Desert Locust Plague In Africa - Another Offshoot Of Climate Change That Threatens Food Security For Millions

African in midst of locust swarm. Close up of the desert locusts gobbling food.

The recent news in The Wall Street Journal of the desert locust plague in Africa and neighboring nations is deeply concerning.  Mainly because we know it will affect the food security of millions, and is also another offshoot of climate change. 

In Kenya, police facing the country’s largest outbreak in 70 years have actually fired machine guns and tear gas into swarms in an effort to prevent them from consuming fields. (The original methods that used to work was banging om=n metal buckets.)  Meanwhile, Ethiopia is spraying pesticide from small planes to displace hovering throngs, though swarms have forced passenger jets in the region to make emergency landings.

In Eritrea and Djibouti, teams numbering in the hundreds are chasing swarms with hand-held pesticide pumps and truck-mounted sprayers.  The creatures are shown in the accompanying images as well as a map  (below)

showing the extent of the current plague and the nations affected by the infestation.

For reference, we know desert locusts are the most devastating of all locust species and can consume their weight in food each day. Swarms potentially containing hundreds of millions of insects each can travel over 90 miles a day; a swarm the size of Manhattan can consume as much food in a day as the population of the New York tri-state area.  This according to UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) locust expert Keith Cressman. Some swarms are far bigger..

If the outbreak isn’t controlled and conditions remain favorable for breeding, it could reach 30 countries in Africa and Asia,  Added  Guleid Artan, the climate prediction director at East Africa’s Intergovernmental Authority on Development, quoted in the WSJ piece:

"This is a more serious emergency than we had earlier anticipated. More locust swarms are entering northern Kenya daily and at this rate they could soon spread into Uganda and South Sudan.”

How is the latest locust plague related to climate change? 

We know extreme weather is behind the infestation, given that East Africa experienced abnormally heavy rains late last year.  These caused flooding of regions that are normally semi-arid. Such conditions are favorable for locust breeding, and the hives can grow substantially if not disrupted.  This itself is a challenge in cash-strapped countries contending with insurgencies and other security challenges. Continued breeding in some areas is already deepening the crisis.

Swarms entered Kenya in late December from Somalia, where security challenges had left a large breeding area uncontrolled. When the swarms crossed the border, relief officials said, residents in the Kenyan county of Wajir started shouting, whistling and drumming to scare the insects away.

The efforts forced the initial swarm to retreat. But a day later, larger swarms returned, clouding the sky. Police units fired tear gas and bullets but the locusts didn’t disperse. Locusts have continued to spread; this week, the swarms moved to around 90 miles east of the capital, Nairobi, alarming the region’s corn and fruit growers.

John Phillips- suggests using sound as a weapon.

What can be done now to control the pests?  Obviously machine guns won't work as the bullets will mostly miss the dodgy critters.  But when I spoke with Bajan biologist John Phillips (a former colleague of mine at Harrison College) he suggested high -pitched sound might be used on the beasties.  According to Phillips:

"It may require some tweaking to get just the right frequency, but a loudspeaker mounted to a generator machine that can produce and sustain such a sound  might do the trick  - and disperse the pests, sparing the indigenous crops. If that doesn't work maybe incorporate them into the human food chain.  They're loaded with protein, after all. "

However, I don't believe even 50 million hungry Africans would have the appetite to eat these crusty critters - especially in swarms.  Just saying.  Phillips' other (sound) remedy may be worth a try given that right now aerial spraying is the only effective method to reduce locust numbers, according to the U.N.,  However, it is expensive and dangerous in areas where there are militants operating, and has thus far covered less than a third of affected areas, according to East Africa’s Intergovernmental Authority on Development.

In Ethiopia, Africa’s second-most populous nation, locusts have invaded around 700 square miles of cropland, pastures and forests, in the country’s largest infestation this century. Less than 10% of the affected area has been sprayed, according to FAO data.  Ethiopia and Kenya need at least two more spray planes, while no such control measures have been possible in war-afflicted Somalia.

Whatever the solution or response it needs to be done soon. If unchecked, the locust swarms could grow by 500 times by June, when drier weather is expected to slow breeding, according to the FAO.  By then, millions of Africans could be starving. 

5.0 (And Higher) GPAs In High School - or College? Preposterous Nonsense!

John Phillips, left, taught Advanced level Biology and Chemistry at Harrison College for twenty years. Andy Haynes, recently retired Chair of Physics Dept, taught Advanced Level Physics. Both acknowledged that any grades in the 4.0 plus range are total bollocks.

Kyle Kashuv, alleged to have had a 5.345 grade point average at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school, in Parkland, FL.


When I recently discussed the explosion of  ultra high GPAs in U.S. high schools with former colleagues at Harrison College, most were in sheer disbelief.  They admitted there is no way in hell any student, no matter how bright he or she believes,  could score over 100%  in any of their Advanced level courses. And certainly not the equivalent percentage to a 5.345 overall  GPA, i.e. as gun supporter Kyle Kashuv reportedly did at Parkland,  Florida's Marjory Stoneman Douglas High.

When I spoke with Andy Haynes, former HC Physics dept. chair 2 years ago,  he said the path to such outlandish "untethered from reality" GPAs and grades began soon after U..S. schools implemented AP classes and honors programs in earnest.  According to Haynes:  "They somehow believed because a student was enrolled in some honors course or was taking AP classes he was entitled to be marked at a much higher 'gear' than other students.  Of course, that's foolishness!"

Haynes pointed out the similarities between AP classes and Advanced level courses in Bim while also noting that most students in the latter don't even attain a highest mark of 80.  That's because: a) classes are marked on a much less expansive scale, i.e. NO student is expected to even come close to perfection irrespective of which course level, and b)  the level of course work was far too rigorous to be earning "super" marks, i.e. in excess of traditional academic norms - in this case exceeding a highest level of 100% or a 4.0 GPA.

Both Haynes and retired Biology lecturer John Phillips (20 years at HC)  agreed with me that a supra 4.0 GPA can only be obtained in an academic environment in which standard Gaussian grade distributions are ignored in favor of a confected alternative. This is  given that an exam deemed proper for a specific  level -  whether a 3rd year Harvard course in astrophysics- OR a 2nd year Harrison College Course in Advanced level Physics - should possess considerable discriminatory power.  

So, even in a class of 30 Harvard  astrophysics over-achievers (or 25 HC Chemistry or Physics A-Level counterparts)  it ought to be possible to separate out the 10 percent or so who demonstrate peak excellence and really merit A's. This as opposed to having such an absurdly easy test that 40 percent or more get A's off it.   Nor should anyone achieve grades or marks (using "weighted"schemes) that "escape academic gravity".  That is,  in excess of the upper limit of a standard Gaussian grading curve, whether 4.0 or 100 %.

As I have argued in previous posts, the lack of discriminatory power in grading and the level of difficulty of coursework, assignments automatically lends itself to overly generous American high school marking schemes.  In the case of 4.0 -plus GPAs  it is a result of  systemic grade inflation by virtue of awarding honors (or AP students) a significantly much higher potential GPA (one student posting on Reddit claimed an 8.0 GPA) than their non-AP, non-Honors course pursuing peers.   This is done via so-called "weighting".

For example, under one high school's current weighting scheme (defined in its Student Handbook) , a standard unweighted 'A' tallies a GPA of 4.0 (93-96% range)  while  an "honors" weight translates to 5.33 and an AP weight to 6.33.   Averaging out the latter, and even with lower grades (an honors 'B' gets 4.33 and an AP B gets 5.33)   leads to the inflated GPA.  (This is a prime reason HC does not use grade point averages in performance evaluations, only percentages achieved.)

The reasoning is that if the courses are much more difficult at that level, then the upper limit of the marks or GPA needs to be weighted higher.  To which Messrs. Haynes and Phillips have offered: "Nonsense! You score at the same level with the same maximum. No extra margins. If a kid maxes out tests all the time then it's clear your tests, homework are too easy!"

Both then referred to the Advanced-level courses at HC which are equivalent to 1st, 2nd year university level and for which no weighted grades are allotted. Students earn what they earn and on a regular marking scheme.

At Harrison College,  for example, anything below 50 % was an F, no arguments. Grades from 50-60 rated a D mark, from 61-70 a C, and From 71-80 a B. Marks higher than 80 earned an A but virtually no student attained a 93 % the usual starting point for an A in the U.S. The reason is that exams at HC are genuinely difficult - so much so that even the 'cream of the crop' will seldom if ever score 100%

Some examples of  A-level physics (P) and Biology (B)problems from past HC exam papers:

1) (P) Certain meteorites (tektites) found on Earth have a composition identical with that of lunar granite. It is thought that they may be the debris from a volcanic eruption on the Moon. The graphic shown (which is not to scale) shows how the gravitational potential between the surface of the Moon and the surface of the Earth varies along the line of centers.:



At the point P the gravitational potential is a maximum.

(a)By considering the separate contributions of the Earth and the Moon to the gravitational potential, explain qualitatively why the graph has a maximum and why the curve is asymmetrical.

(b) State how the resultant gravitational force on the tektite at any point between the Moon and the Earth can be deduced from the diagram.

(c) When a tektite is at P the gravitational force on it due to the Moon and Earth are F_M and F_E, respectively. Hence, find the value of x/y, where x and y are the distances of P from the center of the Moon and the center of the Earth.

(d) If a tektite is to reach the Earth, it must be projected from the volcano on the Moon with a certain minimum speed, v_o.  Making use of appropriate values from the diagram, find this minimum speed. Explain your reasoning.

(e) Discuss very briefly whether a tektite will reach the Earth’s surface with a speed less than, equal to or greater than the speed of projection. (Neglect atmospheric resistance).

Data: Mass of Moon  = 7.4 x 10²² kg,

Mass of Earth = 6.0 x 10²⁴ kg.

2) (P) Compare the maximum velocities of a simple pendulum bob of mass m (= 0.1 kg) if an experiment in evaluating energy change is conducted on both Mars and Earth at the same time, for the same deflection angle Θ and length, L = 1.0 m. (Take the acceleration of gravity on Earth as 9.8 N/kg,and on Mars as 3.7 N/kg) Compare also the potential energy in each case. Why or why not would these be different? (Take the deflection angle Θ = 15 degrees in each experiment.)


3) (B) a) The mutation rate for human albinism is u = 0.00001. (e.g. 1 in every 100,000). If the equilibrium frequency q = 0.01, what is the reduction in fitness?

b)Blatella Germanica, the German cockroach,  has the following identified alleles:
D- resistance to the pesticide dieldrin
d- non-resistance

After some defined time, the population exhibits the following three genotypes: DD, Dd and dd

If over time, each dd and Dd roach produces one offspring, and each DD produces TWO, then find:

a) the relative fitness for the DD roaches
b) the relative fitness for the Dd roaches
c) the relative fitness for the dd roaches

4) (B)Over successive generations of German roaches it can be shown that the gene frequency of the deleterious allele will be decreased by:

-Dq = - spq / (1 – sq)²

where p is the gene frequency for the favored allele ( = 0.60)

If it reproduces at a ratio of 3:2 relative to the disadvantaged allele., use this information to find:

i) The gene frequency (q) of the disadvantaged allele for the roach, and thence, the magnitude of -Dq.

ii) The values of p and q when:     -Dq = -0.07

State any assumptions made.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

While we can certainly agree the Barbadian and U.S. systems are different in key ways, it is clear the latter - from many points of view - is simply too generous, and gives exalted or exaggerated grades and marks for students. I warrant if they were suddenly put into the Bajan system their marks, GPAs would crash back to Earth in two heart beats. 

Glyphosate in Cereals: You Can Trace It To The GMO Crops Spawned By Monsanto

John Phillips: Barbadian Bio-geneticist and nutrition specialist, links the glyphosate in cereals to GMO -based foods.


Barely four years ago,  a much publicized letter was put out by dozens of worried scientists, physicians. The letter began by stating:

"We the undersigned scientists, medical professionals, and researchers are writing to urge the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency not to register a double herbicide mix of 2,4- D and glyphosate - the 'Enlist DUO weed killer"

In the letter all the probable health risks were detailed, as noted in the first paragraph. In terms of the horrors of glyphosate and how it wreaks havoc on foods, I already discussed this in a previous post, including how consumption of glyphosate not only led to cancers by Alzheimer's disease (thanks to research by long time bio-geneticist John Phillips)  See e.g.   http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2014/03/alzheimers-epidemic-fro-eating-gmo.html

In that post I quoted  Mr. Phillips:

"Among other toxins and other health-disrupting contaminants, GMO foods contain glyphosate, a horrifically destructive chemical that saps nutrients from foods and quite literally makes them toxic to consume."

To the(then) FDA's credit it withdrew approval of 'Enlist DUO' in November, 2015. However the use of Roundup and glyphosate has continued unrelentingly and we know::

 - Seventy to Eighty percent of the foods we eat today contain GMOs.

- There are 1.1 billion pounds of pesticides used per year, primarily on GMO crops - because those crops are designed to survive the poisons.

 According to the January 2016 issue of the  Bulletin from 'Food & Water Watch' :

"GMO ingredients are hidden in 70 percent of processed food in this country. This is only a 'best guess'  because no one knows for sure as they are not labeled. Also, very little is known of the long term effects of what GMOs can do to your health because they've not been properly tested. But what facts we do have are alarming."

The Bulletin then references:

"Real lab rats fed GMOs have suffered kidney and liver damage, cancerous tumors and even premature death."

Wonder why so many people are now needing kidney and liver transplants? These hidden GMOs  may be one huge contributing factor.

This is now germane as the new food scare concerning excessive glyphosate found in a number of cereals has materialized.   But the corporate media failed to note the cereals were only a subset of the popular foods affected, all of them traced to GMOs or to excessive application of glyphosate on conventional crops. .   Independent testing on an array of popular American food products by the San Francisco-based Anresco lab found many samples contained residue levels of the weed killer glyphosate far in excess of safe thresholds.

 This led the nonprofit organization behind the testing to call for corporate and regulatory action to address consumer safety concerns. (Though the FDA routinely tests foods for other pesticide residues, it never tested for glyphosate until this year. The testing for glyphosate residues was recently suspended, however, under the orders of resident Trumpies committed to deregulation, i.e. removal of citizen protections.

To conduct its test Anresco Lab  used liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), a method widely considered by the scientific community and regulators as the most reliable for analyzing glyphosate residues.  The findings were shocking and as Mr. Phillips told me in an email, ought to "scare the socks off any American that consumes them".  Mainly because of possible liver and kidney issues, including cancers.

The Anresco Lab tests were done on 29 foods commonly found on grocery store shelves. Excess glyphosate residues were found in General Mills’ Cheerios at 1,125.3 parts per billion (ppb), in Kashi soft-baked oatmeal dark chocolate cookies at 275.57 ppb, and in Ritz Crackers at 270.24 ppb, according to the report. Different levels were found in Kellogg’s Special K cereal, Triscuit Crackers (a Janice favorite) and several other products.

The nonprofit behind the report noted that concerns about glyphosate comes as research shows that Roundup can cause liver and kidney damage in rats at only 0.05 ppb, and additional studies have found that levels as low as 10 ppb can have toxic effects on the livers of fish. The groups criticized U.S. regulators for setting an acceptable daily intake (ADI) at for glyphosate at much higher levels than other countries consider safe. The United States has set the ADI for glyphosate at 1.75 milligrams per kilogram of bodyweight per day (mg/kg/bw/day) while the European Union has set it at 0.3 mg per kg/ bw/day.

Question: Why is the European threshold nearly SIX times lower than that set by the U.S.? Well, because European states care more about the health, welfare of their citizens!  Thus they are more likely to adhere to the  precautionary principle  so that it is not anti-GMO activists who must prove the toxicity of the suspect culprit food, but rather the GMO producers (like Monsanto) to prove their products are safe.

Meanwhile, Monsanto has said repeatedly that there are no legitimate safety concerns regarding glyphosate when it is used as intended, and that toxicological studies in animals have demonstrated that glyphosate does not cause cancer, birth defects, DNA damage, nervous system effects etc.  But let us make it clear here that a multinational corporation can say anything for PR sake.  That does not meet the standard of proof.

Glyphosate is under particular scrutiny now because last year the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified it as a probable human carcinogen. Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide and is the key ingredient in Monsanto Co.’s branded Roundup.  The trick mastered by the GMO crop producers has been to make them "Roundup ready" so that the pesticide and now its glyphosate component are integrated into the very crops and hence the cereals from which they are obtained.  Further, these GMO crops can also be additionally treated, sprayed with the offending chemical  making them even more toxic to humans.

Beyond the usual GMO offenders (corn, soybeans, sugar beets, canola) we also know glyphosate is sprayed on many conventional crops such as wheat, oats and barley. In all glyphosate is used in some form on nearly 70 food crops, and all of them with levels far in excess of what the EU allows for its own citizens.  

 A further warning shot for Monsanto  transpired  last week with an award of $289 m to a terminally ill school groundskeeper (Dwayne Johnson) . With this award the miscreants at Monsanto ought ot be very worried given another 475 cases are pending against them. See e, g.

https://usrtk.org/pesticides/mdl-monsanto-glyphosate-cancer-case-key-documents-analysis/

Again, we know Monsanto's protestations and those of their hired gun whore "scientists" don't add up to diddly or squat.  We know this because the PR playbook to make poisons, toxic crap look good was exposed over 23 years ago, e.g.

Toxic Sludge Is Good For You | PR Watch

Other points Mr. Phillips wished to have pointed out for emphasis: 
 

·         Independent research links glyphosate to cancer (sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and it has been deemed a probable human carcinogen by the World Health Organization’s team of international cancer experts. The childhood cancer rate is steadily rising and experts say that they don’t know why. Why are they not taking a closer look at these facts?

• Research also indicates that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor, which disrupts hormones and leads to reproductive problems, early onset puberty, obesity, diabetes, and some cancers. When it comes to endocrine disruptors, very small exposures are the most damaging, so “the dose makes the poison” mantra does not apply! 

*  Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum antibiotic killing the good bacteria in your gut. Poor gut health is linked to inflammation and a whole host of diseases. As GMOs laced with glyphosate are commonly fed to farm animals, this could very well be contributing to antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

It binds with vital nutrients in the soil (like iron, calcium, manganese, zinc) and prevents plants for taking them up. Glyphosate is thereby making food less nutritious.
 
As Mr. Phillips put it: Tell your readers they consume these foods at their own risk. If they don't wish to get kidney or liver cancer - such as struck down your youngest brother -  they had best avoid them. NO matter what the FDA, the EPA or your government says.


See also:

15 Health Problems Linked to Monsanto's Roundup - EcoWatch