Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

[HenryN]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

The latter part of my most recent posting has nothing at all to do with a "dead birds don't fly"-argument.

I'd still appreciate a substantive reply to the findings cited in my posting and not just empty dismissals. Dr. niman, please answer the following question: Which bird species migrates between July and December from Novosibirsk to the Caspian Sea along the major transport routes and stops over at the specific times and the specific places where the first cases in the different regions have been reported?

Birds and roads/railways?

Please. These were mentioned in 2005. Nonsense then, nonsense now.

There was NO H5N1 west of China prior to Qinghai Lake in May, 2005 and now there are over 50 countries with QINGHAI only H5N1.

The H5N1 positive species are largely RESIDENT wild birds (and Russia alone described 2 dozen species).

The record number of H5N1 positives in 2007 in Germany are in the SUMMER with no reported poultry outbreaks (and the sequneces again show MULTIPLE introductions).

These arguments are akin to arguing religion.

I have no interest.

[tompe]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

I, however, have interest.

The H5N1 positive species are largely RESIDENT wild birds (and Russia alone described 2 dozen species).

What am I supposed to make of that statement? Migratory birds are suddenly innocent?

These arguments are akin to arguing religion.

Then let's argue religion. There are some religions that claim an empirical ground. Now let's assume the spread of H5N1 to the west happened along the route outlined in my posting. Now there are two beliefs that can be based on that empirical foundation: (1) migrants were responsible, (2) trade is responsible. But note: these are beliefs that can be subjected to some form of testing!
So, again my question: Which bird species migrates between July and December from Novosibirsk to the Caspian Sea along the trans-Siberian railway and stops over at the specific times and the specific places where the first cases in the different regions have been reported?

[HenryN]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

I, however, have interest.



What am I supposed to make of that statement? Migratory birds are suddenly innocent?


Then let's argue religion. There are some religions that claim an empirical ground. Now let's assume the spread of H5N1 to the west happened along the route outlined in my posting. Now there are two beliefs that can be based on that empirical foundation: (1) migrants were responsible, (2) trade is responsible. But note: these are beliefs that can be subjected to some form of testing!
So, again my question: Which bird species migrates between July and December from Novosibirsk to the Caspian Sea along the trans-Siberian railway and stops over at the specific times and the specific places where the first cases in the different regions have been reported?

Please. The mute sweans are easily seen (and tested). You have an interest in arguing religion. I don't.

The werre over 700 wild bird H5N1 positives in Europe in 2006 all ALL were Qinghai. There was arecord number of H5N1 positives this SUMMER in Germany and France and ALL were Qinghai (with no poultry farms reporting H5N1). H5N1 was identified in multiple countries in the Middle East and Africa and ALL were Qinghai.

NONE of these countries reported Asian H5N1 prior to Qinghai Lake in May, 2005.

The data are VERY clear.

[tompe]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

And if it was the Qinghai-strain that was transported from China to Russia and then further West? And I still don't see the point about the RESIDENT birds...

My question stands: Which bird species migrates between July and December from Novosibirsk to the Caspian Sea along the major transport routes and stops over at the specific times and the specific places where the first cases in the different regions have been reported? What is metaphysical about this question?

[HenryN]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

And if it was the Qinghai-strain that was transported from China to Russia and then further West? And I still don't see the point about the RESIDENT birds...

My question stands: Which bird species migrates between July and December from Novosibirsk to the Caspian Sea along the major transport routes and stops over at the specific times and the specific places where the first cases in the different regions have been reported? What is metaphysical about this question?

Please, the flyways have been known for years.

H5N1 infects MANY speicies, including RESIDENT birds. It is endemic and the positives are related more to what is tested and what has a level high enough for the VERY poor surveillance program.

Alomost ALL positives are in dead or dying birds. H5N1 has been detected in live healthy birds, but the RNA level is VERY low.

[tompe]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

Please, the flyways have been known for years.

Then please provide me with a reference to a flyway that coincides with the trans-Siberian railway and that includes stopover sites at the positions of the outbreaks (the timing has to be right as well). Should be easy if the information is known for many years.

I find it insulting to be accused of expressing nonsense.

[HenryN]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

Then please provide me with a reference to a flyway that coincides with the trans-Siberian railway and that includes stopover sites at the positions of the outbreaks (the timing has to be right as well). Should be easy if the information is known for many years.

I find it insulting to be accused of expressing nonsense.

Nonsense is nonsense.

It isn't science. It is religion.

The science is the POSITIVES and the SEQUENCES from the positives.

The flyways are well known and have been for years.

Find a go fer if you can't find the data.

All of this was covered in 2005.

Case closed.

[tompe]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

The flyways are well known and have been for years.

I insist as I really can't find any reference to such a flyway: where is the evidence for such a flyway? If it is known for years it should be easy and I can be shown to be a fool.

What is that nonsense about positives and negatives? The spatial and temporal pattern of positive findings of infected birds and variants still leaves plenty of room for civilised arguments about the processes that brought about the pattern. It is such a basic fact of natural science that similar patterns can be caused by very different processes (ontogeny offers wonderful case studies).

[gsgs]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

maybe you can comment on the anatidae-migration
paper above. They seem to address this question.



--------------------------------
The Black Sea and Caspian Sea flyways run from the WSL, leading to Mediterranean Europe and western Asia, respectively. When weighted according to the number of birds that use them ( Figure 2B), the North Sea flyway stands out as the most important, followed by the Black Sea; the Caspian Sea flyway is of least consequence. ( The estimated population of Anatidae in the western Palearctic is shown in the Appendix Figure.)
---------------------------------

[HenryN]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

I insist as I really can't find any reference to such a flyway: where is the evidence for such a flyway? If it is known for years it should be easy and I can be shown to be a fool.

What is that nonsense about positives and negatives? The spatial and temporal pattern of positive findings of infected birds and variants still leaves plenty of room for civilised arguments about the processes that brought about the pattern. It is such a basic fact of natural science that similar patterns can be caused by very different processes (ontogeny offers wonderful case studies).

Please.

[tompe]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

@gsgs

The Gilbert et al. paper is not at all conclusive. The virus did not spread by large jumps along the stopover places of the migrants but through a progressive expansion from isolated outbreaks.

Gilbert et al. write: "The broad approach adopted in this study has clear limitations, given the uncertainties regarding the host range of HPAI H5N1 virus within the Anatidae family, the sizes and distribution of the bird populations, their precise migratory patterns, and the demarcation of the summer and winter habitat. A comprehensive retrospective analysis of HPAI H5N1 virus spread in the western Palearctic would require a better description of the dynamic distribution of wild birds (breeding range, wintering sites, stopover sites, migration pathways) as well as more detailed domestic poultry data (distribution, production structure, species composition, movements through trade) to map the contact points between wild and domestic birds."

The "precise migratory patterns" and the actual spread of the virus need to match. The actual spread does not conform to a known migratory pattern (but to patterns in transport networks).

[gsgs]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

no, they just say that their methods have natural limitations.
They don't say that the migratory pattern won't match the virus spread.
As I understand it, they in contrary conclude that those two are conform.

It needn't be 100% migratory birds and 0% poultry trade
or vice versa. Some combination works just fine.

[tompe]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

Yes, they don't say it, but others do (for example Gauthier-Clerc et al.). The precise pattern of spread places an evidentiary burden on people claiming that migrants are the vectors (especially if this precise pattern does not match any known migratory pattern). A match of the broad pattern is not good enough.
And of course it is possible that it is x% migrants and 100-x% trade. I think it would be constructive to return from time to time to the issues raised by the Weber-Stilianakis-paper (ands as niman has admitted of not having read it I will completely ignore his comments). It is still largely unknown how heavy exercise and infections interact in migrants. Current knowledge makes it worthwhile to consider the hypothesis that heavy exercise and infection with HPAI don't go together very well...
I just think that there so many doubts that the role of migrants should still be treated as an open question.

[HenryN]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

Yes, they don't say it, but others do (for example Gauthier-Clerc et al.). The precise pattern of spread places an evidentiary burden on people claiming that migrants are the vectors (especially if this precise pattern does not match any known migratory pattern). A match of the broad pattern is not good enough.
And of course it is possible that it is x% migrants and 100-x% trade. I think it would be constructive to return from time to time to the issues raised by the Weber-Stilianakis-paper (ands as niman has admitted of not having read it I will completely ignore his comments). It is still largely unknown how heavy exercise and infections interact in migrants. Current knowledge makes it worthwhile to consider the hypothesis that heavy exercise and infection with HPAI don't go together very well...
I just think that there so many doubts that the role of migrants should still be treated as an open question.

This issue was closed long ago. Use of negative data on swabs of live healthy migratory birds is nonsense, as are attempts to identify individual species.

The assays on live birds failed to detect H5N1 in regions where detection in dead or dying wild birds was widespread. The live bird assays simply lack sensitivity, as has been demonstrated time and time again. Similarly, attempts to pick some species is also nonsense. Dozens of bird species have been positive for H5N1 and EVERYTHING west of China has been the Qinghai strain and ALL have been after Qinghai Lake in May, 2005.

These arguments were DOA in 2005. Repeating them now after the Qinghai spread has grown to include over 50 countries west of China in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa and RESIDENT wild birds are now dying of Qinghai H5N1 in the SUMMER in Germany in record numbers (in the absence of poultry deaths), makes these arguments absurd and puts them into a religious FAITH categeory.

[gsgs]

Re: Ecologic Immunology of Avian Influenza (H5N1) in Migratory Birds

is there a picture or list with these
"precise patterns of spread " available ?