Bird Flu: Your questions evaded on the Beeb!

[rynnor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4761622.stm

This is a shockingly poor article - it either completely evades answering the stated questions or gives mis-leading answers - you can just imagine a meeting where someone is worried about the public panicking over bird flu - "I know - lets put out some official seeming statements to calm the masses".

Heres a re-write with the correct answers that were evaded:

Q.What is the likelihood of the virus getting to the stage where it is possible for humans to pass it on to each other and it becoming a pandemic?

A. He beats about the bush and contradicts himself -"The likelihood exists but is very, very low." then follows with "However, it really is impossible to predict when that might happen."

The real answer is "I dont know - no-one does."

Q.If the bird flu mutates so it can be spread amongst humans, how quickly can a vaccine be produced and how will it be decided who in the general public gets the vaccine first?
C P, Gloucestershire

A."two months for the vaccine strain and about three to four months for vaccine to appear from the manufacturers; so about five to six months for the first lots."

This sounds good but these are very low estimates and thats for the first few doses to roll off the manufacturing line - a few thousand doses wont make much difference.

Other official estimates suggest 6 months to isolate a vaccine after the virus has mutated - it will then take a further 12-18 months to produce enough vaccine to dose the whole population by which time the virus will have infected most of the population.

Q. If or when bird flu comes to the UK will we all be vaccinated if it mutates into the deadly form?
Lynne Wright

A. "If the bird flu virus mutates into a form that will pass readily from human to human (a pandemic), the aim of the UK Dept of Health is to vaccinate all within the UK." Great answer - totally avoids questions about how long such an aim will take to achieve though...

Q. Are steps being taken to compile a register of owners of small flocks of hens which are being kept in people's back yards?
Mrs J H Parlett, Cheltenham, UK

A. No - nothing official although there is a voluntary scheme as we cant be arsed to do anything about it

Q. Will the migration of birds back to England affect the risk of bird flu?
Clare Finn, Birmingham, Britain

A. Yes.

Q. We have a cat that loves the outdoors and she sometimes drinks from the bird bath. Is our cat at risk and, more to the point, are we?
A Smith, Kings Lynn, Norfolk, UK

A. Yes.

Q. My cat frequently brings home dead birds. Could this pass on bird flu to my cat and humans?
Susan Acton, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire

Short answer yes but he keeps harping on about the fact that there are only 10 recorded cat deaths from bird flu - yet ignores the fact that most places with bird flu are in the east in areas where your lucky if people with the disease get recorded and where nobody worries about feral cats - thousands could have died but they'd probably not even notice. However there have been deaths noted amongst zoo animals in vietnam so it could well have been grossly underestimated.

 

[Ch3tan]

You say short answers, but you don't actually quote what he says, you summerise for him.

 

[nath]

To be honest, something in the media that *isn't* saying "OMGZ WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" is anything but a bad thing.

 

[rynnor]

You say short answers, but you don't actually quote what he says, you summerise for him.

Well I linked the full story but I didnt want to make a really massive post so I tried to highlight the inconsistencies and evasions.

 

[rynnor]

To be honest, something in the media that *isn't* saying "OMGZ WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" is anything but a bad thing.

True but this article is at the other end of the spectrum from the OMG we're going to die brigade - I thought the Beeb might try for the middle path of balanced views as we do pay a license fee for this...

 

[Ch3tan]

Well I linked the full story but I didnt want to make a really massive post so I tried to highlight the inconsistencies and evasions.

Yes, but by doing that you add your own slant to the answers.

 

[Tom]

Well I've never had any kind of flu, so I'm fucked. Mind you I do have a box of Tamiflu and a good supply of coal/wood for heating

 

[xane]

... by which time the virus will have infected most of the population.

I'm sorry but that's complete bollocks.

Ordinary flu strains are quite deadly and kill thousands every year, yet we never hear of them "infecting most of the population". The deadliest ones, like the Spanish Flu of 1918, although killing tens of millions worldwide did not affect "most of the population" of any country.

Don't be mislead by pandemics, the death toll is fantastically high because it has spread over several countries, not because it has wiped out a country.

 

[TdC]

Don't be mislead by pandemics, the death toll is fantastically high because it has spread over several countries, not because it has wiped out a country.

wise words here.

something I've been thinking about that seems a little strange to me: pandemics are actually caused by things that are relatively slow to kill their hosts. Extremely virulent virii that kill quickly are highly inefficient at spreading because their hosts tend to die before coming into contact with many other candidate-hosts.

unless you get something with a 2 month incubation and an 80% mortality rate that is o0

 

[SAS]

Someone mentioned this in work, and I put two and two together. A cat died of birdflu in Germany after eating a bird it had found. Now cats have feas, which can also jump onto humans...

This is how many plagues (black death for example) were passed, but mind you I guess they still dont know how its passed from birds to humans/cats so my theory could be wrong? :/

 

[DaGaffer]

Don't be mislead by pandemics, the death toll is fantastically high because it has spread over several countries, not because it has wiped out a country.

Spot on. And bear in mind the Spanish flu pandemic happened at a time of unusal mobility (for the time) after WW1 ended, and when whole populations had had their resistance lowered by four years of fighting in terrible conditions (for the soldiers) and poor diet (for a lot of the civilians). Of course we now have a much bigger population (3x as big?), and even more mobility, but if it turned into a pandemic, I still don't think it would have the effects the doomsayers are talking about, certainly not in the developed world anyway. The effect on Africa on the other hand, could be a real hammer blow.

 

[rynnor]

The deadliest ones, like the Spanish Flu of 1918, although killing tens of millions worldwide did not affect "most of the population" of any country.

What I meant was by the time 2 years have passed most of the population thats going to get it will have had it so its a bit after the fact. Figures from the two later pandemics in the 50's and 60's showed that overall about half of the population had developed antibodies to it but only half of those had shown any symptoms - the rest caught it but never even knew it

In reality the distribution of fatalities is not even through the population - some areas that have been relatively isolated fared very badly - I have read of people being sent into innuit communities after the 1918 outbreak where whole villages had died and they just had to clear away the corpses - obviously they had no resistance to flu at all.

 

[rynnor]

Of course we now have a much bigger population (3x as big?), and even more mobility, but if it turned into a pandemic, I still don't think it would have the effects the doomsayers are talking about, certainly not in the developed world anyway. The effect on Africa on the other hand, could be a real hammer blow.

Aye - if its just about the same strength as other pandemics of the 50's n 60's then it will cause disruption here but wont be massively damaging and we have well developed (ish) medical systems that should cope.

We also have one of the handfull of facilities that could mass-produce vaccine so we are amongst the 'lucky' countries - however in africa with a high number of people who already have immune systems compromised by HIV and no chance of anti-viral drugs even an average strength pandemic will kill more people than I like to envisage

 

[rynnor]

something I've been thinking about that seems a little strange to me: pandemics are actually caused by things that are relatively slow to kill their hosts. Extremely virulent virii that kill quickly are highly inefficient at spreading because their hosts tend to die before coming into contact with many other candidate-hosts.

unless you get something with a 2 month incubation and an 80% mortality rate that is o0

I think the hosts die'ing too quickly thing is why you dont tend to get highly deadly viruses naturally - a really exceptionally nasty one usually only kills a few percent - however if it finds a concentration of extremely vulnerable hosts this can distort the figures as is argued for the 1918 flu pandemic.

 

[SAS]

What about societies reaction to a pandemic? Chances are if bird flu grips the world a number of people will die, but the civil unrest that could result (panic buying e.t.c) is the real danger?

 

[xane]

What about societies reaction to a pandemic? Chances are if bird flu grips the world a number of people will die, but the civil unrest that could result (panic buying e.t.c) is the real danger?

Best to look at previous flu pandemics, in recent cases there has not been social upheaval like "panic buying", but isolated communities have become more suspect of outsiders as they try to quarentine themselves, to little effect.

Spanish Flu in 1918 killed about 500,000 in the US, Asian Flu in 1958 killed about 70,000 and Hong Kong Flu in 1968 killed about 35,000, this was despite increasing populations. So as pandemics go, the western nations are getting better at self-quarentine and making sure the virus does not spread.

China and other east Asian countries in the grip of Avian Flu, but there has been no large scale civil disruption there yet.

You should bear in mind that rapidly spreading viral pandemics are nothing new, the bacterial based plagues of long ago wont occur because of modern lifestyles and better health, medical facilities and communications are ever more efficient reducing the impact of anything highly infectious.

As I stated before, ordinary "seaonal" flu is very infectious and kills a lot of people every year (over 30,000 in the US), but we rarely hear about the social impact of that.