China reports human case of H10N3 bird flu, a possible first

The Associated Press ^ | June 1, 2021

[Oldeconomybuyer]

BEIJING - A man in eastern China has contracted what might be the world’s first human case of the H10N3 strain of bird flu, but the risk of large-scale spread is low, the government said Tuesday.

The 41-year-old man in Jiangsu province, northwest of Shanghai, was hospitalized April 28 and is in stable condition, the National Health Commission said.

No human case of H10N3 has been reported elsewhere, the commission said.

“This infection is an accidental cross-species transmission,” its statement said. “The risk of large-scale transmission is low.”

[Oldeconomybuyer]

[glimmerman70]

Here we go. It’s gonna spread and more lockdowns. They will transition from covid to this..

[newfreep]

[loucon]

So now they’ve weaponized H10N3. Great. Can anyone say “gain of function”?

[cuban leaf]

China seems to be a big petri dish.

[Jim Noble]

There have been many transmission events of avian (bird) influenza viruses in to humans in Asia - H5N1 even has accomplished some endemicity in Vietnam and elsewhere. H7N9 has even caused small clusters in Russia and Europe after spreading in China.

But none of these strains has ever shown pandemic potential. There's something about Hemagglutinins (H) 1-3 that is suited to pandemics among humans that the others seem to lack.

[COBOL2Java]

Let me guess. Fauci helped fund the development of that strain?

[Paleo Pete]

The risk of large-scale transmission is low.”

*******************************

Right...I believe china...I believe AP too...sure I do...just like I believe covid19 is accidental...

I also believe in santa claus, the tooth fairy and the easter bunny. Oh yeah, and the great pumpkin...

Do I need a sarc tag?

c’mon man

[PGalt]

CCP is EVIL

[PGalt]

pfizer offshoot zoetis has facilities in CHYNA

[a fool in paradise]

>>a man in China has contracted what might be the world’s first human case of the H10N3 strain of bird flu, but the risk of large-scale spread is low, the government said Tuesday.

“Trust us”

[pas]

Released information to show how trust-worthy they are.

[SunkenCiv]

He caught it while he was out on a lark.

[rlmorel]

If WHO was really about “World Health” instead of being a lapdog to the Chinese and sucking money from people willing to part with it for agenda driven reasons, then a 21 day quarantine would be in place for that entire country. Anyone leaving the country would have to be quarantined.

This was interesting. From WHO’s own website about their financing:
*********************************************************************
WHO gets its funding from two main sources: Member States paying their assessed contributions (countries’ membership dues), and voluntary contributions from Member States and other partners.

Assessed contributions (AC) are a percentage of a country’s Gross Domestic Product (the percentage is agreed by the United Nations General Assembly). Member States approve them every two years at the World Health Assembly. They cover less than 20% of the total budget.

The remainder of WHO’s financing is in the form of voluntary contributions (VC), largely from Member States as well as from other United Nations organizations, intergovernmental organizations, philanthropic foundations, the private sector, and other sources.

Assessed contributions
Assessed contributions are the dues countries pay in order to be a member of the Organization. The amount each Member State must pay is calculated relative to the country’s wealth and population. Assessed contributions have declined as an overall percentage of the Programme Budget and have, for several years, accounted for less than one quarter of the Organization’s financing. The balance is mobilized through voluntary contributions. However, assessed contributions remain a key source of financing for the Organization, providing a level of predictability, helping to minimize dependence on a narrow donor base, and allowing resources to be aligned to the Programme Budget.

Voluntary contributions
Voluntary contributions come from Member States (in addition to their assessed contribution) or from other partners. In recent years, voluntary contributions have accounted for more than three quarters of the Organization’s financing. Voluntary contributions (VC) are further categorized based on the degree of flexibility WHO has in deciding how to spend these funds:Core voluntary contributions (CVC)
Core voluntary contributions are fully unconditional (flexible), meaning WHO has full discretion on how these funds should be used to fund the programmatic work of the Organization. These represent 3.9% of all voluntary contributions. WHO thanks all contributors to this account.

Contributors to the Core Voluntary Contributions Account 2018-2019
Contributor (Funding received US$ million)
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 64.7
Sweden. 35.4
Norway. 27.3
Australia. 18.2
Netherlands. 10.0
Belgium. 8.0
Denmark 7.6
Switzerland. 5.1
Luxembourg. 3.6
France. 0.9
Estate of Mrs Edith Christina Ferguson 0.3
Spain. 0.2
Estate of The Late Marjory Miller Thomson. 0.1
Monaco. 0.1

Thematic and strategic engagement funds
Thematic and strategic engagement funds (partially flexible) aim to meet contributors’ requirements for reporting and accountability while providing a certain degree of flexibility in their allocation. These funds provide more effective and efficient earmarked funding by helping to promote WHO’s stronger focus on results, while delivering on our contributors’ priorities. These represent 6% of all voluntary contributions.

Thanks to our pioneers key “thematic funders” Germany, the European Commission and Japan, WHO received US$ 190 million in thematic funds in 2019, up from 2018’s US$ 137 million. These funds give a degree of flexibility that allows WHO to be more effective and efficient in allocating funds, to focus on results for our joint priorities.

Specified voluntary contributions
Specified voluntary contributions represent 90.1% of all voluntary contributions. They are tightly earmarked to specific programmatic areas and/or geographical locations and must be spent within a specified timeframe.

[drwoof]

“It’s not transmissible human-to-human”
“Oh wait. Maybe it is.”
“It is.”
“But it’s not airborne.”
“Oh wait. It is.”
“No need for masks.”
“Masks not bad idea.”
“Two weeks, just to make sure we don’t overwhelm hospitals.”
And we all know the rest of the story... Let us never forget this.

[Agatsu77]

All Right, here we go again!

[a fool in paradise]

Apparently mock bat soup is unsafe as well

[unread]

“The risk of large-scale transmission is low.”

Yeah, that's the same thing they said about the last one... :(

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Another scientific breakthrough at Wuhan Laboratories! This should definitely cinch the Nobel Prize! Two one in medicine and the peace prize!

[momincombatboots]

Lol.. you didnt think they only designed one virus. Covid was just blood in the water.