Bird flu nightmare needs wake-up call

Scotsman.com ^ | January 28th, 2006 | Al Avlicino

[elfman2]

"Because there would not be a shift from a virus that kills 20% or so of people who get it, to a virus that kills nobody. It becoming a squirrel virus would be more likely."

Why assume the virus will be deadly once it changes into another virus? It’s a different virus if it can affect us. A different virus has a different rate of lethality. Why assume a 5% death rate for something they can’t even model? Why not a death rate similar to the common flue? If you’re going to go make that assumption, you might as assume mutations from every other viruses that’s deadly to other animal will kill us.

I’ve seen FR go through 2-3 pandemic panics, and they’re always promoted by a small group who wants to raise awareness. They always mention 1918 as if advances in hygiene, medical understanding, medical care and communications have little effect on isolating a new bug. I’m sure after the bird flue plays out, there’ll be another “killer flue” for some to take it upon themselves to spread awareness of and to worry about.

[elfman2]

It’s a different virus if it can affect us be easily transmitted between us.

[little jeremiah]

FYI. I think I got you all.

Did you get the article about elderberries and the possibility (or likelihood, according to the article) that they may help even with avian flu?

[redpoll]

Nice apocalyptic writing. People really enjoy the good scare that comes with any consideration of the end of the world - asteroid impact, nuclear war, the Second Coming, superflu. However, disease tends toward becoming less and less virulent over time. It's true that catching a disease from another species can be deadly - I once contracted brucellosis after caribou hunting, a disease adapted to hoofed animals, and it almost killed me. But it didn't - my body beat it back before I needed hospitalization. Bird flu contracted by humans is deadly. A human flu derived from bird flu would be far less deadly. This doesn't mean it would nice to experience, either, but I doubt it would lead to the collapse of civilization. One more comment: in Barbara Tuchman's book about the 14th century ("A Distant Mirror"), the Black Death is one of the elements that led to the creation of Western Civilization. I don't want to die from the flu, nor my family, neighbors, friends, or townspeople, but humanity would survive.

[Dog Gone]

I did. I don't know what to make of it. I know if Bird Flu becomes widespread we'll be doing everything we can to protect ourselves.

[Termite_Commander]

Why assume the virus will be deadly once it changes into another virus? It’s a different virus if it can affect us.

If a virus shuffles around some of its protein structure, it doesn't technically make it a different virus. It's a mutated virus. It would still be (A)H5N1, only with a couple different genes.

A different virus has a different rate of lethality.

Not necessarily, but I see your point. It depends on what part of the virus actually mutates.

Why assume a 5% death rate for something they can’t even model?

Er, that 5% number was not scientific in any way. I just pulled a number out of my head and stuck it in there to make a point. I don't know of any models that have a 5% CFR. Sorry for the confusion.

Why not a death rate similar to the common flue?Because the common flu's death rate is extremely small, and this virus's death rate is extremely high. It would be virtually impossible for H5N1, the deadliest influenza strain ever seen, to mutate into a highly benign strain.

If you’re going to go make that assumption, you might as assume mutations from every other viruses that’s deadly to other animal will kill us.

I'm sorry. I don't quite understand what you're saying. We've looked at the genome of the H1N1 virus, found 10 critical amino acid mutations, and now we're watching for those mutations to occur on H5N1. It's not the best way to go about things, because H5N1 and H1N1 are fundamentally different, but it's the best we can do at the moment.

I’ve seen FR go through 2-3 pandemic panics, and they’re always promoted by a small group who wants to raise awareness. They always mention 1918 as if advances in hygiene, medical understanding, medical care and communications have little effect on isolating a new bug. I’m sure after the bird flue plays out, there’ll be another “killer flue” for some to take it upon themselves to spread awareness of and to worry about.

If we're all a bunch of panic-mongering fools, and the warnings are utter nonsense, why do you trouble yourself coming in to shoot them all down? Since we're kooks, don't waste your time on us.

[Termite_Commander]

Well Redpoll, I don't think anybody's quite talking about the "collapse of civilization". Although there was some apocalyptic talk coming out of the World Economic Forum (in fact, they even said it could be a 21st century "Black Death"), I think even their "Worse-Case scenario" stopped short of forecasting the end of the world.

As I'm sure you'll agree, a pandemic could certainly screw up some main elements to civilization for a bit (like business, travel, public services, etc.), but after the virus began winding down, they would recover, as usual.

"A human flu derived from bird flu would be far less deadly."

In all likelihood, you're right. It's important to note, however, that both the 1957 and 1968 pandemics, which were both very mild, were recombinants that popped up after mixing in pigs. With the H1N1 and H5N1 strain, such mixing is not necessary. The virus in 1918 went straight from bird to human, without the mixing vessel. This means the virus doesn't need to lose any of its deadliness in a recombination process.

[Revolting cat!]

For the last time, bird flew, or bird has flown!

[Termite_Commander]

Your screen name makes me smile every time.

Especially since I have two cats snoring on my desk.

[blam]

"The world is fully unprepared. "

Not so, I'm presently prepared for:

* A category five hurricane. And, any looters.

* A war with Iran that could cut our oil/gas supplies.(maybe for months) And, any domestic terrorist activity associated with the war.

* A flu pandemic that could last for 6 months to two years. And, any domestic violence that may be associated.

* A small 'city-busting' asteroid impact. And, a subsequent possible 1-2 year 'cosmic-winter'.

[redpoll]

I agree with you - I was referring to the writer of the article, who appeared to relish the thought of impending chaos, and I'm really, really tired of hearing about how awful things will be in the near future from the threat of (fill in the blank). I prefer faith and hope in my worldview. I grew up in the 60s, where I was fed a daily diet of imminent collapse from nukes, overpopulation, pollution, science run amok, computers taking over the world... in the 70s I was told that the world would run out resources, there would be global famines, an ice age was coming, Nixon was going to be the next Hitler... or was that Reagan as the next Hitler... or George Bush, yeah, he was a CIA guy... anyway, you get the idea.

I would prefer not to see an epidemic of anything, of course. I can't stop one, either. Relishing gory details feels like a waste of time to me, that's all.

[cajungirl]

The Great Influenza by Barry. After I read it I read the same author's book Rising Tide about the Mississippi flood of 1927. Both were superb. I am into disastor reading ever since the storm!!

[Seaplaner]

People really enjoy the good scare that comes with any consideration of the end of the world - asteroid impact, nuclear war, the Second Coming, superflu. However, disease tends toward becoming less and less virulent over time.

Redpoll, I enjoy a good scare, so long as it's fiction.

Unfortunately, the H5N1 is a valid worry. Keep in mind that influenza viruses are especially good mutaters. And, once its gene sequence changes to that which makes for human-to-human infection, we won't have much time to react.

The author's point that virus hosts (that is, infected humans) could be unknowingly jetted around the world is key to the critical nature of the public health threat.

Another poster mentioned case fatality rate, and that is what worries so many experts.

.

[Seaplaner]

It does turn out that there is one effective medication for the flu-infected birds...

...people soup.

(Such a serious topic, it needed a bit of humor.)

[Cold Heart]

MRE's are good sustenance whilst traveling but your regular dry stores from Wal-Mart or Costoco or Winco are far more economical.

[blam]

"...people soup."

Should we avoid people who died from the bird flu?

[BenLurkin]

The 20% fatalities . . . will it be the elderly and infirm or what are the "risk factors" likely to be?

[Domestic Church]

There were cases reported in Basra last week.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1562819/posts

[jocon307]

"The 20% fatalities . . . will it be the elderly and infirm or what are the "risk factors" likely to be?"

Ben, I'm going to have to let TC answer your precise question. What's clear is that "bird flu" has killed many young, and not so young, but healthy people who have contracted it. Like the other poster says about her grandfather, in the 1918 epidemic, people were in perfectly good health in the morning and dead by nightfall. So these virulent viruses can really strike a person down.

[Termite_Commander]

Interestingly, it seems to be affecting younger people.

In Turkey (where I got that 20% figure from), only 2 people out of the 20 cases there were older than 18.

Some are saying it's because the kids are more likely to be playing in the chicken coops, or interacting with the chickens, or they're less sanitary.

Others say it might favor them for some reason or another. We really wouldn't know unless a pandemic actually happened.