• 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.

WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Shiloh

Editor, Senior Moderator
Source: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/swineflu/news/may1409who.html

WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Robert Roos * News Editor

May 14, 2009 (CIDRAP News) ? An international group of experts has examined and rejected the idea proposed recently by an Australian scientist that the novel H1N1 influenza (swine flu) virus is the product of a laboratory accident, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported today.

"The group of scientists feels that this hypothesis does not really stand up to scrutiny, that the evidence suggests that this is a naturally derived virus, and not a laboratory-derived virus," said Dr. Keiji Fukuda, WHO assistant director-general for health security and environment, at a press briefing today.

Adrian Gibbs, 75, a veteran flu researcher, said recently that he had concluded from his analysis of the virus's genetic sequence that it might have evolved in eggs used by scientists to grow viruses and by drug companies to make flu vaccines. Gibbs said he intended to publish a scientific paper describing his hypothesis, according to a May 13 Bloomberg News report.

Fukuda said Gibbs contacted the WHO May 9 to communicate his idea, which he had arrived at by studying genetic data deposited in public databases, not from studying the virus directly.

"Because of the nature of the hypothesis and the credible nature of the scientist, we took this seriously," Fukuda said. The Bloomberg story said Gibbs was involved in research that led to the development of oseltamivir (Tamiflu).

After hearing Gibbs' idea, the WHO asked five of its collaborating centers to evaluate it, Fukuda said. A day later the agency asked the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) to do the same. WHO officials discussed the hypothesis with a large group of experts in both human and animal influenza 2 days ago, he said. They concluded that Gibb's proposition didn't fit the evidence.

Fukuda added that the WHO will need to review Gibbs's research article when it is published, but he indicated that it is unlikely to change the experts' conclusions.

He cited the episode as a positive example of rapid, open scientific communication and debate on medical issues, facilitated by putting genetic data in public repositories.

"We live in an age when it's really not possible to hide things," he said. "It's all for the better as far as I'm concerned. Maybe it means a little more work, but you can also address it in a way which is convincing to people."

"This is much better than dealing with rumors in which the basis for the rumor is not clear and then dealing with answers in which the basis of the answer is not clear," he added.

In response to a question, Fukuda said Gibbs suggested that the novel virus seems to have an increase in lysine (an amino acid) residues and that it sits out on a "long branch" of the influenza phylogenetic tree in comparison with other swine flu viruses. He said it is known that growing flu viruses in eggs can lead to an increase in lysine residues.

However, human, avian, and swine flu viruses differ somewhat in this respect, Fukuda said, adding, "After discussion and looking at older swine influenza viruses, it was concluded that the amount of lysine being seen was in fact very consistent with the natural increase in lysine being seen in swine flu viruses."

Also, the experts who evaluated the hypothesis said that because of historical gaps in swine flu genetic data, many swine flu viruses are somewhat isolated on the phylogenetic tree, so Gibbs' observation on this point was nothing unusual, according to Fukuda.

In other comments at today's briefing, WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl announced that the agency's daily briefings would be suspended for about a week because of upcoming WHO meetings.

A WHO-hosted intergovernmental meeting on virus sharing will begin tomorrow, Hartl said. That will be followed by the World Health Assembly, the annual meeting of WHO member countries, which runs all of next week.

The intergovernmental meeting will deal with the sharing of viral isolates and access to vaccines and other products derived from them, an issue pursued by Indonesia in relation to H5N1 avian flu in recent years.

In other comments at today's briefing:

* Fukuda said experts who met today to discuss whether to recommend mass production of a vaccine for the novel H1N1 virus will probably need to meet several more times before they can come to a conclusion.
* He said the WHO has not seen any evidence that the novel virus is resistant to the antiviral drugs in use (oseltamivir and zanamivir), and the agency is not making any changes in its recommendations on antiviral use.
* The WHO continues to be concerned about the fact that most of the people infected with the H1N1 virus have been young, he said. About half of those who died were healthy and had no predisposing conditions. "It's highly unusual for young, healthy people to die from influenza," he said. "So this is a pattern which is different than what we see with normal influenza," though it has been seen in previous pandemics.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

I find it amusing that WHO is trying to discredit Adrian Gibbs, one of the greatest virologists alive on the planet today.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Virologist to make his case for lab origin of swine flu


The scientist who made headlines in May by positing a laboratory origin for the swine flu that has swept the world will defend his theory in the scientific literature, Peter's New York has learned. Dr. Adrian Gibbs, a Canberra, Australia-based virologist with more than 200 scientific publications to his credit, said that over the weekend he submitted his latest work on the swine flu to a prominent scientific journal, and is awaiting a response. Gibbs, 75, was part of a team that developed the antiviral drug Tamiflu. ...

And while the WHO gave the appearance of having put the final nail in the coffin of Gibbs's theory, in a rare show of scientific honesty for a public institution, it affixed the lid rather loosely, leaving itself room to revisit Gibbs's hypothesis once it is published. In the mid-May press conference in which the WHO addressed Gibbs's analysis, which by that time has spread far and wide throughout the mainstream media, Assistant Director Keiji Fukuda praised the virologist who had contributed to the field for more than fifty years of professional work, calling Gibbs "a credible scientist, a credible virologist." In answer to a reporter's question about whether Gibbs's theory had been refuted, Fukuda said: "I think that it is fair to say that in the world of science, nothing is ever totally excluded, nothing is ever ended." On the issue of whether Gibbs's theory may actually prove true or not, he said: "We feel very comfortable based on the analyses which have been done, based on the rigor in which it has been looked at, that we are not dealing with a laboratory-created virus. However, I do not expect that the debate itself will stop." The world awaits Gibbs's response.


http://saltspringnews.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=19610
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

I find it amusing that WHO is trying to discredit Adrian Gibbs, one of the greatest virologists alive on the planet today.
I'm sure his interpretation was due to a VERY limited swine database. There is NO data to support a man made product.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

......... There is NO data to support a man made product.
Could you be more specific.

If I remember correctly, the suspected lab-escaped WS/33 in South Korea had sequences that exactly matched known lab sequences.

Is that the type of (non-existant) data that would support the theory?

.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Could you be more specific.

If I remember correctly, the suspected lab-escaped WS/33 in South Korea had sequences that exactly matched known lab sequences.

Is that the type of (non-existant) data that would support the theory?

.

I think that we will just have to see the "evidence" offered in the next couple of weeks to support this interesting theory.

It's really difficult to "prove" that this theory is not true, just like it is difficult to prove that little green men are not buried in Roswell, NM. Persons supporting a view really bear the burden of proof and persuasion.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

My primary personal reason for questioning this theory is that, after watching all the incredible pains a virus goes through to become "fit", I can't imagine for one minute that we mere humans can successfully mimic viral logic. ;)

.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

I can't imagine for one minute that we mere humans can successfully mimic viral logic.

Looks like a low security lab strain could mutate. This is from Venter:

http://www.jcvi.org/cms/fileadmin/s...genomics-report/synthetic-genomics-report.pdf

"A key hurdle for constructing a robustly infectious virus is being able to replicate the correct genomic sequence. This task is not as straightforward as it would initially appear, as viruses that have been maintained in a laboratory setting tend to accumulate mutations; these laboratory strains are the source for many viral sequences currently in databases (the DNA sequences in databases are continually being updated, however, especially for viruses of scientific and societal interest). Further, merely synthesizing the genome is only one step in a process that requires many steps.

For the purposes of this report, we take as a given that now, or within a few years, any virus with a known sequence can or will be able to be constructed in a relatively straightforward manner. How functional any of these constructed viruses would be is not clear. Several important factors must be kept in mind. For example, the source of a virus is paramount. Viruses found in nature (particularly during an active outbreak) will probably always be the only “sure thing.” Constructed viruses (or even viruses somehow obtained from a laboratory) could be as virulent as wild type viruses, but could just as easily be attenuated.

Table 2 contains our best “guesstimate” of the overall difficulty of synthesizing specific viruses. This evaluation is based on several factors: bigger viruses (longer nucleic acid sequences) are harder to synthesize than
smaller ones; positive-stranded RNA viruses (in which the nucleic acid is infectious on its own) are easier to construct than negative-stranded RNA viruses, which in turn are easier than DNA viruses. Finally, available sequence data does not always report how virulent the virus supplying that particular sequence was in nature or in the laboratory. Thus, poliovirus is relatively easy to synthesize because it has a small genome made up of positive-stranded RNA and because a large amount of data is available on sequences of known virulence. Variola (smallpox) virus, in contrast, is harder to synthesize because it is a very large DNA virus for which there are fewer data relating infectivity to sequence.

The key conclusion from the papers and discussion at the workshops was that over the next five years constructing an infectious virus will remain more difficult than obtaining it from nature or from laboratory stocks, with a few important exceptions. In ten years, however, the situation might be reversed. For someone hoping to inflict harm, constructing a pathogenic virus might actually be easier than going to the trouble of isolating it from nature or stealing it from a secure laboratory.

Constructing a “designer virus” or “superpathogen” from scratch was seen as a more distant concern, although several examples of unexpected increases in pathogen virulence using recombinant DNA approaches have been published in the literature.64 Given the current limitations on the understanding of viral pathogenesis and the immune response, using synthetic genomics to increase the pathogenicity of known viruses was considered to be a more probable risk."

Can we tell for sure if a virus is 'wild' now? I think I read a paper regarding marking MLV vaccine strains somehow as the only way to tell if wild or MLV infections were occurring in hosts.

This Dawkins/Venter debate is interesting. Seems to me that Venter at one point conceded that a minor change to the natural order could slip in undetected.

http://de.sevenload.com/videos/GzPNcFM-DLD08-Day-2-Life-a-gene-centric-view
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Could you be more specific.

If I remember correctly, the suspected lab-escaped WS/33 in South Korea had sequences that exactly matched known lab sequences.

Is that the type of (non-existant) data that would support the theory?

.
Identifying an isolate that has escaped from a lab is pretty straightford. The WSN/33 sequences in the isolates from swine were obvious because part of each sequence matched, while swine sequences are easily distinguished from WSN/33. The question in South Korea was whether the WSN/33 were actually in swine, or contaminated swine samples IN the lab.

For the pandemic swine sequence the is NO match. There are related sequences and a modest amount of divergence (kind of like the "missing link" in human evolution from primates). There are two obvious explanations for the divergence. One is based on a limited swine database. Since there are gaps in the database (because MANY swine infections are not represented), the small database leads to gaps between the database and the pandemic sequences. The alternate explanantion is that the pandemic sequences were being developed in the lab, and that development led to more divergence.

The "lab creation" is not based on any hard data. There is NO match and no evidence that the sequence had been in ANY lab prior to isolation from patients in California and Mexico. It is ALL handwaving and ignores the fact that the swine database is VERY limited.

I do NOT expect to see ANYTHING that is remotely "interesting" from the 'study".
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Dr Niman: "I do NOT expect to see ANYTHING that is remotely "interesting" from the 'study".



Dr Keiji Fukuda: "I think that it is fair to say that in the world of science, nothing is ever totally excluded, nothing is ever ended."
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Dr Niman: "I do NOT expect to see ANYTHING that is remotely "interesting" from the 'study".



Dr Keiji Fukuda: "I think that it is fair to say that in the world of science, nothing is ever totally excluded, nothing is ever ended."
If you look at pandemic NA sequences with H274Y, there is a red asterisk
* These sequences have the H274Y mutation that confers resistance to Oseltamivir.

Earlier descriptions included the word MIGHT.
* This sequence has the H274Y mutation that might confer resistance to Oseltamivir.
http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showpost.php?p=261728&postcount=33

Although both descriptions are accuarte, the earlier discription left open the possiblility that the correlation between the polymorphisms and strong resistance was a coincidence or artifact, most scientists knew that the later description was a more accarate represention of the data.

That type of logic applies to this "theory" that the divergence between the pandemic swine sequence and earlier sequence in the database are man made. The man made is possible, but in the "martians did it" category.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

After we all can learn hystoricaly the man maded,
even the martians made category today borderings the man made one
(finaly they roboticaly mars landed also :)).
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Dr. Niman : "The man made is possible, but in the "martians did it" category."


Do Martians Exist?

If "Martians" ever existed, they wouldn't be the "little green men" of our imagination. Water probably didn't exist on the surface of Mars long enough for anything other than very small, bacteria-like life forms to develop.

Even the prospect of finding the tiniest life forms, however, is extremely exciting. To our knowledge, life has only developed on one planet: Earth. Finding life on Mars, however small it might be, would radically change the way we think about the possibilities for life throughout the Universe.


http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/life/
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Dr. Niman : "The man made is possible, but in the "martians did it" category."


Do Martians Exist?

If "Martians" ever existed, they wouldn't be the "little green men" of our imagination. Water probably didn't exist on the surface of Mars long enough for anything other than very small, bacteria-like life forms to develop.

Even the prospect of finding the tiniest life forms, however, is extremely exciting. To our knowledge, life has only developed on one planet: Earth. Finding life on Mars, however small it might be, would radically change the way we think about the possibilities for life throughout the Universe.


http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/life/
Although life on Mars may be exciting, the liklihood that the pandemic swine sequences are linked to accellerated divergence due to growth of the virus in eggs as part of a vaccine program (against a virus not previously reported), is about as likely as an introduction of the virus by martians.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Source: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/swineflu/news/may1409who.html

WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Robert Roos * News Editor

May 14, 2009 (CIDRAP News) ...

* He said the WHO has not seen any evidence that the novel virus is resistant to the antiviral drugs in use (oseltamivir and zanamivir), and the agency is not making any changes in its recommendations on antiviral use.


It is WHO statements like this, in respect of virus' resistance to Oseltamivir, that are devoid of credibility. Given the FACT of rapid, silent, ubuquitous spread of H274Y in human (seasonal) H1N1 (in a little over 12 months 2007/08) and a very similar pattern now emerging in swine H1N1 - statements such as the above suggest it is the WHO that lack credibility.

World Health Organisation or the Roche World Marketing Department?
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

It is WHO statements like this, in respect of virus' resistance to Oseltamivir, that are devoid of credibility. Given the FACT of rapid, silent, ubuquitous spread of H274Y in human (seasonal) H1N1 (in a little over 12 months 2007/08) and a very similar pattern now emerging in swine H1N1 - statements such as the above suggest it is the WHO that lack credibility.

World Health Organisation or the Roche World Marketing Department?
Unfortunately, many are addicted to Tamiflu and in an obvious state of denial.
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

"Tamiflu addiction"

I don't see many options for the masses out there ...

Maybe apart the vitamins and prayers, or waiting several years to new drugs, to take soap filled capsules or vaccines ... :rolleyes:
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

I don't see any evidence either.

And I don't like the way how he presents his theory.

Not on his webpage with links and data and discussion-forum,
but rather in talkshows, letters to WHO, submissions to journals
(=delayed publishing)

Is he just trying to make money from this ?



the strangest thing about the origin are the South Dakota birds with the
preserved sequences for 9 years .
Strange also the only 2 mutations in 4487
by mid April, while e.g. the Cancun-strain had 11
 
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

I'm thinking he just might be 'old school' about communications.

But very credible as a scientist even if there is debate about the lab strain issue.

http://www.socgenmicrobiol.org.uk/pubs/micro_today/book_reviews/QRMAY96/QRM96_24.cfm

Molecular basis of virus evolution By Adrian J. Gibbs, Charles H. Calisher, Fernando García-Arenal

You can see here how intensively this PRRSV is being studied. I've read that its setting the stage for a 'biological train wreck.' It's gotten really nasty in the last few years. I wonder if co-infection with influenza could make the SIV mutate faster than expected, or in patterns not seen before?

http://www.pork.org/PorkScience/Documents/RFLPAnalysis.pdf
Abstract
The accuracy of the ORF5 RFLP test developed to distinguish RespPRRS® from field isolates was examined through the use of our database of 175 sequenced PRRSV strains. We found several strains which would have an RFLP profile consistent with vaccine origin, but appeared to be substantially different from vaccine on the amino acid level. In addition, we
studied whether or not dual infections of swine could lead to accelerated PRRSV evolution by first testing whether or not recombination occurred when two vaccine strains were coinfected into an established cell line. We obtained evidence that recombination does occur under these
conditions, and also provided genetic evidence of in vivo recombination.
 
Last edited:
Re: WHO rejects idea that novel H1N1 virus is lab-derived

Some Chinese epidemiologists have weighed in on this topic:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/7108ln14693gk29j/fulltext.pdf
"Origin and future distribution of the new A (H1N1)
influenza virus emerging in North America in 2009
CHEN JiMing, SUN YingXue, LIU Shuo, JIANG WenMing, CHEN Jie, HOU GuangYu & LI JinPing
China Animal Health and Epidemiology Center, Qingdao 266032, China

....
In addition, the above inference and other information
available now could not exclude the possibility that the
current new A (H1N1) influenza virus came from a laboratory
,
as in many laboratories in multiple countries, it
is not that difficult to generate such a new virus using
the technique of reverse-genetics from tubes without
clear manmade signs[13]."
 
Back
Top Bottom