Re: Public Service Announcement - Fatal Contact (Worst Case Bird Flu Pandemic Scenario)

It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1147333631.506470.259170@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Don Kirkman wrote:
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1147315733.181493.110500@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Don Kirkman wrote:
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1147252409.483131.33680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Don Kirkman wrote:
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
article <1147219473.408501.134110@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Starting now on ABC 8:00 pm EST

Another Hollywood horror movie like the Poseidon and King Kong. Worth
exactly nothing for evidence of a possible medical threat.

Simply a "What if..."

The world right now needs more "What if not . . ." scenarios.

The "worst case" scenario presented is in accordance with the "doctrine
of original antigenic sin."

"Antigen: protein or carbohydrate substance . . . that when introduced
into the body stimulates the production of an antibody." Antigenic is
the adjective form. Webster's Collegiate.

Sin is always discussed as a spiritual, not a physical, phenomenon.
Antigens are material/physical phenomena. **Never** the twain shall meet.

**emphasis** added.

Your "emphasis" is meaningless; Franklin clearly was making an analogy
between the [questionable] doctrine of inherited sin and inherited
susceptibility to influenza strains. He was talking medicine, not
religion.

-- Begin proof of Don's ignorance --

Well, let's suspend judgment for a bit.

It is an observation. See **emphasis** above.

It is not an observation; there is no way you can see, touch, hear, or
smell my beliefs. Thus your emphasis is meaningless and your statement
false.

Francis wrote, "The antibody of childhood is largely a response to
dominant antigen of the virus causing the first type A influenza
infection of the lifetime. The antibody-forming mechanisms are highly
conditioned by the first stimulus, so that later infections with
strains of the same type successfully enhance the original antibody to
maintain it at the highest level at all times in that age group. The
imprint established by the original virus infection governs the
antibody response thereafter. This we have called the Doctrine of the
Original Antigenic Sin."
--End proof --

You apparently overlooked a few things; first, Francis was working with
data on the 1918 flu epidemic and on swine flu, not avian flu.

The 1918 Spanish Flu virus was an avian flu virus.

But with an H1 strain, not the H5 of the current bird flu. Note that I
said he dealt with Spanish flu AND swine flu; I did not describe the
1918 flu further.

Second, his work is 46 years old, and things have changed:

What Francis observed then continues to be observed now. Indeed, the
"Doctrine of the Original Antigenic Sin" continues to be described in
current virology textbooks for this reason.

When was the last time you read a current virology textbook, and which
one was it?

"Francis died in 1969 and did not live to know the full explanations for
antigenic shift through reassortment of gene segments from 2 parent
viruses or antigenic drift through mutation. He surely would have been
in awe, as we all are, of the molecular explanation of influenza virus
variation with succeeding epidemics. And yet, even with the brilliant
work of Taubenberger delineating the 1918 virus (7), we can still ask
Francis's question: Which strain will cause the next pandemic? Francis
would have been cautious, but he certainly would have agreed that
knowing the genetics of the 1918 virus will guide our strategy to
confront future influenza pandemics. And I believe he would be cautious
about the pandemic potential of the current avian influenza virus. He
would warn us to keep alert to the unexpected, to be prepared for a
"newe acquayantance.""

If he had known what we know now of flu epidemiology he would probably
restate his ideas and, perhaps, abandon the term he coined.

No. The Avian Spanish Flu virus of 1918 was apparently an H2 genotype.

No, most references seem to call it an H1N1. For instance, "Skehel's
team looked at the structure of the protein from the 1918 virus, known
as the H1 form of hemagglutinin. They also examined the structure of
similar forms of the protein attached to receptors, or attachment sites,
from either bird or human cells."
[http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/2004/02/06/flu.php]

What threatens us is now an H5 genotype. The "Doctrine of Original
Antigenic Sin" predicts a much broader age range of the population
being susceptible to infection and indeed that is what the WHO is
observing. Even those who survived the 1918 Spanish Flu will be
susceptible to H5N1 according to the Doctrine. Moreover, one would
predict that an H5 Flu vaccine would be protective against a pandemic
highly-pathogenic H5N1 Avian virus only in infants (i.e. those without
prior exposure to the non-H5 Flu viruses).

You seem much more specific than those actually researching avian flu.

[Begin]
Now, researchers have reconstructed a key protein from the 1918 virus.
They see in its structure clues to how the virus jumped from birds to
humans. The protein from the 1918 virus has a sequence that is similar
to flu viruses found in birds, which are usually inefficient in
infecting human cells. The protein, called hemagglutinin, adopts a shape
that allows it to readily latch on to human cells.

The new studies are not likely to help public health officials predict
the course of the current avian influenza outbreak, which is caused by a
different strain of virus. However, they may help researchers better
understand how such viruses adapt to new species and may suggest what
changes to look for as the virus mutates.

Because the avian influenza virus can mutate rapidly, health officials
are concerned that mutations could result in an altered form of the
protein that might make it able to latch on to human cells.

If this happens, the virus could rapidly spread among people. The new
research illustrates how changes in this important protein could signal
such a switch.
[End]
http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/2004/02/06/flu.php

BTW, this page on the genome studies says nothing about "Doctrine of
Original Antigenic Sin"
--
Don Kirkman
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Good news! Avian Flu Pandemic
    ... discovered why the avian flu virus is rarely if ever transmitted from ... Human flu viruses typically infect ... Previous pandemics have been caused only by H1- (the ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: Flu FYI
    ... evidence of 6 migratory birds having had the avian flu. ... IIRC the exumed bodies yielded no virus. ... attributed to US Army personnel who picked up the virus at Ft ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Flu FYI
    ... evidence of 6 migratory birds having had the avian flu. ... Most of the episodes of avian outbreak has been traced to ... IIRC the exumed bodies yielded no virus. ... only the normal mutation persists. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Flu FYI
    ... evidence of 6 migratory birds having had the avian flu. ... Most of the episodes of avian outbreak has been traced to ... IIRC the exumed bodies yielded no virus. ... known chemical mutagens. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Swine flu epidemic starting
    ... Swine Flu May Be Human Error; ... Australian researcher that the swine flu virus circling the globe may ... Adrian Gibbs, 75, who collaborated on research that led to the ... scientists to analyze the genetic makeup of the virus that was ...
    (sci.med.nutrition)