Check out the FAQ,Terms of Service & Disclaimers by clicking the
link. Please register
to be able to post. By viewing this site you are agreeing to our Terms of Service and Acknowledge our Disclaimers.
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster.
The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website.
By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
Apparently Maryland mallards are carrying low path H5/N1 viruses as once again the virus has been detected in the state, this time in live Kent County birds. Interestingly the viral samples were collected back in June and are just now being investigated and reported. Makes one wonder what else has not yet been reported to the public and duck hunters by the USDA.
I hope someone explains to the duck hunters that it may have mutated to HPAI if not by now - it could soon.
In the table notes they say...."If the genetic sequence matches that of a known highly pathogenic AI virus, the sample is considered highly pathogenic."
Shouldn't they consider any virus with multiple amino acids at the cleavage site to be highly pathogenic?
Does their further determination of pathogenicity by observing the % of dead chickens always correlate with multiple amino acids?
.
Last edited by AlaskaDenise; September 12, 2007, 01:24 PM.
"The next major advancement in the health of American people will be determined by what the individual is willing to do for himself"-- John Knowles, Former President of the Rockefeller Foundation
I hope someone explains to the duck hunters that it may have mutated to HPAI if not by now - it could soon.
In the table notes they say...."If the genetic sequence matches that of a known highly pathogenic AI virus, the sample is considered highly pathogenic."
Shouldn't they consider any virus with multiple amino acids at the cleavage site to be highly pathogenic?
Does their further determination of pathogenicity by observing the % of dead chickens always correlate with multiple amino acids?
.
Yes, most countries will use the cleavage site as evidence of high path (however, the low path H5N1 do not have multi-basic cleavage sites and the assays are not sensitive enough to detect high path in live birds, which makes of the bulk of the testing in North America).
.......assays are not sensitive enough to detect high path in live birds, which makes of the bulk of the testing in North America).
That's not comforting news.
I'm concerned that if the testing procedure if an "if, then" situation where only IF it matches a known HPAI, THEN they do the %-of-dead chicken testing, they may miss any other AI that could have pandemic potential - like H9Nx, or even H6Nx (mentioned since it's a parent to H5N1).
.
"The next major advancement in the health of American people will be determined by what the individual is willing to do for himself"-- John Knowles, Former President of the Rockefeller Foundation
I'm concerned that if the testing procedure if an "if, then" situation where only IF it matches a known HPAI, THEN they do the %-of-dead chicken testing, they may miss any other AI that could have pandemic potential - like H9Nx, or even H6Nx (mentioned since it's a parent to H5N1).
.
It is just a sensitivity issue. All dead patients, except one are from H5N1 from Asia (and everything west of China is Qinghai).
The concern is Qinghai, but the testing of live birds for Qinghai is well into the abysmal range.
The story is quite simple. The surveillance is simply flying blind, because the test being used produces false negatives and has little likelihood of detecting Qinghai H5N1 in live birds. Even the PCR on the DEAD goslings on Prince Edward Island was borderline positive.
Tweet
Comment