DEAR READERS: The Amazon rainforest is one of the “lungs” of our planet, releasing oxygen and helping sequester atmospheric carbon, which combats global warming and climate change. The destruction of this vast forest and the demise of indigenous animal and plant species and peoples is criminal ecocide and genocide. But no government is standing up to stop Brazil, and other surrounding countries bent on short-term profits, from destroying the forest through logging, mining and burning. This is being done to clear land for growing soybeans, which are exported to feed livestock and poultry (undercutting U.S. producers) and to raise cattle for the beef-export market.

The U.S. government refuses to label any beef products sold in America with their country of origin. American multinational corporations, notably Cargill, have turned a blind eye on the soybean issue until recently, thanks to increased public pressure for environmentally responsible business practices and the efforts of nonprofit organizations like Mighty Earth.

According to environmental group One Green Planet, while the U.S. is technically the world’s largest beef producer, meatpacking companies from the second-largest country of origin -- Brazil -- are consolidating the industry. The U.S. National Beef Packing Company is now nearly 80% owned by the Brazilian company Marfrig Global Foods S.A. Of the four top meatpacking companies in the U.S., which collectively process roughly 74% of all beef in the country, Brazilian-owned companies control half of them.

Some critics say that reforms are too little, too late, but we can all make a difference in terms of our dietary choices. We can boycott beef products in general, and food products from Brazil in particular, at least when labels are in evidence.

The international priority of protecting biodiversity and of restoring natural ecosystems must take precedence over nationalistic, profit-driven industries that are ultimately detrimental to our health and to the common good -- as exemplified by President Trump’s weakening of the National Environmental Policy Act on July 15 and reported rollback of rules protecting clean air and water.

DEAR DR. FOX: How can I protect my dog from ticks without resorting to Bravecto and similar products? I worry about how toxic they might be to my dog. -- S.B., Tulsa, Oklahoma

DEAR S.B.: We should also be concerned about the environmental toxicity, and about the exposure of family members, especially children, petting animals treated with some of these insecticides. Several holistic veterinary practitioners are now advocating various essential oils to repel ticks, as I have been doing for decades, in order to avoid the risks of conventional petrochemical-derived insecticides.

Both the CDC and EPA recommend oil of lemon eucalyptus as a natural insect repellent for humans. (Note: “Lemon eucalyptus” is not approved for use in disease-endemic areas due to its lack of efficacy. In contrast, “oil of lemon eucalyptus” contains a much higher quantity of a substance called PMD, which provides highly effective mosquito protection and is approved for use in all disease-endemic areas.)

Mix six to eight drops of this essential oil in a quarter-cup of warm water and sponge this over your dog. It will remain effective as a repellant for a couple of hours. This is one of the essential oils detailed in the Animal Wellness magazine article “Natural Tick Repellants” (volume 22, issue 4, 2020) by Kyle Holgate. He reports the benefits of oil of lemon eucalyptus, and similar benefits from oil of turmeric, which, according to studies in the U.K., was comparable to insecticides such as DEET in its ability to repel ticks. He also notes that essential oil of geranium has been shown to repel ticks, especially Lone Star tick nymphs.

In addition, I would advise keeping dogs out of vegetation that can harbor ticks, and using a flea comb after going outdoors in grassy or wooded areas. Rake the comb through the dog’s fur, and especially look between the dog’s toes and around the ears where ticks can lodge.

VETS SEEK RECLASSIFICATION OF ‘BUNNY EBOLA’

Rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus type 2 (RHDV2) has been spreading in wild and domestic rabbits, hares and pikas throughout the Southwest, and veterinary epidemiologists say it’s only a matter of time before the virus is endemic throughout the U.S. A vaccine exists, but RHDV2 is still considered a foreign disease, making it both difficult and expensive to obtain the vaccine in the U.S., so the Association of Exotic Mammal Veterinarians is coordinating efforts to have the disease reclassified. (Tufts University, 7/13)

Dubbed “bunny Ebola” -- because the toll it takes on rabbits is as devastating as the toll the Ebola virus takes on humans -- the virus is not actually related to Ebola and does not affect humans, but it is carried easily on shoes and clothing. In rabbits, it destroys liver cells and causes lesions on the heart and lungs, as well as internal bleeding and death.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: A rise in zoonotic (animal-to-human) diseases is being driven by environmental degradation, according to a report by the United Nations Environment Program and the International Livestock Research Institute. The report cites rising demand for animal protein, intensive farming practices, exploitation of wildlife and climate change among key factors. The authors suggest adopting a One Health approach, which would unite public health, veterinary and environmental experts to respond to and prevent zoonotic disease outbreaks. (UN News, 7/6)

If preventive veterinary medicine had been applied in China and other countries to better monitor live animal markets and wild and domestic animal factory farms, in my professional opinion, this COVID-19 pandemic would have been much less likely to occur.

The COVID-19 pandemic has put in bold relief how the veterinary and medical professions, and associated public health services internationally, have failed to promote the first medicine: disease prevention. This responsibility has been corrupted by pecuniary interests and an increasingly distorted, dispirited and mechanistic perception of health, which is not simply the absence of disease. The human medical profession may be faulted for not engaging effectively in the politics of human overpopulation and ecologically damaging and unhealthful dietary choices. But many, along with veterinarians and other health care professionals and biological scientists, are rallying under the banner of One Health. This concept is not new, and enjoyed stronger endorsement and support in decades prior to the advent of clinical specialization in human and veterinary medicine. Steps to achieving the end point of this concept are well articulated by the One Health Initiative at onehealthinitiative.com.

DEAR DR. FOX: I have a rare Nebelung cat -- a rescue, who was named Smokey Robinson before I got him, much to my delight! I have had him for about eight years now.

I usually take him to a local vet for both grooming and his yearly shots. The price of both services has increased dramatically over the years -- grooming went from $25 to $65, for example. I don’t really mind this, as I assume the groomer is being paid more (as she should be, in my opinion). However, the price of his rabies and distemper shots has gone from about $30 each to $70 each over the years.

Our local Petco offers these shots for $30 each, which better fits my budget, as I am now retired and on a fixed income.

As the vet does not actually examine Smokey at shot time -- the last exam ran $110 -- are the actual vaccines identical in effectiveness? I don’t want to put him in any medical danger by “skimping” on these important items, but it is much better for my budget to pay $59 for these shots than $140 (which I assume will go up again this year, as it has every year).

The vet is what I would call a “high-end” operation with a large building, boarding and training services, etc., so their overhead is obviously larger than a part-time service offered by the store.

Should I feel safe taking Smokey to the pet store rather than the vet so I can save significantly on these shots? -- R.O., Boca Raton, Florida

DEAR R.O.: You do have a rare breed of cat -- there is some inbreeding in their creation.

I would only get the anti-rabies shot, which is mandatory under the law, and no other vaccinations if your cat is indoor-only and not exposed to possibly diseased cats outdoors. (In many instances, annual “boosters” are not needed; a blood-titer test can be done to be sure, but they are costly.) If other vaccinations are needed because your cat does go outdoors, have them given three to four weeks after the rabies shot. Multiple vaccinations at the same time can stress the immune system and result in adverse vaccine reactions, such as so-called vaccinosis.

Ideally a wellness exam would take place before any vaccination, but with many people financially constrained such as yourself, your Petco choice makes sense.

I worry that the groomers may insist on all other vaccinations being up-to-date. I protest this protocol when the cats are indoors all the time and the grooming facility is well-sanitized. (Using ultraviolet light at night to sterilize surfaces is a wise way to reduce potential feline and canine virus contamination.) Blood tests showing your cat is negative for feline leukemia and immunodeficiency virus infections are essential protocols for all cat care and boarding facilities.

INSECT-BORNE VIRUS CONCERNS

Iowa health officials confirmed the state’s first case of Heartland virus this year, as well as a case of mosquito-transmitted West Nile virus. The cases should serve as a reminder to prevent tick and mosquito bites, said veterinarian Ann Garvey with the Iowa Department of Public Health. Symptoms and signs of Heartland virus disease are often similar to those of other tickborne illnesses, such as ehrlichiosis or anaplasmosis. (Full story: Associated Press, 6/17)

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: A pandemic is defined as “an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people” (“A Dictionary of Epidemiology,” Oxford University Press, 2001). So clearly, international cooperation is vital in helping identify, monitor and prevent the spread of highly infectious diseases from country to country.

But now the United States is withdrawing from the one international organization where many American specialists are employed: the World Health Organization. On July 8, the U.S. formally notified the United Nations that it is withdrawing from the WHO. Global-health experts warn that the move puts at risk everything from polio eradication to pandemic preparedness. Much is uncertain: The WHO’s founding constitution has no provision for countries to withdraw.

“This is the end of an era of United States global-health leadership,” says public-health legal scholar Lawrence Gostin. (Read more at nature.com in the article “What a U.S. exit from the WHO means for COVID-19 and global health.”) Such isolationism is wrong-minded, putting not only American citizens at risk, but people in other countries -- as well as animals wild and domestic, which may become infected with, or be reservoirs for, pandemic diseases.

The British social critic George Orwell, in his seminal book “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” coined the term “doublethink” as a process of indoctrination whereby the subject is expected to accept as true that which is clearly false, or to simultaneously accept two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct -- often in contradiction of one’s own memories or sense of reality.

One illustration of doublethink is President Trump’s repeated assertion that if we had fewer COVID-19 tests being done, there would be fewer cases. The truth is that the cases exist, whether they are documented or not. The failure of the U.S. government to stop this pandemic cannot be papered over by obfuscation, doublethink and promises of soon-to-come vaccines. Trump’s assertion that 99% of coronavirus cases are “harmless” ignores the fact that asymptomatic people can infect and kill others, especially those with preexisting conditions.

DEAR DR. FOX: I had an animal rescue for 15 years. In addition to doing adoptions and caring for unadoptable critters, I also advised pet owners. People often asked the question about how to know when it’s time to say goodbye. Here’s how I would answer: ”Consider whether your pet is still living the life of (a dog, a cat, a rabbit, whatever). Get a little calendar and every day, mark whether your pet is having a good day, a bad day or a so-so day. When there are more bad days than good days, it’s time.”

People find this comforting. It gives them something they can measure. Another advantage of the calendar is that it helps prevent the “Was it too soon?” second-guessing that torments people. They can look back at the calendar and remind themselves that it was the right time. -- P.B., Memphis, Tennessee

DEAR P.B.: I think your advice will be helpful to many people who may otherwise have regrets and feel guilty having their animal companion euthanized. Keeping a record of daily quality of life can help avoid memory-suppression of bad days, which is part of our own self-protection from the burden of empathy and remembering just how long an animal had been suffering. Desensitization to how much an animal is suffering day after day might then be avoided.

DOGS AT RISK FROM TOXIC LAKES

With climate change, ponds and lakes across the U.S. are warming up, creating ideal conditions for algae to flourish. Of special concern is blue-green algae called Cyanobacteria, which produces a toxin lethal to dogs, and probably wildlife, who drink the water. It can also make people ill if it gets into their water supply. Runoff from fertilized lawns, gardens and agricultural crops, along with farmed animal manure, feed the algae, creating toxic blooms. Scientists are finding nutrients (as well as microplastics) in windborne dust precipitating over remote lakes where algal blooms are being reported.

Keep your dog out of the water if you have no assurance that it is safe, and if your dog does go for an off-leash dunk -- water-loving breeds like Labradors in particular -- hose your dog down thoroughly when you get home. Also, never let your dog drink from standing water. Take water and a bowl with you if you are going for a long walk or hike.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)