What exactly was this bird flu expert on CNN trying to say today here?

[NNN0LHI]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/17/sitroom.01.html

<snip>DR. DANIEL PEREZ, FLU EXPERT, UNIV. OF MARYLAND: Well, it brings up the reality of the previous concerns which is the virus to extend its host range. And a few months ago we knew it went into migratory birds. And the fear was that this virus could extend even more.

Like I said, these fears have become a reality. Now the virus is showing up in other parts of the world. And I think the worrisome feature of this virus is reaching Europe.

BLITZER: It's still so far only transmitted to humans from birds. It's not transmitted from human to human. But there's fear if the virus mutates, that could happen. How concerned are you that could happen? In other words, that humans could spread this disease?

PEREZ: Well, this virus has seen several locations being able to do the jump from avian to humans. And it's probably a matter of time for this virus to learn one more step, which is a transmission among humans. Now, we have to be also careful with what it means, the virus showing up in Europe. Because until we do a full characterization of these viruses in animal models and that means mammalian models, we will not know until then what is the potential of these viruses in going into humans. Those that have showed up in Romania and Turkey. But given the history of these viruses, we have to be very cautious. And the possibility exists that the virus can actually jump to humans.

BLITZER: Well, when you say it's a matter of time for that deadly transfer to occur, what does that mean, a matter of time? Are we talking weeks, months, years, decades?

PEREZ: Unfortunately, we don't know enough about these viruses. And they are unpredictable in the way that they can mutate that this could be days or it could never happen. We just cannot put a timeframe to this.

[Ready4Change]

1. Quote: "YOU'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!"

Just cutting through his techno-babble.

Oh, and btw, he's full of sh*t.

[screembloodymurder]

13. I'm not so sure.

These assholes have been talking population reduction since the late 50's. As a teen, I remember a General coming to our summer home (my father was in defense sales) and talking about the need to reduce world population. This was not his personal opinion, but a military assessment. It was his job.

[kestrel91316]

20. Yeah. He's a bird flu expert, so by definition he knows

less about bird flu than anyone else on the planet. Heck, he probably never even graduated from high school.

:sarcasm:

[Missy M]

2. I guess what he was trying to say is they really don't know enough..

about the viruses. In that case I think they should stop scaring people so much. They should let us know when they have some answers.

[murray hill farm]

3. The more the virus spreads geographically,

and the more it has a chance to spread, the better the chances of it "learning" how to mutate to transfer from human to human....it may mutate this way and that..but the chances are very, very good that it will eventually mutate to be able to move from human to human..virus are cleaver that way..and will mutate to best survive.

[confludemocrat]

6. It's not a given that it will attain pandemic status ever. MASS HYPE

many viruses have never developed that capacity, and having been present among a few billion people in Asia for more than a year without that projected capacity having developed, why are we now hyping it's dangers? It could arrive by any number of ways should it become highly transmissive, which makes we wonder whether its simply having reached birds near white/rich people/nations is what has caused this hysteria. Sorta like another missing white female seems to get the media all hot n bothered.

[jsamuel]

4. is "never" really "just a matter of time" then?

[NNN0LHI]

10. That is the part that had me confused too n/t

[cornermouse]

5. Another expert

(I think on NPR) said that in order for avian flu to become a real threat, it has to undergo at last 5 to 20 more mutations.

[mike_c]

8. or a single recombination....

Or a few smaller recombinations with a flu strain that already has the capacity for easy transmission among humans. Recombination is easier than mutation for a number of reasons.

[cornermouse]

16. All I can do is tell you what I heard.

[NNN0LHI]

17. I don't think mike_c is the kind of guy who wants anyone to be fearful

He appears to be a straight shooter on this stuff. Other stuff too. I consider him to be a pretty good source of information around here. I respect and appreciate a lot of your comments too. See you later.

Don

[cornermouse]

18. Thank you

for the compliment. I guess I'm just so used to hearing the "be afraid, be very afraid" mantra that I instinctively react. Its sort of like a reflex.

[kestrel91316]

21. I have a pretty good BS detector with this stuff, and TRUST ME,

mike-c is not a b---s----er. He knows his genetics.

[NNN0LHI]

23. Not just his genetics

He is pretty wise on quite a range of subjects. He is not a grudge holder either. When he gets real mad about something...if he ever does (?) it lasts all of about 3 minutes. Stand up guy. Not enough of them. We can all learn something from mike_c I think?

Don

[mike_c]

43. thanks for the kind remarks, ya'll....

:blush:

[HereSince1628]

35. Most of the population has no idea how viruses do transfer

genetic material from one type to another.

[mike_c]

7. don, I can answer this....

First, you need to understand that there are many possible strains of H5N1, and the one currently called avian flu is only one of many. But in general H5 influenzas transmit among birds, but not among humans. By among I mean from bird to bird or human to human. Avian flu is troubling because it can occasionally transmit to humans, that is, from birds to humans, and when it does it has high lethality. But so far it does not pass easily from human to human. This is because the biochemical machinery it uses to invade host cells and take over gene replication and protein production is not well matched to human cells.

OK, the first underlined statement:

PEREZ: And it's probably a matter of time for this virus to learn one more step, which is a transmission among humans.

The "last step" Perez referred to is a change in the viral proteins that influence its ability to invade human cells. This change can occur either by spontaneous mutation or by recombination with another flu strain that has the correct viral proteins to easily invade human cells. This lowers the threshold of transmissibility tremendously, so that low exposures, like when someone sneezes on a bus, are sufficient to cause infection. At present, the only people infected are those who've been exposed to LOTS of virus by proximity to infected flocks of birds, and even then the infection is VERY sporadic. But a relatively simple genetic change in the virus could change that.

BLITZER: Well, when you say it's a matter of time for that deadly transfer to occur, what does that mean, a matter of time? Are we talking weeks, months, years, decades?

PEREZ: Unfortunately, we don't know enough about these viruses. And they are unpredictable in the way that they can mutate that this could be days or it could never happen. We just cannot put a timeframe to this.

The viral genetic change itself, whether by mutation or recombination, happens very quickly, for all intents and purposes instanteously. But it happens very rarely. VERY RARELY. Still, when a host is infected it habors billions of virii and is producing orders of magnitude more, so all those viral replication and assembly instructions are being executed simultaneously in host cells. Even though mutations and recombinations with other viruses are exceedingly rare events, the sheer number of opportunities makes them statistically inevitable, but they're still probabilistic occurrances-- like rolling snake-eyes, it could happen in the next instant, or it could take a long time.

Did that answer your question?

[NNN0LHI]

9. Thanks a million mike_c for your help here

You know I trust your judgment on this stuff. But at the end he states "or it could never happen". I have read statements by other scientists who suggest that since this particular virus hasn't developed into a pandemic in the 8 years we have know of its existence that perhaps it may not have the capability to do so. Is that likely or even possible? Thanks again.

Don

[shraby]

11. The problem involved is that it is becoming

more and more prevalent in the bird kingdom. The more birds infected leads to more birds infected. Many of these birds are chickens that live in close proximity to humans and yes, pigs. Pigs are traditionally a mixing vessel for virii. Also the numbers of humans that have caught this flu virus have increased.
All these increases in numbers increase the chance of the fatal mutation that will carry it from human to human. No one knows when this mutation will occur or if it will occur. What is known is the more cases of the virus in birds/humans, the larger the chance of it being communicable between humans.

[NNN0LHI]

15. Thanks for your comments too

Between you and mike_c and others around here I think I am beginning to understand some basics of this thing. I doubt my educational limitations will allow get me much further than that. So I really appreciate you guys putting this information into the most simplest terms that you can for me and other like me. Again much appreciated and looking forward to reading more of your guys posts.

Don

[kestrel91316]

22. You can trust mike-c. He is a reliable source, and he spells

things out in plain english.

[mike_c]

12. yep-- or it could never happen....

It's a probabilistic event, but the probability is influenced by lots of things that we don't fully understand yet. There have been several pandemic human flus since the 1918 H1N1 pandemic and they involved viral recombination between easily transmissible and less easily transmissible flus (the 1918 strain is now thought to have resulted from a series of mutations, rather than a recombination). But there are MANY influenza strains in the wild-- probably tens of thousands (I'm guessing about the number-- no one knows)-- and they're not all recombining with human strains every tuesday, so there are definitely barriers to recombination. We just don't have a good understanding of them. (on edit-- well, some of them we do, like inability to share hosts.) The other pandemics of the 20th century were thankfully not as deadly as the 1918 pandemic, but they nonetheless prove that the barriers to recombination are breachable, at least under some conditions. The fact that avian flu does occasionally infect humans means that conditions are good for producing opportunities for breaching those barriers, but the strength of the barriers themselves are probably a function of the genetic differences between specific flu strains, so it's impossible to estimate them with any accuracy.

Mutation is another matter. Mutants are exposed to natural selection and most fail, but again, successful mutants are probabilistic and ultimately inevitable. The 1918 pandemic strain proved that. Again, a successful mutant could appear tomorrow, or it might take decades, and mutation has its own set of unique barriers. Nonetheless, influenza uses mutation (and recombination) as survival stategies to stay ahead of host immunity, so the barriers are routinely surmounted. But any specific mutation has a very low likelihood of being successful-- again, it's the sheer number of trials that lead to new viral strains.

[NNN0LHI]

14. Man did you ever explain that good

Probably a little (lot?) too technical for me but I think I got the basics of it now. Thanks again mike_c

And just one other question for you later if you get the time. No rush as I know you are real busy. Can another virus like say the West Nile Virus recombine with our current human flu virus, or even mutate on its own and become a killer? Or is this something particular to avian influenza? Hell for all I know maybe West Nile is a form of avian influenza? Shit. Sorry that was like about 5 questions. Might as well ask while I got you here. But no rush. Maybe talk to you again tomorrow? See you later.

Don

[mike_c]

19. sorry about the overly technical reply....

It's hard to guess people's backgrounds, plus I'm accustomed to dealing with senior biology undergrads and graduate students, so that's kind of my default starting point.

The short answer to your question is "no." West Nile virus stores it's genetic information on a single strand of RNA, and influenza is a DNA based virus (if I'm not mistaken-- any virologists around to confirm?). They use different mechanisms to copy themselves once they infect a host cell, so I think it's pretty unlikely they could exhange parts.

Here's an analogy for viral recombination to illustrate the problem less technically than my last response. Imagine a machine shop filled with machinists making parts for widgets, but in this shop the machinists are automata. They can follow instructions almost perfectly-- they only very rarely make mistakes-- but they cannot store instructions, so everything they do has to be ordered by someone shouting instructions from across the room. The "instructor" shouting directions likewise cannot remember the instructions for any length of time, but he has a set of written plans he can consult.

Other workers in the shop are scribes, who listen for the instructions as they're shouted and write them down, so each widget goes out the door with a copy of the instructions used to manufacture it-- its plan-- so it can be accurately duplicated later. All the plans currently being shouted were obtained that way, from widgets produced previously in other factories. The scribes also rarely make mistakes, but every now and then one transcribes something a little inaccurately.

As long as there is only one set of plans in operation, things go pretty well, and widgets are turned out in abundance with accurate copies of their instructions. But suppose some of the instruction shouters get plans for another type of widget altogether, so now there are multiple instructions being shouted by different foremen. Again, the machinists and scribes rarely make mistakes, but now one of the potential mistakes it's possible to make is to inadvertently incorporate some of the insructions for making widget B into widget A, resulting in a hybrid of the two we'll call widget C. Likewise, the scribes could transcribe a bit of widget B's instructions into the instructions for widget A, which would produce widget C the NEXT time they're used. This is the "mistake" that really counts, because it will produce a whole new family of widgets when those miscopied instructions are used later on in another factory.

Another way this can happen is if the instruction shouter gets the plans mixed up, so that a sheet of widget B's plan gets inserted somewhere in the widget A stack. If that happens, even perfectly executing machinists and perfectly transcribing scribes will create hybrid widgets with hybrid instructions because the information they receive from the shouter will contain mixed instructions, and a new production line of hybrid widgets results.

In that analogy, the machine shop represents a cell infected by a virus-- the widget it's copying, the widgets produced are new virus copies that can be sent to infect other cells (factories), the machinists are the biochemical mechanisms that produce copies of the virus, the scribes are the cell's DNA replicating mechanisms (we'll ignore RNA viruses for the moment), the plans are the viral DNA, and the instruction shouters represent the mechanisms cells use to decode DNA and pass that information on to the cellular "factory floor" where it's translated into biochemical products. Confusion sometimes arises when several viruses are present simultaneously, with their copying instructions being shouted and executed together, and in this analogy, recombination occurs when a bit of one plan gets inserted into another plan, either at the level of the information replication level (scribing) or the information translation level (shouting).

In this analogy, a mutation occurs when a scribe makes a spontaneous mistake and does something like writing "hte" or "thi" instead of "the." Some mutations have no effect-- the instruction shouter can probably interpret "hte" properly, but "thi" is more difficult, especially if it mutates further to "this." In real virus reproduction within host cells, mutations thus result in slight changes in the genetic information coding for new copies in the next round of reproduction-- but over time, these minute changes can accumulate and can ultimately lead to dramatic changes.

To make matters a bit more complicated, some viruses are much more "accepting" of recombination than others, which we can work into our analogy as some plans being easier to scramble than others. Some are in looseleaf binders and some are bound like books, and others might just be loose piles of paper. And the hybrid widget that's produced-- the recombinant virus-- is always more likely to be functional if the plans are closely related, or better yet, simply different versions of the same plan, e.g. different strains of flu virus rather than flu and some other virus altogether. Nonetheless, unrelated viruses DO exchange genetic information under the right conditions, and sometimes the hybrid recombinants they produce are viable. Remember too, that BILLIONS of these events are happening simultaneously in an infected host.

Now to return to your question-- West Nile virus and influenza use plans recorded on different media-- RNA and DNA respectively, and different instruction shouters yelling in different languages, so information crossover is much more difficult. But it's still remotely possible. The chances are vanishingly slight, but you can't say "never."

[Silverhair]

29. Flu is RNA based.

Great explanation. Here is a link for the statement that flu is RNA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza#Genetics

"Influenza A viruses contain their genome in eight separate linear segments of negative-sense RNA."

Doesn't this mean that the genetic code is less stable and far more prone to copy mistakes than a DNA based virus?

Could you tell us what difference it makes being RNA based instead of DNA based?

[mike_c]

30. thanks for clarifying-- I couldn't remember....

Let me answer this question this afternoon-- it's 6:45 and I have an early class, so I've got to run. Check back this afternoon (maybe later this AM but I'm all "meeting'ed up") and I'll explain the difference. Or maybe someone else can jump in before then.

[mike_c]

41. self reply-- Kailassa answered the question....

Thanks Kailassa!

[Kailassa]

46. No Worries ;-)

I love the internet. But I'm wondering just how long it's going to take to learn everything that's on it. :think:

[Kailassa]

38. RNA based copying in influenza.

It's the RNA replication that enables influenza to so quickly evolve into new types and pick up resistance to antivirals. Aids is also RNA based, which is one reason it is still so difficult to immunise against.

However, the influenza virus is among a minority of organisms that base their replication on RNA. The properties of RNA help to explain the epidemiology of influenza and the difficulty of achieving successful prophylactic treatment by using vaccines.

DNA and RNA genomes both use polymerase enzymes for replication, but under suitable conditions, RNA molecules can replicate spontaneously and maintain continuous synthesis. Between the two types of genome, DNA and RNA, RNA viruses have the ability to evolve a million times more rapidly than their DNA based host. Because the error rate of RNA is so high, many variants of an RNA virus may coexist and compete. The fittest of these variants and hence the best adapted to its host will become the most abundant within a given population.

http://www.medicalecology.org/diseases/influenza/influenza.htm

[senaca]

24. Series of mutations in 1918 H1N1

Do most viral pandemic strains perform a series of mutations infecting their hosts, before developing into a killer strain that reaches pandemic proportions? I guess what I'm asking is if there is human to human transfer of H5N1 will it become good at infecting a population before it changes to a strain that kills at pandemic levels? If that is so can survivors antigens be used to combat the more virulent form, or would the next mutations make them noneffective?

How does the secondary cause of death by pneumonia play into this? This is probably a really stupid question, but how does a bacterial infection react to the mutation of a viral infection?
If there were human to human transfer for H5N1 would the present pneumonia vaccine help stave off a secondary pneumonia after a viral infection?

[mike_c]

28. good questions....

Do most viral pandemic strains perform a series of mutations infecting their hosts, before developing into a killer strain that reaches pandemic proportions? I guess what I'm asking is if there is human to human transfer of H5N1 will it become good at infecting a population before it changes to a strain that kills at pandemic levels?

First, pandemic just means "global epidemic," so there's no automatic association with "killer strains." There have been numerous flu pandemics during the last century, both among humans and birds, of varying severity. Of course, it's the really virulent, pathogenic strains that everyone worries about the most.

As I understand your question, the basic answer is "yes," avian flu must change in order to begin efficient human to human transmission, either through mutation or recombination with another flu strain. Flu viruses do this all the time, so we know it is possible, perhaps even likely, but we don't know about all the barriers that must be overcome for this to happen, so we can't assign an accurate probability. The current avian flu is already initiating a pandemic among birds, but it not capable of a human pandemic, no matter how lethal it is for the relative few humans who've caught it. It must undergo mutations or recombination into a more efficiently human transmissible form before it will be sufficiently virulent among humans to cause a pandemic. That might not happen at all, and if it does happen, no one can estimate when it will happen, but the longer the virus is associated with humans (and some other animals, like pigs), the greater the probability that it will occur.

If that is so can survivors antigens be used to combat the more virulent form, or would the next mutations make them noneffective?

No. An "antigen" is a part of the virus (or other pathogen) that stimulates the immune system to produce antibodies, and the antibodies produced have a very specific recognition-- at the molecular level-- for regions of the antigen called "epitopes." This, BTW, is why a specific vaccine can only be produced once a pandemic strain actually emerges-- the antigenic epitopes of the pandemic strain will likely differ significantly from the current avian flu strains, so a vaccine produced from the current non-pandemic strain is unlikely to be effective against the pandemic variety. Anyway, the antigen is present only in the virus, not the survivors. Immunization against influenza involves growing the actual virus in chicken embryos, killing it, and then injecting it into people to stimulate their immune systems to recognize those antigenic epitopes and produce the necessary antibodies.

How does the secondary cause of death by pneumonia play into this? This is probably a really stupid question, but how does a bacterial infection react to the mutation of a viral infection?
If there were human to human transfer for H5N1 would the present pneumonia vaccine help stave off a secondary pneumonia after a viral infection?

First, pneumonia is a generic term that simply means "filling the lungs with fluid," so it can happen in lots of ways. Secondary infections can cause it, especially when the body is under great stress from the primary infection, but remember that flu is a respiratory infection that can cause pneumonia directly. The "pneumonia vaccine" is actually a vaccine against pneumococcal bacteria, and it would be at least partly effective against secondary infectious pneumonia (it's efficacy is not universal) but only if given well before flu infection-- it's a prophylactic, not a cure. The patient would already have to have acquired partial pneumococcal immunity. Note-- I'm a biologist, not a physician, so I'm not going to offer medical advice about this!

Bacteria do not react directly to human viral mutations at all, but extreme pathogenic stress from a virulent virus infection can reduce the host immune response to secondary infections.

Hope this answered your questions!

[senaca]

36. I appreciate your easy to understand answers to my questions. Thanks. nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. Part of the UK plan is, I think ,to give poultry farmers regular flu shots

before the H5N1 flu arrives here in birds (which seems quite possible, now that it's reached the eastern Mediterranean). This makes sense to me, to lessen the chances of recombination in the people who will have exposure to both type of flu.

I wondered if this ought to be happening with those in contact with poultry in Asia too (which may be a lot more people - I get the impression a lot of 'backyard farmers' have been involved there). Or, now that the bird flu is established over there, would it actually be more dangerous - could recombination happen with just the components of the vaccine (dead virus? Fragments of virus? I'm not sure) present in a recently-vaccinated person, rather than a live, reproducing human flu virus?

If using the vaccine in areas where the bird flu virus is already established is safe, would the best thing for world health as a whole to be to divert some regular human flu vaccine to there to lessen the chances of recombination?

[mike_c]

42. makes good sense...

...and no, recombination requires that both viruses be copying simultaneously within host cells. Killed virus used in a vaccine never invades host cells-- it just "presents" itself to the immune system to stimulate copying the appropriate recognition factors for antibodies.

[Irish Mastiff]

25. There is now a Dog Flu that just mutated fromm a Horse Flu.

Please bear with me here. This is not a thread hijack. As I understand it, the mechanism that took the Horse Flu and just turned it into Dog Flu is the same as what could happen with the H5N1 Bird flu.

The death rate with the dogs is reported at anywhere between 1% and 8%. I think the Spanish Flu of 1918 had a mortality rate of 2.5%.
------------------snip-------------
There are no reports of human infection with this virus, but there are some lessons for public health nonetheless. This influenza A subtype has been known for 40 years as a horse influenza virus and it was a great surprise to find that it had jumped directly (it appears) to dogs. Sequencing of the hemagglutinin protein of the virus (the H3 part of H3N8) showed a number of amino acid changes from the horse virus, but this remained a horse virus, i.e., it did not seem to be a reassortment. This underlines once again that a species jump can take place without the reassortment that WHO continually invokes as the herald of a change in avian virus that can transmit efficiently in humans. Reassortment simply is not needed for this. The species barrier that has been a convention of influenza epidemiology is not as high or as difficult to cross as believed and dog flu is a good example.

--------------snip----------
http://effectmeasure.blogspot.com/2005/10/dog-flu.html

[NNN0LHI]

31. No that ain't no thread hijack. I have been wondering about dog flu too

So if anyone that knows more about this I am all ears. Thank you for mentioning it and also the link. We also have some really sharp veterinarians who post at DU. Welcome to DU too.

Don

[Silverhair]

32. I did some googling about it.

At this time, no human is known to have caught the flu from a dog.
However, horse/dog flu is already infecting mammals who are closer to us than birds are.

That is as far as my knowledge on that goes.

[NNN0LHI]

33. I have been Goggling this for a week and just can't find much

At least much that I can understand? Thanks for the info.

Don

[mike_c]

44. this is a really good point....

That sort of direct species jump via mutation (nucleotide/amino acid substitution) is now understood to be the way the 1918 pandemic strain moved from birds to humans, IIRC. However, recombination is statistically (well at least theoretically) more likely to produce viable new strains because it incorporates new genetic material that has already been "tested" by natural selection and succeeded, whereas most mutations either don't change the virus significantly or are likely to reduce its fitness rather than improve it-- that's one reason public health agencies fear the recombinant so much. But direct species jumps via mutation can and do occur as well.

[depakid]

26. ????

Apparantly, this guy could have used a public speaking course or two during his undergrad days....

Blitzer is also incorrect in asserting that there hasn't been human to human transmission- it's suspected among family caregivers and several healthcare workers who were in prolonger contact with the virus via their patients.

Oh well, It's CNN-

and at this point, if anyone's actually expecting to learn from Blitzer's show, I guess they deserve some muddle.

[mike_c]

45. that's because there is likely a high threshold for human...

...transmissibility because the current virus is inefficient among humans. Think about it this way-- if only 1 in every 100,000 exposures results in human infection, but tens of thousands of people have been exposed to tens of millions of infected birds, a small number of human cases are statistical likelihoods. Now say that 100 people have been infected that way (I'm making these numbers up to illustrate the point)-- if the virus hasn't changed, the likelihood of them passing the disease to a "second generation" human infection, e.g. caregivers, is still 1 in 100,000 so there will be very few such infections. Third generation infections become highly unlikely.

Now imagine what would happen if the virus became much more easily transmissible among humans. The threshhold goes way down and hamans can pass it among themselves easily.

[depakid]

50. This of course has long been the concern

and thank you for taking the time for the informative posts, btw. I recall that you were discussing this issue intelligently 8 or 9 months ago.

I think a lot of people have trouble getting their heads around the statistical angle. With the spread of H5N1 throught Eurasia, the chances of random mututations and genetic reassortment increase exponentially, as to some extent does the likelyhood that a pandemic variant will cross over the species barrier into humans.

I like your "rolling snake eyes" analogy- I usually use the roulette wheel- and the two house numbers "0" and "00" to try to explain the same sorts of things.

[NNN0LHI]

48. I am not crazy about Blitzer or CNN but I think he was just repeating...

...what this doctor had said on CNN October 8, 2005? And I noticed that the expert on yesterday didn't correct him.

Don

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/08/smn.01.html

<snip>DR. WALTER ORENSTEIN, EMORY UNIVERSITY: Well, we really don't know how serious it will be. There are several things that make us concerned -- the spread in Asia, the numbers of people who have been infected so far and the fact that the virus is mutating and becoming more virulent.

On the other hand, we've seen no evidence of human to human transmission, which is necessary for a severe pandemic. So I think a much more likely scenario this season will be our traditional influenza outbreaks, where 36,000 people die, on average, and over 200,000 are hospitalized. So I hope everybody listening in who needs influenza...

[depakid]

49. agreed

And it's sort of hard to find the survellience info on the "mundane" A-strains this year. I think a lot of people don't give influenza the respect it deserves. A bad cold is not "the flu."

Influenza kills a lot of people- and those it doesn't, it knocks down hard. I hope I never have to deal with 104 fever, migraines, bone aches like I was beaten with a bat, lungs on fire, sweats, chills, secondary infections, etc.- ever again.

[NNN0LHI]

51. I have had the normal flu twice (I think?) and thought it was going to...

...kill me both times. Really. And once when I was only in my 20's. I think had I been the age I am now it would have killed me. It is some serious stuff, and should receive more attention.

Don

[tx_dem41]

34. A question: If a Democrat were president, and the World Health...

Organization (WHO), not a U.S. agency, were publicizing the exact same information that they are now, would any people that are crying "Overhype", be crying "Overhype"?

Just a question.

[NNN0LHI]

37. You are joking right?

After Bush came out a week or so and told everyone to read a book about the 1918 pandemic that read like a Stephen King novel and suggested he was going to call out the military on us in the event of a pandemic what was the Dem's reaction?

Did they come out and say Bush was full of beans? No they didn't. Their answer was to call for Bush to appoint a pandemic director. Yea, that was their answer.

So in this age where even the Democrats are just as scared shitless of the influential drug companies as the Republicans are I would still be very skeptical. There you go.

Don

[tx_dem41]

39. I get my info from the World Health Organization.

Its not part of *co.

[NNN0LHI]

40. I thought you were asking me about a Dem president saying what Bush did?

Because if a Democratic president would have come out and said we have this avian flu problem. But you all relax because your government is working on this problem and really isn't much that you as a citizen can do about it.

And then went on to say there are currently several experimental vaccines for avian flu going through trials in this country and when one is perfected it will be available to everyone who wants it.

And if there isn't adequate private manufacturing capacity to make enough vaccine in a timely manner we will make it ourselves. And by the way my fellow Americans stay away from the online snake oil salesmen trying to steal your money with their bird flu remedies. And if you need medicine for this illness your government will supply it for you at no charge.

But you know that no politician would ever say that. Don't you? But until I hear something like that yes I won't believe much of anything they say. Republican or Democrat.

Don

[countryjake]

47. Thanks for sparking an informative post!

And thanks to mike c for giving understandable responses!

I think many around here see this flu scare as nothing more than hype, as it relates to humans, yet small farmers and backyard chicken flocks in this country have already been put on notice in some states that their "hobby" will no longer be tolerated in the event that infected birds reach (or even get near) our shores! The effect that avian flu would have on the poultry industry here is real, just as mad-cow could destroy beef profits, and our government does NOT look kindly on independent food raisers, small farms, or folks who live a normal country-life-style!

Even if avian flu has not yet made "the jump" but a migratory bird (not just a goose or duck) falls out of the sky, dead of it, onto rural America's soil, all hell will break loose as those guys in their white gear start taking people's birds. They already have been to my yard, when British Columbia had H7 flu last year...even checked our non-poultry birds in cages inside. They will allow NOTHING to threaten their industry!

I firmly believe that it's not nearly as important to them that our population be protected, as it is to protect all those huge agri-business poultry farms. Small farmers have NO rights once the health department comes knocking.