@indivisibleteam You're far too generous with Biden. In his interview right after the the SOTU his first reaction was to say that he'd never cut off weapons to Israel and he hasn't. Everything else in that statement is him realizing how his first remarks would play and trying to qualify them for public consumption. When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
It sounds like the Trident pier itself may have been beached/grounded. The ability of the US military to execute JLOTS at this location on an ongoing basis has really been called into question. This just isn't a good system for delivering aid by boat.
This is your periodic reminder that the Israeli port of Ashdod lies just to the North of Gaza. Also, World Central Kitchen has a functional jetty which they used twice to deliver barges of aid at the same place where the US is doing their JLOTS. Maybe just switch to using the jetty! You know...the stationary structure which doesn't need anchor cables and which isn't subject to being driven off by wind and waves?
As usual, the "What's is Going on With Shipping?" channel has informed ongoing coverage of the JLOTS debacle (which this channel rightly said was going to be a debacle for a long time).
He says this as someone with decades of experience as a merchant mariner and one who has participated in these sorts of JLOTS exercises.
@Miro_Collas@palestine I wonder to what extent western governments are supporting and letting Israel get away with this shit because Israeli intelligence has dirt on politicians or has documentation of past international dealings and actions by those governments which the public would find unsavory. To what extent is international politics now being conducted by who has the best blackmail material?
Wow. A microbiology lab at Texas A&M accepted purchased raw milk samples from NPR for H5N1 testing, then contacted the milk producers to seek permission. When the producers said, "don't test our milk," the lab not only declined to carry out the tests but also refused to send the samples on to another lab.
@human3500@kdnyhan Basically the government bought 297 commercially processed samples in 38 states and PCR tested them. PCR testing is looking for the presence of the viral RNA. It tells you nothing about the viability of the virus. The presumption (and it is a presumption) is that pasteurization kills or inactivates the virus and so they've basically been repeating the line "The milk supply is safe."
@human3500@kdnyhan To actually see if it is safe, they do a test where they inject the pasteurized milk into eggs and canine kidney cells to see if there is live virus that takes hold and replicates. The government repeated the "pasteurized milk is safe" line before doing those tests. They've done those tests now and assert that pasteurized milk is safe.
@human3500@kdnyhan The University of Wisconsin as part of another series of tests to see if raw cows milk would infect rodents, also did informal tests where they heated contaminated raw milk samples to 72 degrees C for various lengths of time. 72 degrees held for 15 seconds is the most common standard for commercial pasteurization.
@human3500@kdnyhan There's another form of pasteurization where you heat the milk to a lower temperature (typically in a double boiler on a stove) and hold it for 30 minutes. This later type is typically used for pasteurizing breast milk, for milk banks, for instance. They imitated both of these types of tests and found 99.99% inactivation and 99.999% inactivation respectively. That isn't 100% inactivation, though.
@human3500@kdnyhan And now people are basically going to the government and saying "Did you actually find complete inactivation or just mostly inactivated?" because that matters when you are dealing with billions of copies of virus which can then start to replicate again.
The U of W researchers hypothesized that fat globules and casein micelles may shield the virus from being completely eliminated at the standard levels of heat and hold times used in commercial pasteurization.
@human3500@kdnyhan There are bacteria and viruses which are known to survive in 72c pasteurized milk. That level is basically chosen to reduce levels of some of the more common and worrisome bacterial pathogens to the point where the milk is safe to drink and the milk has a reasonable sellable a the grocery store lifespan. The main reason milk goes bad even if you leave it sealed in your refrigerator is the incompleteness of the pasteurization process.
@human3500@kdnyhan The bacteria not killed in 72c pasteurization replicate in the jug and sour the milk.
There is a higher level of pasteurization called UHT where the milk is heated to typically 132 degrees C under pressure and held for typically 2 or 3 seconds. This does a much better job of killing pathogens. So much so that UHT milk (typically sold in Tetra Pak cartons) can be stored at room temperature for six months to a year prior to opening and use.
@human3500@kdnyhan Once you actually open UHT milk, you have to refrigerate it, of course, because you've introduced bacteria into it from the air. I've drank UHT milk commonly while living in the Cook Islands and on Maui. Milk goes bad fast in the heat of Polynesia.
I've drank nothing but UHT since the announcement of H5N1 is cow milk and don't plan on going back to normal milk.
@human3500@kdnyhan Not leastly because pasteurization failures occur commonly in US agriculture. Google "Pasteurization failure leads to recall" or check out the FDA recall site. These failures in pasteurization equipment and processes are OFTEN not caught for 2-3 months where they are caught at all. People wind up drinking unpasteurized or underpasteurized milk unintentionally without them knowing it.
@human3500@kdnyhan The widespread and frequent occurrence of such failures in US agriculture should IMO give the public little confidence that the milk supply is safe absent of a systematic government effort to wipe this pathogen out in US dairy herds. They are not making such an effort.
Oh, btw, the last pasteurization failure leading to a recall was this month: