The sudden demise of Indian vultures killed thousands of people | Hacker News Reader

The sudden demise of Indian vultures killed thousands of people

economist.com

168 pointssohkamyung53 comments

I remember that during the early nineties, when I was kid, I often used to see over a dozen vultures perched on my maternal grandparents’ terrace in New Delhi on summer evenings (I visited them only in summer). A few years later I noticed that I didn’t see them anymore and occasionally wondered why. Then years later I started seeing articles about Diclofenac killing vultures and then it clicked. Just thought I’d share.

All the vultures suddenly died because farmers began treating their animals with a new drug that was harmless to the animals, but which was deadly to vultures that ate animals who had been treated with it. After all the vultures died there was less efficient scavenging of dead animals, more polluted water, and more disease.

The delicate balance of Nature was upset.

> The delicate balance of Nature was upset.

Fascinating stuff. A subtle build on this that just struck me: "The delicate balance of Nature moved to a new equilibrium point that involved a lot more human deaths"

I think it's interesting because it strikes me that Nature is actually a pretty resilient system, it's just that a lot of its stable-states are hostile to human life, to varying degrees. Then again, maybe I'm painting too much of an anthropocentric picture.

I'd add a couple of points:

1. Nature isn't an 'equilibrium' and doesn't have 'stable states'. It's a constantly changing complex system that can produce catastrophic changes without any external triggers.

2. What people view as 'nature' is often itself a situation that humans have created. For example in this post the preexisting situation was vultures feeding on livestock, but the vultures weren't doing that before humans were around.

Also vulture were probably consuming other mammals before human replace most of them with livestock.

https://ourworldindata.org/wild-mammal-decline

> it's just that a lot of its stable-states are hostile to ~~human~~ life

FTFY. We humans are part of nature too.

FTFY: here’s a nature’s nature article on nature (pun intended) [0]. There’s 4 main definition which are exclusive to each others and guess what, your “fix” is within the same definition as GP:

> The whole universe, as it is the place, the source and the result of material phenomena (including man or at least man’s body)

Furthermore I think his point wasn’t about the definition of nature but instead going further on the classic argument “nature will be fine”. Of course universe will always be fine! But your descend may not be part of it. So yes, we should preserve the current equilibrium to preserve ourselves and that’s what this article is all about.

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-0390-y#Tab1

It is incredible how humans are incredibly resilient, but also very fragile.

The collective is resilient, it's individuals that perish.

The collective perishes, it's individuals that persist.

> "The delicate balance of Nature moved to a new equilibrium point that involved a lot more human deaths"

As OscarCunningham has pointed out, nature does not have a balance or an equilibrium. That's the concept of "evolution".

This drug (diclofenac) is partly covered in Arundhati Roy's novel "The Ministry of Utmost Happiness".

More here: https://www.kirkusreviews.com/news-and-features/articles/aru...

And here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_vulture_crisis

> less efficient scavenging of dead animals, more polluted water, and more disease

The first one, yes, but for the others isn’t it kind of hard to evaluate the counter factual? How do we tease this apart from all the other factors contributing to polluted water and disease?

> The delicate balance of Nature was upset

So what ? If Nature is upset you can submit it to Cell or Science. If its of interest to the medical community JAMA or Lancet might pick it up. At a 5% significance level, h-index of Nature is not that much different from these other peer reviewed publications.

Not even that delicate, usually quite robust really. The interventions humans throw at it are just too massive.

This had a big impact on the Zoroastarian community in Mumbai. They do "sky burials" where they leave remains exposed for the vultures to eat, but with so few vultures left in Maharashtra they had to import hawks.

there's a good radiolab on that part of this. I wish their search function were better, but here's the episode where they talk about this: https://radiolab.org/podcast/corpse-demon

This is an interesting article. One aspect few might notice is that India is also where the largest group of Zoroastrians/Parsis live. This is relevant because parsis dispose their dead not by burial or cremation but by placing them on towers where vultures can consume their bodies.

The lack of vultures has been a huge problem for the community. It would be interesting to know if this contributed to that.

https://radiolab.org/podcast/corpse-demon

Yes it did. Some Parsis are doing cremations now for this reason.

This is terrible, but I relate a humorous misreading of the title that occurred just now:

"The sudden demise of Indian Ventures killed thousands of startups"

Indian Ventures sounds like a legit VC firm in the SW US.

On topic tho, it's so weird that diclofenac kills vultures. It's such a useful and good pain-killer. Vultures are super interesting because they are very hardy and resilient to many shall we say "discomforts" that would be lethal (concession for hovering pedants: "exceedingly harmful") for humans. Makes me wonder if there's not some toxicity with diclo that we haven't noticed yet...

2nd order effect related: this is one of the things I'm so worried about when people talk about deliberately biosphere-engineering the extinction of mosquitoes. I know they 'seem a senseless pestilence upon the good Earth', but I think they're kind of vital in the same way. Not as obvious as carrion mungers, but vital non-the-less. If we eradicate them, I see more pandemics (concession for skeptics: I think it's related to immuno-modulation and horizontal gene transfer).

Vultures are truly the death-eaters of nature. It's weird that a pain-killer kills them.

Vulture funds are definitely a thing in the financial world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulture_fund

Unlike the feathered variety, nobody would miss those.

Cool! Yeah, they should just come out and say it: Vulture Ventures, 666 S Sepulveda Blvd

> I think they're kind of vital in the same way

It's just so easy for the people in California to fight for the wellbeing of mosquitoes, hookworms and environment in general. While having an endless summer and highly energy intensive air conditioned environment around you. Not everybody on the planet does. Some people have half a year of winter and half a year of dense mosquito clouds. If only we could give you some for safekeeping.

Speak you about that which you know not? You think I don't know your mosquito burden, yet you know mine? But it's you who doesn't know mine.

I've had plenty the places I've lived. I've been bit so many times now I no longer get bumps or itchiness. Continue felling your forests to create swamps, perhaps you should blame your industrial policy if you dislike your surrounds.

Thank you for the kind offer, tho! You keep them where you are, you need them. But if you really have enough to share, indeed safe keep them! :)

Northern areas are usually damp enough to enable mosquitoes even without any explicit swampland. Half of the year is snow, which produces a lot of water, and then a rain once in a few days equals mosquito paradises.

Arguably it is already not fair that some people get to live in temperate areas whereas the other in cold ones, but it is then compounded by the fact that cold areas get unbearable amount of biting pests.

So it would be just great if mosquitoes are removed from the equation somehow. I believe the best way is actually frogs. I'm not sure what happened to frogs in those areas. Is it too cold for them either? Should we have arctic frogs?

In areas where frogs encircle every pond, no mosquitoes to be seen.

> Arguably it is already not fair that some people get to live in temperate areas whereas the other in cold ones, but it is then compounded by the fact that cold areas get unbearable amount of biting pests.

How is that "not fair", man? I don't think that's how the concept of "fairness" should be applied. You have control over where you live. The thing that's being unfair is you being unfair to you by trapping yourself by pretending you don't have that control.

I'm OK if natural predators are used to control mosquito populations. That's fine I think as long as it is not done in a "keep throwing support at Team Frog" to artificially prop it up. The ecosystem will find a balance, that's OK and desirable.

I think there are frogs in cold areas. Maybe the logging there destroyed the habitats. Or the use of pesticides / fertilizers ruined the water table...What do you hate so much about mosquitos?

Vultures die since diclofenac drug concentration is way higher in dead cattle.

Dead cattle have higher concentrations in either their liver/kidney, since V's are the clearing/cleaning house, a single V could be eating the entire liver off of one animal.

Perhaps there's a silver lining to this. Maybe the remaining vultures have a resistance to the drug and with an abundance of food they will be able to recover? I don't know any of this I'm just trying to be positive.

Western vultures are much less vulnerable to death by Diclofenac, although it's still not good for them. It's a peculiar feature of Asian vultures. Doubly so in India because cows die in the field there in much higher numbers than in countries where cows are harvested for food.

Once the cause was noticed governments were relatively quick at banning Diclofenac and vulture numbers are slowly recovering.

Also people are breeding vultures with the intent to release them eventually. (There is still some illegal use of Diclofenac because it's legal for human use and some gets diverted to veterinary use.)

It's still legal in Spain, and kills vultures there.

As a Spaniard I wasn't aware of this, thanks. I did a quick search for relevant news articles about it in case others are interested:

[en_GB] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/11/rare-eur...

[es_ES] https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/alerta-diclofenaco-medicame...

It's less of a problem there because unlike India, when a cow dies in Spain it's disposed of rather than being left for vultures to eat.

> when a cow dies in Spain it's disposed of rather than being left for vultures to eat.

Sure. Do you remember extensive cattle farming?

The Fapas organization was what saved the vultures in Spain since 90's. Its main goal was to assure a steady supply of dead cattle so the vultures can eat. They sow the seeds that allowed the reintroduction of the bearded vulture decades later.

The difference between India and Spain is that we eat the cattle. Diclofenaco appears only in work animals, racehorses, etc.

Most of the time, when you find vultures poisoned in Spain are on purpose not necessarily with this product. That superstitious behavior is getting less common.

Is there any record of the Indian government doing it? Ecological collapses such as this incident are quite serious and it’d make me happy to hear that some action is being taken.

From the Drug Controller General of India in 2007 (the sources seem to be off by a year, or maybe it's just bureaucracy delays) [1]:

> AGENDA ITEM NO.1

> CREATION OF A NEW SCHEDULE-H(1) AND CORRESPONDING CHANGES IN THE RULES UNDER THE DRUGS AND COSMETICS RULES FOR SPECIAL PRODUCTS WHICH ARE REOUIRED TO BE SOLD UNDER SPECIFIED CONDITIONS i.e. DICLOFENAC AND SPECIFYING CONDITIONS FOR SALE OF SUCH PRODUCTS.

> DCG(I) explained that at present the sale of drugs is regulated under Schedule-H (prescription drugs), and under Schedule-X {psychotropic or habit forming drugs). A need is, however, being felt that a separate Schedule is required to monitor, control and evaluate sales of certain specific drugs where it is not desirable to allow indiscriminate and unregulated access. Such drugs- would be regulated through a new Schedule i.e. Schedule-H(l). The specific sale conditions for the drug will be notified by the Ministry of Healthand FW through notification.

> The committee after deliberations agreed to the creation of a new Schedule-H 1 under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules which would be strictly monitored by the State drug inspectors with a specific reference to Diclofenac preparations in respect of their veterinary use. The DCC also agreed to the prohibition of Diclofenac preparations for veterinary use. It further recommended that Diclofenac formulations meant for human use will print on their labels “Not for Veterinary Use”

[1] https://cdsco.gov.in/opencms/resources/UploadCDSCOWeb/2018/U...

Perhaps my grandmother has wheels, maybe she is a motorcycle :)

> I don't know any of this I'm just trying to be positive.

I joke to make a point, but I sympathize with the need.

Spotted the Italian.

Saluti

> The cause was diclofenac, an anti-inflammatory drug that farmers began using to treat their cattle. Though the drug was harmless to both cows and humans,

It isn't harmless to humans, it causes ulcers (if you take a big dose, like the vultures).

Reading up on things, it seems these kind of problems also play in Africa, albeit slightly less dramatic and for different reasons (intentional poisoning and hunting seem to be the largest factors).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_vulture_crisis

https://archive.li/m4h8E

Paywalled, but there’s a great Radiolab episode about this: https://radiolab.org/podcast/corpse-demon

Second recommendation. It was an extremely well-done episode.

One of those where each rabbit hole leads to an even more interesting rabbit hole, and they're all answered at the end.

They didn’t get into excess human deaths attributed, fwiw

> The cause was diclofenac, an anti-inflammatory drug that farmers began using to treat their cattle

https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/our-glob...

Our global food system is the primary driver of biodiversity loss

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/13/almost-7...

Animal populations experience average decline of almost 70% since 1970, report reveals

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01448-4

Humans are driving one million species to extinction

https://phys.org/news/2023-04-climate-crisis-biodiversity-ap...

The climate crisis and biodiversity crisis can't be approached separately

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/brv.12974

More losers than winners: investigating Anthropocene defaunation through the diversity of population trends

.. of 70,000 monitored species, some 48% are experiencing population declines from anthropogenic pressures ...

... global biodiversity is entering a mass extinction, with ecosystem heterogeneity and functioning, biodiversity persistence, and human well-being under increasing threat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

The biomass decrease is 80% for marine mammals, 50% for plants and 15% for fish. Currently, livestock make up 60% of the biomass of all mammals on earth, followed by humans (36%) and wild mammals (4%). As for birds, 70% are domesticated, such as poultry, whereas only 30% are wild.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2216573120

Farmland practices are driving bird population decline across Europe

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26231772/

Biodiversity conservation: The key is reducing meat consumption

https://xkcd.com/1338/

The authors estimated an extra 100k deaths/year over 5 years… that’s very striking.

I remember vividly when going out with my family in the year 2000. There used to be a stretch of road filled with vultures. Then a few years later they just stopped existing. I haven’t seen a real vulture since then.

Just shows how a small technical change by humans can bring an apocalypse.

From TA:

  Historically, vultures were widespread in India. But 
  between the 1990s and early 2000s their numbers plummeted 
  by more than 90%, from around 40m. The cause was 
  diclofenac, an anti-inflammatory drug that farmers began 
  using to treat their cattle. Though the drug was harmless 
  to both cows and humans, birds that consumed animals 
  treated with diclofenac suffered from kidney failure and 
  died within weeks.

According to the article, farmers were treating their cows with an anti-inflammatory drug and vultures then consumed the flesh of medicated cows and died and this was occurring on a large-enough scale to slash the populations of multiple vulture species.

The piece doesn't mention why those farmers were frequently administering diclofenac to their cows, how the vultures had been able to access dead cow flesh in large volumes up to that point, or anything about the structure of cow ownership in India. The piece is a monocle-wearing version of a "Banish Chin Wrinkles Forever Using This Weird Trick!" clickbait junk article linked via a photo of a woman holding a bell pepper against one ear and is emblematic of why I personally dislike glorified content mills like The Economist.

From what I can ascertain via a quick look around the Internet, in broad strokes, the people using diclofenac on their cows are/were small-holder (as in owning one or two or a handful of cows) dairy farmers who rely on their cows to produce milk that is consumed or used to produce other dairy products largely for their own households and maybe selling or trading a little surplus. They are/were using it treat mastitis. There are alternative NSAIDs (e.g. meloxicam) that are reportedly effective for the same purposes but less toxic to the vultures. I do not know whether alternative NSAIDs are as readily available as diclofenac, which is still available from pharmacies for human use after veterinary use was banned.

Cattle in the region could be dosed up to the gills with diclofenac or one of the other toxic-to-vultures NSAIDs without crashing the vulture population, however, if vultures didn't have access to large amounts of dead cow flesh. The slaughter of cows and the operation of slaughterhouses in that part of the world is tied up with religious and political issues unique to the region. You can find articles about the problem if you don't care for this one (from 2016): https://www.thedairysite.com/articles/4310/how-does-indias-s...

TLDR: Many sick/dying/knackered cows are abandoned by subsistence/small-scale dairy farmers rather than being slaughtered and processed for meat, leather, etc. and that's how they end up getting consumed by vultures. Larger dairy operations exist and are more able to make arrangements for their animals to be slaughtered, though political opposition and interference was (at least according to thedairysite.com, in 2016) increasing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com