• 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.

Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

it can acquire NA (and others...) and not HA.

any such reassortment is dangerous since it could change virulence.
e.g. it could acquire PB1 with a functional PB1-F2

reassortment means prolonged evolution. Once it goes loose
the virus may get other ideas how to change
It "could" do a lot of things. However, swine H1N1 that acquires human N almost always also acquires human H. In Sasketchewan, 2 or 3 farm workers were infected with a triple reassortant that was Tamiflu resistance because the virus had acquired the N1 from Bisbane/59, which had H274Y. However, it also acquired H1 from Brisbane/59, so the resulting virus had a human H1N1 serotype, but a pandemic strain is defined by a new serotype. Brisbane/59 H1N1 is not new (and most humans have immunity by virtue of earlier H1N1 seasonal flu infections and earlier vaccination with Brisbane/59 H1N1).
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

> but a pandemic strain is defined by a new serotype.

so we have no pandemic
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

usually all sorts of reassortments do happen, there are many examples.
I wouldn't rely on HA and NA going to gether.
They didn't in the 1968 pandemic nor in human/swine H1N2
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

it can acquire NA (and others...) and not HA.
Please provide examples of swine isolates with H and N that are not either both human or both swine.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Here's a timeline for when the resistance appeared:

1. On May 31, he developed symptoms. Virus showed susceptibility in samples taken on June 4 but resistance in those taken on June 11, July 14 & 30.

On August 6, pyrosequencing at CDC of viral RNA from a specimen collected on June 4 revealed susceptibility to oseltamivir. However, pyrosequencing of a follow-up specimen collected on July 30 indicated oseltamivir resistance, based on detection of the H275Y mutation

On August 10, CDC received previously collected virus isolates from the patient for pyrosequencing on August 11, which confirmed the previous results. A novel influenza A (H1N1) virus isolate from a specimen collected on May 31 was identified as susceptible to oseltamivir by pyrosequencing at CDC, but viruses isolated from specimens collected on June 11 and July 14 had the H275Y mutation, indicating oseltamivir resistance.

2. June 21, she developed symptoms. Virus showed susceptibility in samples taken on June 21 but resistance in those taken on July 14 & 28.

On August 6, CDC determined that pyrosequencing of viral RNA from the first clinical specimen collected on June 21 did not detect the H275Y mutation. However, the mutation was detected by pyrosequencing of viral RNA from a nasal wash specimen collected on July 28. Treatment of the patient with oseltamivir was discontinued when results became available.

On August 10, CDC received other previously collected virus isolates from this patient for testing, and pyrosequencing of a virus isolated from a specimen collected on July 14 had the H275Y mutation, confirming oseltamivir resistance.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

usually all sorts of reassortments do happen, there are many examples.
I wouldn't rely on HA and NA going to gether.
They didn't in the 1968 pandemic nor in human/swine H1N2
The H1N2 in human or swine H1N2 are both human. 1968 didn't involve swine genes.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Wrong. The acquiring a Brisbane/59 H and N would produce a strain similar to seasonal H1N1 (population would already have antibodies). Its hopes and dreams on steroid.
It has already happened in Saskatchewan with another triple reassortant.

I take it by this very surprising response that it is your view that the existing Swine Flu cannot reassort with Seasonal Flu to acquire only the NA segment making it Tamiflu resistant.

Otherwise, none of this makes any sense, or you have just misinterpreted the question posed.

Many of us in our responses agree with you on your recombination theory of Tamiflu resistance acquisition, but a reader would not necessarily get that impression by the way you respond to our posts on this forum. You simply say "no" or "wrong" to anything anyone else posts.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

I admit to being confused even after Niman explained.

By the little summary I posted, I thought it was clear that the resistance developed "in" both people and was not the result of seasonal combining with panflu (or silent spreading). Considering that a certain percent of people will normally develop a resistance to Tamiflu, I just imagined this was much better than if it had combined.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

****** got HA from swine <1918 and NA from swine which however got it from birds in 1978
mixing of American HA and Eurasian NA in Asia
also:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol12no05/05-1060.htm
separation of HA and NA is also assumed to have happened in 1918

swine H1N2 predates human H1N2 e.g. A/swine/Ehime/1/1980(H1N2)

swinish flu may "pick up" NA from humans while keeping its own HA
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in WA

I take it by this very surprising response that it is your view that the existing Swine Flu cannot reassort with Seasonal Flu to acquire only the NA segment making it Tamiflu resistant.

Otherwise, none of this makes any sense, or you have just misinterpreted the question posed.

Many of us in our responses agree with you on your recombination theory of Tamiflu resistance acquisition, but a reader would not necessarily get that impression by the way you respond to our posts on this forum. You simply say "no" or "wrong" to anything anyone else posts.
There is quite a bit of data on swine H1N1 acquiring H and N human genes. I don't know of any instance where one was acquired without the other, Swine H3N2 is now fairly widespread and both the H3 and N2 are human. In the earlier series on Canadian swine in 2003/2004, most isolates had human PB1 with seven other swine genes. Two had human H and N (I believe they were both H1N2), and one had all 8 gene segments (thus none had a human H with a swine N or a human N and a swine H). Same is true for the recent "novel" isolate in Sasketchewan. It was a triple reassortant (it wasn't clear if it was H3N2 or H1N1 prior to the acquisition of human H1 and N1) and acquired Bribane/59 H1 AND N1 (and the N1 had H274Y).
I didn't say that picking up N1 without H1 was likely and I know of any such example (human N1 with swine H1 or swine H3).
If you know of such and example, post it. I asked GS for an example and he posted ZERO.
I didn't say human N1 with swine H1 made sense. WHO and CDC did, as did media reports, but they are fixated on reassortment and as seen by the nonsense about a concern that acquisition of N1 from brisbane/59, they have no current examples (without also acquiring a human H1), and I doubt that they have any prior examples.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

I admit to being confused even after Niman explained.

By the little summary I posted, I thought it was clear that the resistance developed "in" both people and was not the result of seasonal combining with panflu (or silent spreading). Considering that a certain percent of people will normally develop a resistance to Tamiflu, I just imagined this was much better than if it had combined.
It wasn't at all clear that the resistance developed "in" the patient. It just expanded in the patients (like Singapore, were the resistance was present 2-3 days after the start of treatment - too soon for de novo H274Y).
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

OK, let's review some basic science influenza epidemiology.

First, influenza is unique in many ways but the reassortment into a novel virus has never been documented in human beings, chickens nor domesticated ducks.

It is hypothesized that it might occur in swine, though it is known to widely occur in certain duck species, mallard being the best documented.

This is because, for re assortment into a viable virus to occur, the host must not have an immune response to either the progenitor viruses nor the product virus.Otherwise, it would never survive to adequate quantities to be spread from the re assortment organism.

More later, got to go see some patients.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

Where was we? Oh yeah.

The 3 elements of influenza evolution.

The mixing bowl and intercontinental transport: the wild mallard and a few other species of intercontinental travel. (Have to not have any immune reaction to influenza, other wise dead birds don't fly very far. Exception, H5 is so pathogenic that even the transport birds seldom complete their migration before mounting some sort of reaction. Remember, with influenza it is not the VIRUS that kills, it is the body's immune reaction that kills the patient.)

The ultimate recipient of interest to us, meaning, us, humans.

The middle man species- swine, domesticated ducks, turkeys, ferrets, chickens, crows, grouse, some pigeons. They have to have both upper respiratory receptors for human and the migrating, mixing bowl species. If not they, the virus selected can not be guaranteed to infect humans. THIS is why we have not had a bird flu, H5, pandemic yet.

Over 460 persons have been infected with H5 thus far but this is due to the heavy innoculum received from long time proximity to the infected domesticated birds & ducks. So heavy is the infection that it has to reach the lower respiratory receptors in sufficient quantity to cause infection.

The same probably occured with some of the H1N1 with the slaughter houses in Mexico and in Canda on the swine farms.

Remember, contagious goes both ways, swine/bird to human and human to swine/bird. BIG danger on swine farms for true reassortment in pigs naive to this novel H1N1, or in visiting wild ducks among the herds. It has been clearly documented to occur humans to chickens.

Now, that is an awful lot. Get me back on track. Does any of this apply to your topics? If not, please excuse my ramblings.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

It wasn't at all clear that the resistance developed "in" the patient. It just expanded in the patients (like Singapore, were the resistance was present 2-3 days after the start of treatment - too soon for de novo H274Y).
Sequencing showed susceptibility initially and resistance later, so I assumed it developed in the patient.

Are you saying the intitial sequencing could not detect resistance?

Did the Singapore sequence initially show susceptibility and resistance later?
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

Where was we? Oh yeah.

The 3 elements of influenza evolution.

The mixing bowl and intercontinental transport: the wild mallard and a few other species of intercontinental travel. (Have to not have any immune reaction to influenza, other wise dead birds don't fly very far. Exception, H5 is so pathogenic that even the transport birds seldom complete their migration before mounting some sort of reaction. Remember, with influenza it is not the VIRUS that kills, it is the body's immune reaction that kills the patient.)

The ultimate recipient of interest to us, meaning, us, humans.

The middle man species- swine, domesticated ducks, turkeys, ferrets, chickens, crows, grouse, some pigeons. They have to have both upper respiratory receptors for human and the migrating, mixing bowl species. If not they, the virus selected can not be guaranteed to infect humans. THIS is why we have not had a bird flu, H5, pandemic yet.

Over 460 persons have been infected with H5 thus far but this is due to the heavy innoculum received from long time proximity to the infected domesticated birds & ducks. So heavy is the infection that it has to reach the lower respiratory receptors in sufficient quantity to cause infection.

The same probably occured with some of the H1N1 with the slaughter houses in Mexico and in Canda on the swine farms.

Remember, contagious goes both ways, swine/bird to human and human to swine/bird. BIG danger on swine farms for true reassortment in pigs naive to this novel H1N1, or in visiting wild ducks among the herds. It has been clearly documented to occur humans to chickens.

Now, that is an awful lot. Get me back on track. Does any of this apply to your topics? If not, please excuse my ramblings.

OK, then numerous other viral experts are completely wrong and we do not have much to worry about, unless of course we get additional reassortment in the friendly accommodating pig.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

It wasn't at all clear that the resistance developed "in" the patient. It just expanded in the patients (like Singapore, were the resistance was present 2-3 days after the start of treatment - too soon for de novo H274Y).

Are we just making this up as we go along?

Please provide some scientific basis to go along with this novel theory to go along with our continuing spreading and ever more resistant novel virus.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

Snowy,
About all I got from that blog was this:
But giving them the drugs raises at least the theoretical risk that they will develop and spread antiviral resistant strains of the novel H1N1 flu.

The more we talk about this, the less clear the issue becomes to me. People talk about this like it's a reality but here he calls the risk theoretical. It can't be both.
 
Re: Two Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases reported in Washington

Sorry just got 90 minutes ago the confirmation, you will see confirmation in the next two weeks.

I am uncomfortable because it target specific people again.

Snowy
 
Back
Top