• 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.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

#20/21:...

Without entering the scientific distinctions, before the literature publishing, the sci. details usualy were supervised and rectified if neccessary by the book scientific correctors, not neccessary by the author.

This book were not claimed as an scientific publication for professional viral researchers, or waiting for scientific reviews, it is an wide public lecture probably, so the author could have some room.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

JVBarry said:
I'm John Barry, am incredibly busy just now and plan to post a more detailed reply in the future-- if anyone still cares. However, let me respond briefly here.

First, I certainly know the difference between a retrovirus and other viruses, and I thank my critic for pointing out the imprecision of my language. In future printings of the book, this will be corrected. Any other factual error will also be corrected.

But most of his comments reflect either errors on his part, willful misreading of the book, or matters of opinion. Let me give you an example of each.

1. His error: He's wrong and I'm right about dendritic cells. Some, although not all, do do what the book says they do.

2. A willful misreading of the book: He complains about my sentence, "Antibodies, for example, carry thousands of receptors on their surface to recognize and bind to a target antigen." He argues that this means a single antibody can bind to thousands of antigens. Any reasonable reader of the sentence will conclude that it says the opposite. The antibody has thousands of receptors, but they only bind to one antigen.

3. Matters of opinion:... I think the evidence is very strong that the spring wave in 1918 was caused by the same virus as the second wave. But since the first wave was generally so mild, and killed so few-- the British Grand Fleet, which patrolled the coast of Europe, saw 10,313 cases but suffered only 4 deaths-- it's unlikely we'll ever get enough molecular evidence to prove or disprove this opinion. However, epidemiological evidence is in my opinion compelling.

There is no doubt a new pandemic virus erupted in the spring, long before late June when Taubenberger's article is willing concede that it began. In fact, the pandemic picked up its name "Spanish Influenza" when it struck Spain-- in May, before Taubenberger agrees that a pandemic existed.

So there are two possibilites. Either one pandemic virus was supplanted by another, or the same virus caused both waves. The first hypothesis is possible, and many people now fear that H1N1 could be supplanted by an H5N1 pandemc (or by a reassortant of H1 and H5, or another reassortant, or by an entirely different virus). But this seems quite unlikely.

More importantly, there is overwhelming evidence that spring wave exposure provided protection against the lethal wave. This protection was much greater than can be explained by the cross-protection that one strain might provide another. In fact it was equal to or better than a good modern vaccine. A modern vaccine is considered decent at 70% effectiveness, and a few years ago the vaccine was only 44% effetcive. Spring exposure protected against the fall wave often with 80-90% effectiveness. I wrote about this at length. See: Barry, JM, Viboud, C, Simonsen, L,, Cross Protection Between Successive Waves of the 1918-19 Influenza Pandemic: Epidemiological Evidence from US Army Camps and Britain, J Infect Dis. 2008 Nov 15;198(10):1427-34.

I wrote that article hoping to convince those who speculated that the waves were caused by different viruses that they were wrong. Apparently I was unsuccessful in this.

Those who argue the virus did not change virulence in 1918 are not being logical. They're being tautological. They are saying that influenza viruses don't change virulence; waves in 1918 were of different virulence; therefore the viruses were different.

Until H5N1 surfaced, most people did not believe influenza could jump directly from birds to people either.
Click to expand...

Mr. Barry -

We are all honored that you chose to weigh in on this discussion. Your book has helped many of us see the overall evolution of the 1918 pandemic and I think it will be a great help to us in our vigilance regarding the current H1N1.

Quite apart from specific scientific details, we should all learn from your book about the behavior of governing bodies (Philadelphia versus San Francisco), the strategies that were successful against the virus (quarantine), and the countries and populations that might be most vulnerable to the current strain of the virus (India ?, South America ?, isolated communities, etc.).

There have been two post lines lately that seem to want to divert attention from the Spanish Flu. I believe that is a mistake. Yes, the 1918 strain and the current A/H1N1 may behave differently, but if it turns on us as it did in 1918, we can draw upon lessons from the past. If we do not learn from the mistakes of our predecessors, we will likely repeat their mistakes (mistakes like not telling people about the danger, holding parades eventhough the dangerous strain had moved from the camps to the general population, allowing soldiers to be crammed into railway cars where the death rate far exceeded that in less crowded conditions).

There are many lessons to be learned from "The Great Influenza". We hope that you will become a regular contributor to this site.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

"If we do not learn from the mistakes of our predecessors, we will likely repeat their mistakes"


Unfortunately, not only we did not learn,
we ultra-fasten, and augmented the disseminations by huge touristic fluxes, and by new air vehicles intercontinental vectors ...
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Welcome, Mr. Barry.

I remain impressed with your attention to detail in the writing of The Great Influenza. Also, your ability as historian to enlarge/ to include the multitude of factors that played into the response to the 1918 Pandemic in a manner that was factual/ non-judgmental.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

What an honor to have you post here! I have your book. Being a lay person, current RN student, it is written to where I can understand it. I often refer to the month we are currently in and compare it to the goings on of that same month in your histories. It is eery in the similarities, tho I pray the similarities stop soon. Thanks so much for posting and even more for writing the only thorough book on the history of the pandemic. My husband's grandfather was an elderly doctor and died in Feb 1919, his wife seven days later. All their grown children, 14, lived. We have only the headstones, no other information. Family history says they both had the flu and pneumonia, tho no one in this part of Arkansas seems to remember the pandemic.

Thanks again for all your research.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Thank you J Barry for your very informative work. I found it goes well with Black November: The 1918 influenza pandemic in New Zealand by Geoffrey W. Rice http://www.nzine.co.nz/views/1918pandemic.html



another J Barry paper

WHITE PAPER ON NOVEL H1N1 PREPARED FOR THE MIT CENTER FOR ENGINEERING SYSTEMS FUNDAMENTALS http://esd.mit.edu/WPS/2009/esd-wp-2009-07.pdf
John M. Barry Distinguished Scholar, Tulane University Center for Bioenvironmental Research
Member, Advisory Board, MIT Center for Engineering Systems Fundamentals jvbarry@aol.com
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Crof at H5N1 blog is speculating that the poster JVBarry is not John Barry who wrote "The Great Influenza". I can tell you that it is. I interviewed him last week and also spoke to him today about his response to the blog essay by Racaniello. He chose to respond here because he felt he would have a fair chance to fully express himself without the typical bashing that permeates the internet.

We have a reputation for trying to maintain a civil dialog here.

Mr. Barry will not be responding on Dr. Racaniello's blog. He is invited here to reply and will be afforded the same courtesy we give all posters.

By the way - John Barry's email address is jvbarry..

Why? Who knows....it is his business.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Mr Barry, I am very fond of your work. It is a great honor.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Mr. Barry,

Welcome to FT!

In spite of tracking influenza for several years as a layperson, I'm embarrassed to admit that I just got around to reading your book. After reading the first 1/4 or so, my only regret is that I did not read it sooner!

Great work! :applause:

With Respect,
"Niko"
 
Last edited:
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

The science forums at FT:

Genetic Tracking of Disease - Commentaries & Analysis

http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=459


The Scientific Library

http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=585


The Science Behind the Bird Flu

http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=8


The History Forums at FT:

1918 Pandemic - Data, stories & history

http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=552


SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY, Historical / Situational Overview

http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=736


H5N1 - Historique, statistiques, chartes, r?sum?s

http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=560
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Florida1 said in reply to Crof...
I can assure you that it is the author John Barry who wrote “The Great Influenza” who is posting on FluTrackers.

Reply August 15, 2009 at 07:28 PM






Crof said...
Thanks, Florida. I've written to Barry (at "JVBarry") to seek confirmation, and an explanation of why he entered Flublogia at FluTrackers rather than respond directly to Racaniello at virology blog.

Reply August 15, 2009 at 08:42 PM


at virology blog -

<cite id="dsq-cite-14897998" class="dsq-comment-cite"> Crawford Kilian </cite> 3 hours ago I agree that Barry should respond here, and emailed him this evening to say so. I hope he turns up here with his arguments in hand.



Message -

"History is a relentless master. It has no present, only the past rushing into the future. ca

To try to hold fast is to be swept aside."

John F. Kennedy
President of the United States of America
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

#28, MIT link pdf:


"On Friday, May 1, CDC pushed far past its own guidelines for a pandemic of the mildness that novel H1N1 had by then demonstrated, and took the extreme position that a school with a single case should close for 14 days, and that local officials should consider closing all neighboring and feeder schools.

This guidance was apparently designed to sniff out the outbreak entirely.
Recognizing the impossibility of this task, CDC reversed itself a few days later and simultaneously declared that closing schools was not effective in stopping spread."


After be divided the atom more than a half of century,
to be "impossible" (CDC) to make only 14 days of closures ... having already an winter and summer school hollidays break period every year, well, :yinyang:
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

I believe Barry has the last word for now since no one has responded to his comments on the referenced blog. If/when they do we will post them here.


August 16, 2009

The Racaniello-Barry debate

Readers of comments here know that last night we discussed whether the real John Barry, author of The Great Influenza, had responded on FluTrackers to Vincent Racaniello's post The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?.


I got directly in touch with Barry and found it was indeed he who'd posted. Describing himself as "technologically challenged," he said he found the forum environment more comfortable than blogs.

But others have posted both Barry's first response, and a slightly revised one, in the comments responding to Racaniello's original post.

The issues may seem recondite, even esoteric, to non-specialists. But it's a genuine debate, not just an exchange of abuse--and that quality of civil discussion is one of the things I like best about Flublogia.

Barry added that he faces an immovable deadline for another project and won't be able to return to the discussion for a couple of weeks. So, temporarily, at least, Dr. Racaniello's response will be the last word.


August 16, 2009 at 10:09 AM PST

http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/h5n1/2009/08/the-racaniello-barry-debate.html


I believe Barry has the last word for now since no one has responded to his comments on the referenced blog. If/when they do we will post them here.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

now he argues the virus was the same in wave one and two ?
(Madagaskar,2002...)

I think it did reassort in wave 2 (and wave 3)
Several examples of exceeded transmission and virulence
of influenza in history and these were almost always caused by
reassortment
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Well, it was helpful to me to read the vigorous exchange. I hope I learned something about a challenging science. I have a copy of Mr. Barry's book on order. I've been reading a bit in the NYT's archives about the 1918 pandemic, and lost track of an article that mentioned a major public health official getting fired after the epidemic because his city fared worse than a city that took a different approach. I bet I can find that information in the book.
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

Barry reports about the commander of an army camp who
committed suicide because his camp did badly under his command
 
Re: Blog - The problems with Barry?s ?The Great Influenza?

gsgs said:
new paper:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...ed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=50
Click to expand...

"co-circulation" -> without join mutation
induced more 1918 pandemic virus wave2 lethality?

Could it be?

This article predicted increased severity of this pandemic virus (to better say, of its noted 7/x already present variants) in the next period, without an pandemic 2009 virus mutation,
could it be?
maybe the article implicit an pandemic virus snatching of some co-circulating viruses qualities prior to increased severity?

___
Link excerpt:
"This article (1) presents age, geographic, and temporal variations in 1918-1919 and 2009 influenza severity, (2) presents and discusses ecologic evidence in favor of the hypothesis to influenza lethality advanced here, (3) suggests biologic mechanisms capable of explaining it, (4) retrospectively, proposes co-circulation between the Pandemic and a 1918 seasonal (H3?) influenza virus as the context for the increased lethality during the second wave of the 1918 Pandemic, and (5) predicts an increase in influenza severity in the northern hemisphere as the 2009-2010 season advances and H3 circulation increases."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom