this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
717 points (98.6% liked)

Not The Onion

15221 readers
2941 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A controversial proposal from U.S Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to let bird flu naturally spread through poultry farms is raising alarms among scientists -- who say the move could be inhumane and dangerous.

(page 4) 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

not paywalled for me: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/18/health/kennedy-bird-flu.html

preserve the birds, that are immune to it

I still don't like the everyone get measles version of this.

willing to really try this on a pilot as we build the safe perimeter around them to see if there is a way forward with immunity

"pilot with safe perimeter" seems reasonable, as long as safe perimeter works. Bird flu is endemic already, afaik. = "will remain a constant presence". It only makes sense for domestic chickens/fowls. It is not endemic yet in other animals/humans, and maximum quick containment seems like only approach to keep it that way.

Bird flu not being a problem in countries that have smaller flocks, seems a transformative solution.

I didn't like the rebuttals in my link above. One of them says that the best thing for you/chickens is "to have a central authority decide to cull you minimizing for a balance of cost and your pain, instead of giving you the chance/choice of either surviving, or far more likely, suffering before death." I would choose the 2nd option, but can only do so under central authority that has already decided what it prefers.

[–] YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I can't read this because fuck nyt, but wtf @

I didn't like the rebuttals in my link above. One of them says that the best thing for you/chickens is "to have a central authority decide to cull you minimizing for a balance of cost and your pain, instead of giving you the chance/choice of either surviving, or far more likely, suffering before death." I would choose the 2nd option, but can only do so under central authority that has already decided what it prefers.

Like what? Who is saying this to the person that is "you" in this scenario? Wtf? Absolute fucking non starter. I'm not choosing shit, fuck that we're not doing that.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments