulation of these viruses resembles pre-pandemic seasons.”
He added, “These are typical seasonal increases. Every cold and flu season is different in terms of start, end and severity but, like clockwork, we see a rise in respiratory viruses during the fall and winter months.”
Brownstein said it is unsurprising that young children are currently the most impacted by these respiratory viruses.
CDC data shows that children aged 4 and under accounted for 6.7% of emergency department visits for COVID-19, flu and RSV compared to 1.1% among those aged 65 and older during the week of Nov. 23. Children aged 4 and under also had the highest rate of hospitalizations over the same period.
“Managing capacity is going to be on the minds of every pediatric hospital for the next few months,” Brownstein said.
The CDC also noted that cases of so-called “walking pneumonia” among young children remain high. The illness is due to a respiratory tract infection caused by the bacteria Mycoplasma pneumoniae.
Brownstein said the best way for Americans to stay protected is to stay up-to-date with their vaccinations.
To prevent RSV, there are three vaccines approved for adults ages 60 and older as well as some adults between the ages 50 and 59 who are at higher risk. There is also a vaccine available for pregnant women between 32 weeks and 36 weeks of pregnancy.
For babies under eight months, there are two monoclonal antibody products available. Monoclonal antibodies are proteins manufactured in a lab that mimic the antibodies the body naturally creates when fighting an infection.
“Additionally, practicing good hygiene — like frequent hand washing, covering coughs and sneezes, and staying home when feeling unwell — can significantly reduce the spread of these viruses,” Brownstein said.
