What I Learned From My Awful Experience with Avian Flu

[Florida Bullfrog]

Still wrong. I'll help, maybe then things will become more clear.

1]
HPAI is DEFINITIONAL.
The World Organization for Animal Health (the OEI), defines HPAI in three parts (though is reviewing the third, as some recent presentations have defied the definition):

A) The disease is caused by Influenza type A;
B) It kills 75% or more of eight inoculated chickens within 10 days;
C) The presence of multiple dibasic amino acids at a particular location on the H protein.

Until about 20 years ago, all the HPAI outbreaks identified were with H5 or H7 virii families which satisfed the third requirement. More recently, H2, H4, H8, H10, and H14 strains with HPAI characteristics have been identified.

In other words, if it is an Influenza A virus that doesn't kill, relatively quickly, 3/4 or more of the birds injected in a lab test, while its AI, its not HPAI. Genetic testing doesn't identify it as HPAI, its mortality rate does.


2]
Because LPAI (Low Pathenogenic Avian Influenza) has been known int he wild to spontaneously present in a Highly Pathenogenic form, its the policy of the US and elsewhere (and has been for many years) to destroy flocks which testing shows were exposed to any H5 or H7 Avian Influenza strain, regardless of symptoms presented. That why published mortality rates are so low, compared to the HPAI definition. Because LPAI infections are responsible for the vast majority of cullings. Even the linked study on the last page of the Nigerian outbreak makes the mistake. The majority of the infections were, definitionally, not HPAI. Not that they weren't fatal to some percentage of birds, not that they weren't (possibly - I've read the study, it has some limitations due to the timing and number of samples they could test) H5N1 strains which could have presented in an HPAI form - but definitionally, they weren't HPAI in the majority of cases. Not enough birds died of the disease, as opposed to the cullings.

3]
If you were aware of the definition (see 1a, b above) you'd have rejected out of hand any suggestion that HPAI routinely kills 90-100% of infected birds in two days.

But… as already pointed out I did reject the notion that HPAI routinely kills 90-100% of infected birds in two days. What part of “I don’t believe it” constitutes an acceptance?

And yet you are now contradicting yourself, where you are saying out of one side of your mouth (or fingers, so to speak) that I accepted an erroneous statistic about inflated mortality concerning HPAI, and then out the other side you are arguing that HPAI by its definition is characterized more or less by the quoted statistic of high mortality that you say I am erroneously accepting but you yourself are rejecting and advocating at the same time.

I don’t think you know how to articulate your position, so I will do it for you. What you actually seem to be saying is that I am wrong to reject the quoted statistic, because HPAI by its definition is defined by that general high mortality statistic (although specific numbers from the CDC’s quoted statistic you are saying are wrong may not line up exactly with the studies you are familiar with). Your position is that when I question the mortality numbers, I am doing so because I am observing the results of LPAI and not HPAI.

If that’s not what you’re trying to articulate, then I think you need to go back to the drawing board because you’re contradicting yourself left and right.

 

[lafenrir]

I knew from Day 1 that this was political. I will try to not say too much, because of this venue but, IMHO the elite are spreading curable diseases and panic to control the World population. Farm animals, like Chickens and Ducks are a cash business and they want to control all cash so it becomes a cashless society.

You definitely need to post that sort of crazy elsewhere!

 

[Geena]

I'm confused too. The CDC claims the 90 to 100 percent HPAI mortality rate. Is that accurate?
But I'm pretty sure that they aren't going around killing millions of birds for the fun of it or because of some political agenda. I'm also pretty sure, right or wrong, that they are attempting to protect our food supply and don't give a hoot about backyard flocks other than that they could possibly transmit the disease.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

I'm confused too. The CDC claims the 90 to 100 percent HPAI mortality rate. Is that accurate?
But I'm pretty sure that they aren't going around killing millions of birds for the fun of it or because of some political agenda. I'm also pretty sure, right or wrong, that they are attempting to protect our food supply and don't give a hoot about backyard flocks other than that they could possibly transmit the disease.

Actually, the CDC claims UP TO 90-100% mortality, in this sentence:

HPAI A(H5) or A(H7) virus infections can cause disease that affects multiple internal organs with mortality up to 90% to 100% in chickens, often within 48 hours. 

Those two short words do a lot of work in that sentence, even with HPAI being defined as cases greater than 75% mortality in lab testing. Those two words also seem to get left out of a lot of HPAI reporting. As does the fact that most birds are culled because the flock tested positive for H5 or H7, not because an HPAI diagnosis was made.

Agree, the only reason they seem to care about backyard flocks is as potential disease sources.

 

[Geena]

Those two short words do a lot of work in that sentence,

Indeed, so more accurately it is 75 to 100 percent?

Still then a lot of birds at risk considering the worldwide chicken population is estimated at 25 billion. The let 'er rip and pick up the pieces later method could be devastating.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Indeed, so more accurately it is 75 to 100 percent?

Still then a lot of birds at risk considering the worldwide chicken population is estimated at 25 billion. The let 'er rip and pick up the pieces later method could be devastating.

Well, if its under 75% death rate, and its Influenza type A, we just don't call it "HPAI" - its LPAI.

'Cause that makes it all better, right? /sarc

 

[NanaK]

Well, if its under 75% death rate, and its Influenza type A, we just don't call it "HPAI" - its LPAI.

'Cause that makes it all better, right? /sarc

Do you know if the US would cull for LPAI?
I've read that LPAI can easily mutate into HPAI but have not been able to find out much more info even using google scholar.

edit- not "is" but "if"

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Do you know if the US would cull for LPAI?
I've read that LPAI can easily mutate into HPAI but have not been able to find out much more info even using google scholar.

edit- not "is" but "if"

YES. The US culls for any positive test for H5 or H7.

I suspect that's what you were looking for. Bad Google Scholar, Bad!

/edit the States are free to do otherwise, but the $ from the Feds encourages them to toe the proverbial line.

 

[NanaK]

YES. The US culls for any positive test for H5 or H7.

I suspect that's what you were looking for. Bad Google Scholar, Bad!

Thank you very much!

I will study this more this evening.

 

[AGeese]

If I may interject with public announcement broadly speaking (which could apply elsewhere too) since this thread is beginning to show signs of deterioration and political creep. Since I personally enjoy hearing what many of you have to say, but without the ego.

In as far as politics. I know a lot of folks take comfort in their personal biases when their favored admin is in the Whitehouse. However I think it would do us all well to give each other the benefit of the doubt for some healthy skepticism in an age where people can't figure out how to talk to one another without ridicule and condemnation.

When you shut someone down for this or that, and you're reasoning is that "you're sure" Is your confidence in everything gonna-be-alright all that more intellectual from the person who sees patterns in society and points them out for the benefit of others based on their own values, which may be different from yours?

I personally think we need more people like this, but also more understanding.

Historically speaking is it a surprise to anyone that governments have done both good and bad things? That governments are run and maintained by the failible? By us?

Considering this, I see no reason to name call anyone however uninformed they may be or are perceived to be. Imagine if our forerunners simply appealed to authority? There would be no "science" to follow.

Not sure when "science" all of a sudden become an immovable thing people reference without even knowing what the hell is in it. Just "follow the science" it's more like follow the media, and let someone else do the hard work.

If any blame need laid it is with our "free press" that misconstrues scientific studies, and converts them to catchy headlines and whips people into a frenzy in order to shape social policy. We're either in a free society where we can make up our own minds or we're not. And if we can't opt out to reasonable degree, we're definitely not free.

So if blame need laid anywhere, it's not with anyone here. It's at the feet of these corporate-partisan backed news outlets driven to profit appealing to our emotion.

Don't think so? Please point me to a well established, well known news source that is strictly reporting without telling you how to feel however subtle it may come across.

Actually please don't I don't need more "news", my positions come from a personal kind of philosophical idealism. It doesn't have to be right for the rest of you and that's fine.