logo
Opinion - Bird Flu is far from over: Why the worst could be yet to come

Opinion - Bird Flu is far from over: Why the worst could be yet to come

Yahoo16 hours ago
The May Consumer Price Index reflected another drop in egg prices — something President Trump and other officials from the administration have misleadingly touted as a sign that their moves to reduce the cost of groceries are working.
While the price decrease — albeit slight — provides welcome relief on grocery bills as children start to raid the fridge during summer break, egg prices are still 41 percent higher than they were a year ago.
And the truth is, under the policies followed by both the Biden and Trump administrations, those prices will likely go back up.
The main cause of the spike in egg prices has been the three-year bird flu outbreak. The U.S., under both Biden and Trump, has failed to drive an effective response to this pandemic. While Trump promised a change in direction, the USDA's new response to bird flu can be summed up with one contrast: more money for big corporations, less money for scientists.
We were highly critical of the Biden administration's weak and insufficient response to bird flu, arguing that it was too slow and too deferential to industry concerns.
When Trump's Agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, announced she would break with their approach and commit $1 billion to the crisis — including $100 million to develop vaccines for poultry — it seemed like a potential turning point.
Less than two weeks later, Rollins flipped. After 'speaking with industry leaders,' she announced vaccines were off the table. Instead, she would focus on 'repopulation' — a term the industry invented to allow the government to bail it out not once, but twice.
Meanwhile, USDA staff who were actually monitoring the outbreak are reportedly among those being laid off by Trump's DOGE team. The meat industry's iron grip on agricultural policy has clearly survived into the second Trump administration.
The stubborn, ongoing spread of bird flu has driven up egg prices and the chances of a deadly human pandemic. The USDA's policy on containing it has been dictated by what's best for the profits of big chicken and egg companies and has entirely ignored the agency's other responsibility: to protect the public health and economy. It is not working.
Under Biden, the USDA's strategy was based on the hope that the outbreak could be contained to a few locations and that the industry, as a whole, did not need to make any changes.
The USDA asked meat and egg companies to report any infections and then kill the entire flock in order to 'stamp out' the virus before it could spread. To encourage compliance, the USDA paid these companies 'indemnity' payments — essentially bailouts that covered both the cost of the lost birds and the killing operations.
This plan has been an expensive and spectacular failure.
Despite $1.25 billion in bailout payments to egg and poultry producers, the virus is spreading faster than ever. Three years into this most recent outbreak, almost 40 percent of the infections in egg-laying hens have happened in just the last few months, according to the bailout data, including the emergence of a new bird flu strain, D1.1.
This is not surprising. These taxpayer bailouts have removed any market incentive for these companies to behave responsibly. Bird flu continues to spread quickly through the U.S. farm system because that system is inherently a viral playground.
Birds are kept in disgusting, crowded conditions that encourage viral spread. The USDA has refused to mandate any changes to these conditions, nor has it forced companies to take any meaningful preventive measures.
As a result, the largest egg and meat companies, like Jennie-O, Herbuck's and Cal-Maine Foods, have received huge payments. Jennie-O has received the most bailout money, roughly $120 million, since the beginning of the outbreak. The brand is a division of Hormel Foods, which made $1.1 billion in profit in 2024.
In fact, our investigation revealed that the government has paid out at least $365 million to repeat offenders. As of December, USDA data shows that 67 farms had H5N1 outbreaks twice or more, with 19 reporting three or more separate occurrences of reinfection.
Supposedly, the USDA has coupled these bailouts with new requirements for companies to implement 'biosecurity measures,' such as employees showering before and after work. But there is zero practical enforcement.
The USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service recently admitted that its 'audit' process was worthless — it, thus far, involved no visual inspection and allowed companies to certify their own compliance by filling out a paper-based audit form. Unsurprisingly, no company has ever failed this so-called audit despite the rapid spread of disease.
A new rule was released in December that was meant to increase the rigor of inspections, but the rule still allows for exceptions and 'virtual' inspections, with the company controlling what inspectors see.
In fact, the majority of farms don't face any safety requirements at all.
Under a loophole, industrial-scale farms are deceptively classified as 'small' producers and are exempt from implementing any biosecurity plans whatsoever before getting bailout money. But the exception applies to any farm with fewer than 75,000 laying hens, which is well over 99 percent of egg farms, housing about 77 million hens.
The Trump administration came into power as sharp critics of the Biden bird flu strategy. But Rollins is now saying that the Trump administration will not only continue indemnities for the mass culling approach, but they will double down on this policy.
She announced $400 million for continued indemnities plus new payments to producers for 'repopulation,' meaning buying new birds, even though companies were already paid once for the value of the destroyed birds.
Recent reporting indicates these payouts will come at the expense of money for local food banks and schools that would have supported smaller, healthier farms.
Rollins is now also following industry talking points on opposing vaccines for our poultry supply. Mass vaccination has been successful at limiting the spread in other countries, such as France, and the United Nations has encouraged vaccinations in its recent call for governments to step up their response.
But the industry has fought hard against it here, because vaccinated birds often cannot be exported to other countries, and the industry's profits are dependent on the export market.
The Trump administration's rapid capitulation to industry pressure proves what critics like us have long argued: Our food safety system is fundamentally broken. No administration, Republican or Democratic, has shown the political will to challenge the meat industry's destructive practices.
Real leadership requires fundamentally reforming the industrial animal agriculture system that makes pandemics inevitable and is making all of us less healthy and less safe.
Andrew deCoriolis is the executive director of Farm Forward. Gail Hansen is a public health veterinary expert, an independent consultant and former state epidemiologist and state public health veterinarian for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump visits Iowa to kick off America's 250th anniversary, reassure farmers on trade
Trump visits Iowa to kick off America's 250th anniversary, reassure farmers on trade

Yahoo

time21 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump visits Iowa to kick off America's 250th anniversary, reassure farmers on trade

By Nandita Bose WASHINGTON (Reuters) -President Donald Trump travels to Iowa on Thursday to kick off celebrations marking America's 250th anniversary next year and to tout recent trade and legislative actions to heartland voters who helped propel his return to the White House. Trump will deliver a campaign-style speech at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines, a familiar stop for presidential candidates in the early primary state. Trump won Iowa's 2024 Republican caucuses by a historically large margin and carried the state by 13 percentage points in the general election. His latest visit comes ahead of a Friday deadline he set for Congress to pass his sweeping tax and spending legislation, a cornerstone of his second-term domestic agenda that touches everything from immigration to energy policy. In remarks mixing patriotism and policy, Trump will aim to reassure Iowa's voters that his administration is defending their interests and delivering tangible results, according to a person with knowledge of the speech. Trump's trade policies have whipsawed agricultural communities in Iowa, creating economic uncertainty and testing loyalties. Iowa farmers have been hit hard, especially with China's retaliatory tariffs slashing soybean exports and prices. In a Truth Social post on Tuesday announcing his trip, Trump called Iowa "one of my favorite places in the world." "I'll also tell you some of the GREAT things I've already done on Trade, especially as it relates to Farmers. You are going to be very happy with what I say," Trump said. At recent Republican town halls in Iowa, tensions flared as farmers and constituents pressed congressional leaders, including Republican Senator Chuck Grassley, to push back against Trump's retaliatory tariffs. Some Republicans also worry that deep cuts to the Medicaid health program in their sweeping tax bill will hurt the party's prospects in the 2026 midterm elections. Trump has made several memorable trips to the Iowa State Fairgrounds. In 2015, the reality TV star and presidential candidate gave children rides on his personal helicopter as he aimed to overshadow Democratic rival Hillary Clinton. In 2023, Trump's private jet buzzed low over the crowds in another flashy power move, stealing the spotlight from primary rival Ron DeSantis as he campaigned on the ground below.

Trump showed moral clarity on Iran. He should do the same for Ukraine.
Trump showed moral clarity on Iran. He should do the same for Ukraine.

Washington Post

time21 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

Trump showed moral clarity on Iran. He should do the same for Ukraine.

On June 19, facing pressure to join in Israel's bombing campaign against Iran, President Donald Trump announced, 'I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' Cynics assumed this was yet another example of the president putting off a difficult decision indefinitely. 'TACO,' some said, employing a popular acronym for 'Trump Always Chickens Out.' The doubters were wrong. Two days later, U.S. bombs and missiles hit three Iranian nuclear sites. Though there has been much debate over just how much damage the Iranian nuclear program suffered, at least one thing now seems clear: Trump meant it went he said that Iran, a state sponsor of terrorism that has vowed 'death to Israel,' would not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. If only the president had the same moral clarity about stopping the barbaric war being waged in Ukraine by Iran's despotic ally, Russia. When it comes to that conflict, however, Trump appears to be engaged in exactly the kind of irresolute policy that many (wrongly) suspected he was pursuing with Iran. On May 28, Trump was asked by a reporter whether Russian dictator Vladimir Putin wants to end the war. He replied: 'I can't tell you that, but I'll let you know in about two weeks. … We're going to find out whether or not he's tapping us along or not, and if he is, we'll respond a little bit differently.' More than a month later, Trump isn't doing anything differently even as Russia shows no sign of ending its aggression. Every week seems to bring fresh reports of Russian airstrikes on Ukrainian cities that are described as the largest since the war began. Over the weekend, Russia fired 537 aerial weapons, including 60 missiles, at Ukraine, primarily at civilian targets. Some Ukrainians are now going to sleep with whistles around their necks to make it easier to find them if they are buried under rubble by a Russian attack. Trump has repeatedly insisted that, if he had been president in 2022, Putin would never have invaded Ukraine. But since Trump returned to office this year, Putin's attacks have surged — and Trump hasn't done anything about it. Russia's summer offensive appears stalled, despite the country's large numerical advantage in troops, but Ukrainian cities are suffering more damage from Russian drone and missile strikes amid fears that Ukrainian air defenses are being depleted. In April, Trump beseeched Putin: 'Vladimir, STOP!' Vladimir hasn't stopped, yet Trump does not appear to be applying pressure to back up his words. Instead, at the Group of Seven summit in Canada recently, Trump complained about Russia's expulsion from the group. He apparently continues to speak regularly and cordially with Putin, who has been indicted as a war criminal by the International Criminal Court and is a pariah throughout the West. And the Trump administration continues to block legislation, with more than 80 sponsors, that would impose tariffs of 500 percent on any nations that buy Russia's energy products. Admittedly, there is a case to be made, as Post columnist Jim Geraghty recently noted, that this well-intentioned bill is impractical: Are we really willing to cut off all U.S. trade (which is what a 500 percent tariff would mean) with important international partners, including India, Turkey, Brazil, the European Union and South Korea, if they don't stop buying Russian energy? But it isn't as if Trump is doing anything else to turn up the heat on the Kremlin; since returning to office, he has not imposed any additional sanctions on Russia, thereby allowing existing sanctions to become less effective. Two other possible courses of action would be more effective and produce less collateral damage: providing Ukraine with badly needed air defense ammunition and other munitions while pressuring European countries to release to Ukraine the $300 billion in frozen Russian assets. Ukraine already produces about 40 percent of the weapons it uses on the front lines. With that influx of Russian funds, Ukraine could dramatically expand defense production and become more self-sufficient with weapons. That would send a strong signal to Putin that he might as well make a deal, because he is never going to achieve his objective of turning Ukraine into a Kremlin satrapy. Of even greater immediate impact would be additional deliveries of Patriot air defense interceptors. The Patriot is the most advanced air defense system in Ukraine and the Ukrainians' only effective means of shooting down ballistic missiles, but, more than a year after the last U.S. aid package was approved, Ukrainian stockpiles are dwindling. Last week, Trump said, 'We're going to see if we can make some available,' but there is no indication that his administration is doing so. Instead, the Pentagon this week halted further military aid, supposedly because U.S. stockpiles were running low. President Volodymyr Zelensky in recent months has done everything Trump wanted, from supporting an immediate ceasefire to signing a minerals deal with Washington. Putin would not even agree to a temporary ceasefire. And yet Trump is essentially punishing Ukraine and rewarding Russia. Having failed to end the Ukraine war in 24 hours — as he repeatedly promised on the campaign trail — Trump now seems ready to wash his hands of the conflict. He has hinted that he might step back from the frustrating peace talks, which would mean allowing Putin to wage war without repercussions. Trump has even compared the two sides to 'two young children fighting like crazy': 'Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.' Such comments suggest Trump is guilty of moral myopia about the war in Ukraine — quite a contrast to the moral clarity he displayed about the Iranian nuclear program. Ukraine and Russia are not toddlers squabbling on the playground over inconsequential stakes. Ukraine is a pro-Western democracy that is the victim of an unprovoked war of aggression launched by an anti-American dictator. There is no moral equivalence between the sides; the war is as pure an example of good vs. evil as the modern world has seen. If Russia wins, all of Europe will be endangered, and other aggressors such as China will be emboldened. That makes aid to Ukraine — leading to a peace settlement that safeguards its sovereignty — a moral and strategic imperative for the United States. Trump just doesn't get it, and Ukraine could wind up paying a heavy price for his shortsightedness.

Guard against market volatility in the second half with ‘boring' stocks, investor Jeff Kilburg  says
Guard against market volatility in the second half with ‘boring' stocks, investor Jeff Kilburg  says

CNBC

time22 minutes ago

  • CNBC

Guard against market volatility in the second half with ‘boring' stocks, investor Jeff Kilburg says

Investors may find "boring" stocks a safer bet heading into the second half of the year, according to Jeff Kilburg, founder and CEO of KKM Financial. Markets were plagued by heightened volatility at the end of the first quarter and the start of the second, as fear and uncertainty stemming from President Donald Trump's trade war spread. Stocks reached their lows of the year in early April, shortly after Trump announced his universal tariff policies. While stocks have recovered their losses since then — with the S & P 500 closing Wednesday 25% above its April closing low — Kilburg warned that volatility may not ease up for the reminder of 2025. In fact, he believes that the market is entering a new volatility regime and may continue to be sensitive to any type of geopolitical tensions. Kilburg pointed to the market's knee-jerk reaction to the Israel-Iran conflict as proof. "I think investor attention and needing to monitor your investments has never been more needed," he told CNBC in a recent interview. With volatility lingering at elevated levels, Kilburg believes that now is the time for investors to reposition themselves into the more defensive, blue-chip stocks that were sold off in April. "Some of these names that get no love on CNBC air waves, those are blue-chip industrial names that we've seen people tilt back into," he said. "The ripple effect that has happened after that really tumultuous couple of weeks is that people really want to own names that they know. They want to own names that they can touch and feel, and those are kind of the boring names." These more "boring," blue-chip stalwarts could help hedge against any upcoming uncertainty, Kilburg added, and may be why investors are again favoring industrial stocks. "That's why people have gotten a little more defensive, because honestly, we don't know what President Trump is going to say next. We don't know what his policy or ambition is next," he said. "Investors being uncertain of what shoe could potentially drop next, that has kind of made portfolios tilt more industrial, more defensive." Kilburg's top stock picks One name Kilburg likes that belongs to this category is Duke Energy . The electric and power stock has rallied nearly 9% this year, not including its 3.5% yield. Last week, Goldman Sachs upgraded its rating on Duke. "We raise Duke Energy from Neutral to Buy as the stock has lagged more defensive peers YTD and is making regulatory progress towards building significant generation that is not captured at current levels in our view," wrote analyst Carly Davenport. The bank's new price target of $132, lifted from $125, represents upside of approximately 13% from Duke Energy's Wednesday close. Another name Kilburg highlighted was Waste Management , which has gained 11% in 2025. Last month, Melius Research analyst Rob Wertheimer initiated coverage of the stock with a buy rating, highlighting its "stable growth in a chaotic world." "Despite the market's growing appreciation for the quality of these industry leaders, we think there's more outperformance to come in both the short and long run, from lower risk, less downside to earnings, and higher growth," he wrote. "While relative multiples are roughly in line with historical levels, we think the premium deserved now is larger than in the past." Kilburg also mentioned Visa , up TK% this year. In June, Mizuho upgraded the credit card issuer to an outperform rating from neutral. "We see more reason for optimism as the remaining cash-to-card runway in the U.S. is longer than previously expected (we est. true U.S. card penetration at ~75% vs. 80-90% consensus). This leaves room for another decade of solid top-line growth domestically," wrote Mizuho analyst Dan Dolev. "Plus, V's performance in Canada & Nordics offers evidence of above-PCE growth, even when card penetration is > 90%." In the same note, Dolev lifted his price target to $425 per share from $359. This updated forecast represents a TK% upside from Visa's Wednesday closing price. Other names Kilburg highlighted include Costco , Verizon , JPMorgan , Masco , CVS , Comcast , Nutrien and Sysco .

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store