Guest Commentary by Kip Hansen
Science News treated us to an interesting quip on 2 May titled “Tick-borne and mosquito-borne illnesses are on the rise in the United States” written by Roni Dengler. Dengler writes: “Warmer weather is a major cause for the explosion in these vector-transmitted diseases, The New York Times reports, as ticks thrive in areas once too cold, and mosquito populations mushroom during heat waves.” Real news? Fake news? Or echo chamber reverberation? Let’s see….
The New York Times once again pushed its Editorial Narrative on Climate Change ahead of scientific facts in a news article by Donald G. McNeil Jr. published under the banner of Global Health on 1 May 2018. The article, titled “Tick and Mosquito Infections Spreading Rapidly, C.D.C. Finds”.
The title is true enough, the C.D.C. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — a U.S. federal agency under the Department of Health & Human Services) did in fact find that the incidence of mosquito and tick borne diseases are rising rapidly and laid out a well-founded scientific case as to Why and How and What To Do About It. The study report is available in several forms: a Briefing Sheet online, with a video; and in a full study report, “Vital Signs: Trends in Reported Vectorborne Disease Cases — United States and Territories, 2004–2016”. Both are quite good.
The New York Times, however, insists (this is the correct word) that the cause of the increase and spread of vector-borne diseases is “warming” and/or ”climate change”. Our intrepid NY Times journalist states:
“Warmer weather is an important cause of the surge, according to the lead author of a study published in the C.D.C.’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.”
This is a fascinating distortion of the facts….a very clever one. Why? Because the journalist, McNeil, is forced immediately to point out:
“But the author, Dr. Lyle R. Petersen, the agency’s director of vector-borne diseases, declined to link the increase to the politically fraught issue of climate change, and the report does not mention climate change or global warming. Many other factors are at work, he emphasized, including increased jet travel and a lack of vaccines.”
“The study did not delve into the reasons for the increase, but Dr. Petersen said it was probably caused by many factors, including two related to weather: ticks thriving in regions previously too cold for them, and hot spells triggering outbreaks of mosquito-borne diseases.”
I often write about Science Journalism — and this article gives me an opportunity to point out one of the tricks that journalists use when they want to say the news is THIS when it is really THAT.
Here is what McNeil has done:
- There is a C.D.C. study that says vector-borne diseases are on the rise and spreading — in this case, diseases spread by mosquitos, ticks, and fleas.
- The journalist wants to say, maybe because the NY Times has a strict Editorial Narrative on Climate Change, that this increase in incidence and geographical spread is caused by “warming weather caused by Climate Change.”
- He has a problem. The actual study from the C.D.C. does not contain the word “climate”. It does not contain the word “change”. Naturally, it does not contain the two words — “climate change” — together. It does not contain the word “warming”. It does not even contain the word “weather”. The word “temperature” does appear in the paper — once — in this sentence: “The longevity, distribution, biting habits, and propagation of vectors, which ultimately affect the intensity of transmission, depend on environmental factors such as rainfall, temperature, and shelter.” This sentence is found in the Introduction to lay some groundwork about biological disease vectors (in our case, mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas). It is worth noting that almost all biological activity depends in part on temperature to some degree.
- What to do? The journalist is compelled to blame Climate Change, or at least “warming”, for the dangerous situation.
[Full Disclosure: I have been a radio journalist and an amateur science journalist and have used this trick myself — benignly, I hope.]
Here’s the trick that is used to get around the fact that the study authors have not said what you — the journalist — needed them to say: You call them up (or, more modernly, email them) with a series of questions specifically designed to get them to say something, nearly anything, that you might be able to “validly” transmogrify into a sentence like this one from McNeil:
“Warmer weather is an important cause of the surge, according to the lead author of a study published in the C.D.C.’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.”
How is this a journalists’ trick? It is an easy thing to do — the journalist need only convince himself that the “lead author” said or wrote something in reply to the journalist’s leading questions that might be construed to say something enough like the sentence above to justify the claim. Of course, the journalist does not actually quote the lead author — because he probably said no such thing.
Petersen, the study author attributed, did, I suspect, reel off a long list of potential contributing factors: expanded human travel, suburban reforestation and a dearth of new vaccines to stop outbreaks. Also in the list: Ticks and fleas need deer or rodents as their main blood hosts, and those have increased as forests in suburbs have gotten thicker, deer hunting has waned, and rodent predators like foxes have disappeared. In this list, might have been the idea that some areas are seeing less-cold winters and longer warm seasons …. we won’t know because the NY Times journalist has not told us what Petersen actually said or wrote, nor did he supply any data to support the implied ‘fact’ that areas with less cold winters have increased tick and mosquito activity and vector- borne disease.
What the lead author of the study did not do was blame climate change or warming weather for the problems of vector-borne diseases.
[More Disclosure: When I have used this trick, I have always directly quoted both my exact question and the exact full reply to that specific question, as journalistic standards require.]
Side Note: Forests have increased? The meme is we have been cutting down all the trees. Not true of course — McNeil has been kind enough to include the historical actuality (parentheses his): “(A century ago, the Northeast had fewer trees than it now does; forests made a comeback as farming shifted west and firewood for heating was replaced by coal, oil and gas.)” Yes, almost all of the forest in Northeast United States had been clear-cut — at one time or another over the last century and a half — to supply building materials, firewood and charcoal. There are few remaining tracts of native, never-cut forests in the Northeastern states. Connecticut, with an overall area of 3.5 million acres, has only 200 acres of true old growth forest. New York does better at 210,000 acres (which oddly includes 50 acres in the New York Botanical Garden), out of a total of 35 million acres. We see a similar ratio in each state — about 0.0057%.
The “Illnesses On The Rise from mosquito, tick, and flea bites” factsheet from the C.D.C.’s Vitalsigns outreach, based in part on the study data, lays the blame where it belongs:
“More people at risk
- Commerce moves mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas around the world.
- Infected travelers can introduce and spread germs across the world.
- Mosquitoes and ticks move germs into new areas of the US, causing more people to be at risk. “
Once again, the Vitalsigns factsheet contains no instances of the following words and word combinations: temperature, warming, climate change.
The real causes of the increase in incidence and geographical spread of these vector-borne diseases are:
- Commerce — international shipping — moving biological vectors to new areas — such as mosquito species and fleas.
- The biological vectors shift locations or expand territories, they bring can diseases with them.
- Renewing forests have expanded the ranges and numbers of deer and other vector-associated species — increasing human exposure
- Localities, no longer faced with fighting malaria and yellow fever, cut back on mosquito-control efforts. Some of this cut-back can be blamed on anti-spraying efforts of environmentalists groups.
- Humans have moved into the forests and previously unoccupied areas, bringing themselves into closer contact with disease vectors — the outdoor movement (hiking, camping, trail-biking) also brings more people into contact with Nature.
- The Lyme Disease epidemic has increased awareness of vector-borne disease and vastly stepped-up surveillance and reporting of these diseases, which could account for a very high percentage of the reported increases.
One of the largest complicating factors adding to the problem of human movement spreading diseases is the fact that many localities, as mentioned, for varying reasons over the past decade, have failed to maintain vector control efforts. The C.D.C. says “Critical to effectively preventing or responding to disease outbreaks is sensitive disease and vector surveillance, backed by well-organized, well-prepared, and sustained vector control operations.” For mosquitoes, vector control means, among other things, local efforts of mosquito-control spraying. Environmental groups across the country have been battling mosquito-spraying efforts for many years. Vector control of ticks and fleas is more difficult as is it not easily approached on a community-wide basis and is best handled through public education efforts.
The C.D.C. is worried that with increasing human travel, which moves diseases around the world, and with existing local and state vector-borne-disease surveillance and control efforts not being fully up to the task, that either a natural or a bio-weapon vector-borne disease could cause a serious epidemic. The C.D.C. calls for more Federal and State level effort and money to improve vector surveillance and control and increased efforts to develop vaccines for these diseases. These are valid and important issues and do need to be addressed. They are not, however, a looming disaster or existential threat to mankind.
And, they are not caused by Climate Change or Anthropogenic Global Warming byany of its many names.
Those interested should read the Vitalsigns factsheet available here. It is evidence-based and good science.
Skip the Science News and NY Times pieces — they are badly Flawed News.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment Policy:
It is a sad commentary that the once-proud “Gray Lady” — The New York Times — has allowed itself to be turned into a political-party-based yellow-journalism propaganda rag. In my young years, when I studied a bit of journalism in University and hosted a radio news show with a couple of college friends, the offenses committed daily by journalists at the NY Times were considered ‘firing offenses’ — misrepresenting a quote intentionally, slanting a story to match one’s personal bias or including a personal opinion in a news story.
That Science Magazine, as represented in this case by Science News, would allow something to be published under its masthead without even the pretense of fact-checking is equally sad.
This Commentary is about Science Journalism — not climate change or mosquitoes.
Always happy to read and respond to your comments here or you can email me at my first name at the domain i4 decimal net.
# # # # #
If CNN get hold of this story that tick will be big enough to have your leg off.
Ve2 ==> Ouch!
As mosquito infections triple industrial wind turbines are killing the best natural way to control mosquito populations.
Heres a summary from an article on Save the Eagles International
http://savetheeaglesinternational.org/new/wind-farms-more-health-issues.html
– Birds and bats are being killed at an astonishingly increasing rate as the number of industrial wind turbines increase.
– Mosquito populations are rising at an alarming rate.
– Bat kills in one location can impact locations thousands of miles away.
– Bats are long lived and slow to reproduce. Scientists are worried that some of the most useful bat species (e.g. Hoary bats) will not recover and become extinct – Fatalities at wind turbines may threaten population viability of a migratory bat
– Birds and bats provide a natural way of keeping mosquitoes and other problem insects (e.g. Lyme disease ticks) in check.
– Mosquitoes spread diseases like Zika, Malaria, and West Nile Virus. These diseases are spreading throughout the US and Europe.
– Communities are beginning to increase chemical spraying, including aerial spraying of Naled over millions of acres in the US. Naled is toxic to bees and butterflies. The European Union banned Naled in 2012, citing “potential and unacceptable risk showed for human health.”
– Politicians and Industrial Wind companies are not going to give in easily, as billions of dollars (and euros) in subsidies are at stake.
At least part of the blame for the increase in mosquito population, is because Industrial Wind Turbines are killing millions of bats. Bats are the best natural way to control mosquito populations.A bat can eat as many as 1000 insects an hour. If you kill millions of bats you will have billions of more mosquitoes. While subsidies fund a false solution (wind turbines) for AGW (which is probably a mythological problem), they are creating a real problems by destroying the best natural way to control the problem.
Someone in Kp’s article made this unsubstantiated claim: “ticks thriving in regions previously too cold for them,”.
Could someone tell me where this is happening?
TA ==> The claim that there are now ticks in areas previously “too cold for ticks” is simply false.
Ths CDC page Geographic distribution of ticks that bite humans has a series of map (you must click on the gray bars near the bottom for additional maps) showing that ticks that bite humans live in every part of the continental US.
See this page for ticks in Alaska.
Kip, even Peterson is mistaken about cold places and ticks. Manitoba has had heavy tick infestations from before my early childhood days in the 1940s and right up to the present.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4054020
Manitoba winters are warmer today, but ticks were rife in the very cold years, too.
Gary ==> This is the journalistic point I am writing about. We don;t have a quaote from Dr. Petersen….we have McNeil saying (writing in the NYT article) “The study did not delve into the reasons for the increase, but Dr. Petersen said it was probably caused by many factors, including two related to weather: ticks thriving in regions previously too cold for them,”.
We don’t know WHAT EXACTLY Dr. Petersen said or didn’t say, McNeil did not quote him.
That’s the whole point here.
If you follow what I write here, I often email the “Dr. Petersens” and ask them “Did you really say xxxx?” 95% or the time they reply — “Well, not really….”
And, you are right — tick populations do not primarily depend on winter temperatures. Ticks that bite humans are found in all 48 contiguous states.
In Australia tick populations appear to be associated with rainfall, not temperature.
https://docksci.com/the-relationship-between-the-southern-oscillation-index-rainfall-and-the-occurre_5a55e760d64ab2a3f76a9a4a.html
Sorry about the busty ladies
If the influence of the New York Times is the question.
It must be international , as Newspaper sites in New Zealand .Radio New Zealand often quote the New York Times as an authoritative source. Along with the Washington Post, The BBC, The Guardian , Australian News Papers and TV and some times DW…. My own theory is that the number of journalists in newsrooms in New Zealand has been seriously cut as the proprietors and management put their money into trying to create new
methods of news distribution for mobile devices. Even the National Radio has a web page with podcasts and visual news hosts conduct main news programmes on line . it is now http://www.radionz.co.nz/
This may be leading to reporters or journalists covering academic subjects in which they have no background . They may produce ‘news’ by cutting and pasting from overseas sources and making precis of various publishers ‘ advertising ‘blurbs’. because it is cheaper. These quick summaries by academic publishers are often as misleading as the description of the contents of a book on the back of the book jacket.
But the NYT is very influential overseas make no mistake, and when it misleads the U.S it misleads a large part of the world. I think arguing that it is authoritative is no longer possible either. I’m sceptical of their reporting of science as I’m sceptical of their reporting of conditions in other countries. the Motto Falsus in Uno , Falsus in Omnibus should be pinned to the wall of newsrooms if they want respect.
My significant other has NYT news texts sent to he I Phone, free.
M E ==> “the number of journalists in newsrooms in New Zealand has been seriously cut ” … this is true almost everywhere — print journalists scramble for jobs and newspapers lay them off in droves.
You are also right about journalists “lightly re-writing” stories from sources…especially on science topics where they stories are produced from institutional press releases without much thought.
Reason site article:
Over-Regulation Is Making Us More Vulnerable to Disease
Regulatory precaution, not rising temperatures, is the main driver for the increase in vector-borne disease.
Ronald Bailey|May. 8, 2018
“the increase in vector-borne illnesses identified by the CDC says much more about how the proliferation of regulatory barriers is slowing the development and deployment of modern technologies to prevent the spread of disease.”
http://reason.com/blog/2018/05/08/vector-borne-diseases-climate-change-and?utm_medium=email
Roger ==> Thanks for the link to Bailey’s piece. I’ll be doing a follow-up essay and will include Bailey’s opinion.