The U.S. may be missing human cases of bird flu, scientists say(text.npr.org)
text.npr.org
The U.S. may be missing human cases of bird flu, scientists say
https://text.npr.org/1248538298
68 comments
Feels like your prior should be that there has always been more crossover than was caught by testing? Obviously this shouldn't be a reason to dismiss concerns, but I don't know that jumping to dramatic language is appropriate, either?
Its an election year, in several countries that I know of, so it is the perfect time to jump to dramatic conclusions.
I have chickens myself and the bird flu is a constant worry every winter. I am amazed that the governments of the world don't do more and that there is very little news coverage about it since to me it feels like it is a much larger threat than most.
I read somewhere that scientists mutated it and that it's only 2 mutations away from spreading human to human and that the mutations are such that they could happen in nature.
I am a bit worried of the bird flu and I am very confused over the fact that we care so little about it and keep trading with countries that have horrible animal care which probably is the root cause of these diseases.
I read somewhere that scientists mutated it and that it's only 2 mutations away from spreading human to human and that the mutations are such that they could happen in nature.
I am a bit worried of the bird flu and I am very confused over the fact that we care so little about it and keep trading with countries that have horrible animal care which probably is the root cause of these diseases.
>I am amazed that the governments of the world don't do more and that there is very little news coverage about it since to me it feels like it is a much larger threat than most.
Humans have been living closely with poultry for hundreds of years without some super-deadly virus jumping from birds to humans. Your prior should be that the chance of it happening is very low.
Humans have been living closely with poultry for hundreds of years without some super-deadly virus jumping from birds to humans. Your prior should be that the chance of it happening is very low.
Well, there didn't use to be any large scale factories that handled thousands of birds/animals.
Sure, there were a lot of farmers having some animals but not in the large scale industry that we have today. That is a very modern phenomenon.
Sure, there were a lot of farmers having some animals but not in the large scale industry that we have today. That is a very modern phenomenon.
The 1918 influenza pandemic killed tens of millions, disproportionately affecting young and healthy adults. Does that not qualify as super-deadly?
Didn't that come from pigs?
Not sure how it works with factory farming, but apparently pigs and chickens can share space on a farm often. I am not sure about whether cows and pigs often share space.
I've been slowly getting drip fed bird flu updates through TikTok. Some on the ground people doing some pretty productive coverage. Reports of farms culling entire stocks, farms outright closing, lots of illness unreported. It's pretty wild.
[deleted]
Can someone knowledgeable help me understand why we can have at-home Covid tests, we probably know the genetic blueprint of this strain of flu, but we can't make at-home bird-flu tests?
Scale and necessity? Remember how long it took to get at-home covid tests?
of interest:
'Super antibody' fights off flu
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14324901 [2011]
At the centre: influenza A virus ribonucleoproteins
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5619696/ [2015]
[Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015 Jan; 13(1): 28–41. ]
'Super antibody' fights off flu
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14324901 [2011]
At the centre: influenza A virus ribonucleoproteins
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5619696/ [2015]
[Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015 Jan; 13(1): 28–41. ]
Have we taken any steps to stop feeding chickens to cows?
Not just chickens, chicken poop.
It's okay guys, it delivers value to shareholders.
It's okay guys, it delivers value to shareholders.
Many thanks!
- shareholder
- shareholder
This is very bad news. Primarily because we have not socially recovered from the last pandemic.
If this turns out to be serious, what's the public's appetite for masks? Lockdowns? New vaccines? For many people it's quite low. For others it's quite high. And the disagreement between these groups will become another political flashpoint.
If this turns out to be serious, what's the public's appetite for masks? Lockdowns? New vaccines? For many people it's quite low. For others it's quite high. And the disagreement between these groups will become another political flashpoint.
The risk of dying from covid was probably less than 1% for a healthy adult and it's around 60-70% when it comes to the bird flu. So people will naturally take this much more serious if it starts to spread among humans.
If we learned anything from covid, it should be that you cannot trust these early mortality numbers because they are biased by the fact that we definitely test people who are dying of a disease but don't test those who are just a little sick.
Covid turned out to be 1% fatal in the early days - which is awful. But the early numbers were ~5-10%
Covid turned out to be 1% fatal in the early days - which is awful. But the early numbers were ~5-10%
> Covid turned out to be 1% fatal in the early days
Are you sure? Pre vaccine rollout across all ages in USA, I've seen less than .5% IFR, and an order of magnitude less than that if you constrain to ages 0-59.
With the inundation of constant bad news that we were under, you'll still find people thinking covid killed 20% of anyone who caught it, and that will probably last forever.
Are you sure? Pre vaccine rollout across all ages in USA, I've seen less than .5% IFR, and an order of magnitude less than that if you constrain to ages 0-59.
With the inundation of constant bad news that we were under, you'll still find people thinking covid killed 20% of anyone who caught it, and that will probably last forever.
Treatments improved even prior to vaccine rollout. I didn't say it was 1% fatal for 0-59 cohort.
Ok sure, but even if it's 1/5 as bad it's still very bad.
I think we just have no remote clue what the denominator is though.
True but there are reasons to believe that it's vastly higher than the covid though.
Did it drop to 1% post vaccination or were those figures normalized for that.
Before, initial reporting showed much higher percents because we massively underestimated how many people got sick but were asymptomatic or had so little symptoms they barely noticed.
Yes but I’m wondering if in addition to that did the vaccination have a massive effect on the those numbers.
It had a near 0 or a small rounding from zero effect on overall mortality. Covid rarely, even with co-morbidities, killed people.
Vaccinated people had a significantly lower chance of death but the overall death rate was so tiny it basically doesn't move the needle.
Vaccinated people had a significantly lower chance of death but the overall death rate was so tiny it basically doesn't move the needle.
I feel like you’re just opining. Do you know this for a fact/have any sources?
At the start COVID was claiming potentially 60-70%, then 5-10%, then <5%, then 1%. In all likelihood it's a sampling bias because only the very sick end up at the hospital(s) and are tested.
I don't think we should worry at all. We haven't seen any major illness spread with a fatality rate of >1% since introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics.
You can see yourself https://www.healthline.com/health/worst-disease-outbreaks-hi...
It can happen, but the chances seem vanishingly low. Even the Hong Kong flu outbreak had only a 0.2% fatality rate.
I don't think we should worry at all. We haven't seen any major illness spread with a fatality rate of >1% since introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics.
You can see yourself https://www.healthline.com/health/worst-disease-outbreaks-hi...
It can happen, but the chances seem vanishingly low. Even the Hong Kong flu outbreak had only a 0.2% fatality rate.
We haven't seen any major illness spread with a fatality rate of >1% since introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics.
Isn't that the exact story of the Spanish Flu? Low fatality rate at first which then mutated into a horribly fatal strain after the first wave? Isn't that why we took COVID so seriously from the get-go - the fear of mutation?
Isn't that the exact story of the Spanish Flu? Low fatality rate at first which then mutated into a horribly fatal strain after the first wave? Isn't that why we took COVID so seriously from the get-go - the fear of mutation?
> We haven't seen any major illness spread with a fatality rate of >1% since introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics.
HIV is what obviously comes to mind.
HIV is what obviously comes to mind.
HIV doesn’t kill people, secondary infections do after either the virus or drugs administered kill the person. Regardless, in a given year, less than 1% of people with HIV cited as the underlying cause listed die, far less. Currently, it’s 2/100,000 cases. At its peak, it was 16/100,000
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/slidesets/cdc-hiv-survei...
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/library/slidesets/cdc-hiv-survei...
Right, now that we have HAART. Before treatment was developed, it killed a majority of those infected.
The secondary infection thing is a technicality, the mechanism via which someone who has HIV is killed. But it’s not really a misnomer to say the disease is deadly.
The secondary infection thing is a technicality, the mechanism via which someone who has HIV is killed. But it’s not really a misnomer to say the disease is deadly.
> Currently, it’s 2/100,000 cases. At its peak, it was 16/100,000
You are misreading the charts you are citing btw, your chart shows close to 100% fatality rate, 16 deaths per 100,000 people (with and without HIV)
You are misreading the charts you are citing btw, your chart shows close to 100% fatality rate, 16 deaths per 100,000 people (with and without HIV)
We still get regular outbreaks of Ebola, which has a near 100% fatality rate - in fact the fatality rate being so high is actually it's saving grace in a way, as it naturally limits the spread. If, like COVID, it had a several day asymptomatic period, it would wipe out the planet within months.
Paralytic polio, which has a fatality rate of 5-10%, is still endemic in parts of Africa and southern Asia.
Back in 2002 SARS killed 9.5% (783) of the 8000 people infected with it.
So, I call bullshit on "We haven't seen any major illness spread with a fatality rate of >1% since introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics." (and for another thing, most of the really bad infection diseases are viral, not bacterial. Antibiotics do little to nothing).
Paralytic polio, which has a fatality rate of 5-10%, is still endemic in parts of Africa and southern Asia.
Back in 2002 SARS killed 9.5% (783) of the 8000 people infected with it.
So, I call bullshit on "We haven't seen any major illness spread with a fatality rate of >1% since introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics." (and for another thing, most of the really bad infection diseases are viral, not bacterial. Antibiotics do little to nothing).
Interesting how you picked the one region where "introducing clean drinking water & having antibiotics" is not true.
> 100% fatality rate
Case fatality rate.
> Back in 2002 SARS killed 9.5% (783) of the 8000 people infected with it.
Of the identified cases of people infected.
> If, like COVID, it had a several day asymptomatic period, it would wipe out the planet within months.
Wrong for so many reasons
> 100% fatality rate
Case fatality rate.
> Back in 2002 SARS killed 9.5% (783) of the 8000 people infected with it.
Of the identified cases of people infected.
> If, like COVID, it had a several day asymptomatic period, it would wipe out the planet within months.
Wrong for so many reasons
Uh, one region? I named 3 continents. One of the countries most affected by SARS was Canada (151 cases, 49 deaths) which is as 1st world and modern as it gets.
for ebola
COVID-19 pandemic is still ongoing. Deaths are down compared to 2020, but during the winter thousands of people a week were dying, people are getting injured, early retirements are way up, and disabled people are trapped at home (which never happened to most of us lol, lockdowns are police enforced, we could still go outside anywhere we wanted for the most part).
Right wing bot networks continue to harass anti-COVID activists to reinforce the hegemonic idea that it's over so that rich people can clean up.
Here's a joke: What's the difference between the right and liberals on COVID? About 6 months.
Right wing bot networks continue to harass anti-COVID activists to reinforce the hegemonic idea that it's over so that rich people can clean up.
Here's a joke: What's the difference between the right and liberals on COVID? About 6 months.
There aren't nearly as many deaths from covid nowadays. It's not even remotely close to the early period and it is disingenuous to pretend so.
You could see the blip from covid in global mortality data. You can't see it now.
You could see the blip from covid in global mortality data. You can't see it now.
When did I say there were as many deaths as in the early days? Back then it was up to 4000 a day, now it's still thousands a week during the winter. These are all preventable and wholly unnecessary deaths. People are sick all the time. If you can't see it in the mortality data, that means something else is compensating in the other direction... perhaps killing off so many vulnerable people has made average mortality decline?
You were sold "herd immunity", which means people don't get sick because the disease is prevented by immunity. Instead, we just have total society-wide saturation with COVID. It's a sick, fucked up situation.
You were sold "herd immunity", which means people don't get sick because the disease is prevented by immunity. Instead, we just have total society-wide saturation with COVID. It's a sick, fucked up situation.
Frankly after experiencing Covid hair loss and talking with other folks who got mild covid but 3 months later experienced the same nightmare scenario I would happily isolate. Balding sucks.
Most people are not like you - and I do not think we have sufficient causal evidence on a lot of these post-covid sequelae yet.
I think theres mounting evidence that covid can have dramatic long term effects on people without them fully realising. More obviously, the long covid epidemic is much more significant than people really realise and more work needs to be done to bring this into the spotlight
This reads like parody. What are you going to do - never get Covid?
That is the general idea. Past the 4 year mark with zero infections here (and that's with testing whenever I have the slightest case of the sniffles).
Admittedly the odds are stacked in my favor a bit - I'm a pretty extreme introvert in a quiet small town and have been WFH since 2012. I will never accept another position that isn't 100% remote, and avoiding getting sick is part of that for sure.
Admittedly the odds are stacked in my favor a bit - I'm a pretty extreme introvert in a quiet small town and have been WFH since 2012. I will never accept another position that isn't 100% remote, and avoiding getting sick is part of that for sure.
It's because of others who do interact with people on a day to day basis that your lifestyle is possible. So no, long-term isolating is not a broad solution for covid. It's outrageous that people still talk like this.
For better or worse, H1N1 is monumentally lethal, an order of magnitude past the worst of COVID. People who don't have a taste for masks and new vaccines will simply die, in a way we didn't see for COVID.
Having said all of that, in the absence of strong evidence for human-human transmission, this should not keep you up at night.
Having said all of that, in the absence of strong evidence for human-human transmission, this should not keep you up at night.
>For better or worse, H1N1 is monumentally lethal, an order of magnitude past the worst of COVID
There's absolutely no evidence for this as we have no data on the infection fatality rate, only on the case fatality rate, which like with COVID initially is an order of magnitude or two higher, because the vast majority of people with respiratory infections aren't specifically tested for H1N1.
There's absolutely no evidence for this as we have no data on the infection fatality rate, only on the case fatality rate, which like with COVID initially is an order of magnitude or two higher, because the vast majority of people with respiratory infections aren't specifically tested for H1N1.
Wash your hands when you get home! Try not to touch your face.
I use a mask when I go out because my wife has health issues that would complicate any colds etc. It's really nice to not have to deal with several colds a year.
Masks became political. I've had some double-takes in a couple of stores, but mostly people have ignored my mask wearing. Thankfully the grocery store I frequent serves an aging population who are far more likely to wear masks now.
I know that some, probably even in this thread, will swear that masks are useless. I know you know that, you're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you. Can we skip the arguing and try to reach common ground?
I use a mask when I go out because my wife has health issues that would complicate any colds etc. It's really nice to not have to deal with several colds a year.
Masks became political. I've had some double-takes in a couple of stores, but mostly people have ignored my mask wearing. Thankfully the grocery store I frequent serves an aging population who are far more likely to wear masks now.
I know that some, probably even in this thread, will swear that masks are useless. I know you know that, you're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you. Can we skip the arguing and try to reach common ground?
The politicization of it is a thermometer of societal dysfunction and absurdity that has exceeded the measurable range.
I remember the feeling. I wore a 3M N95 mask into a Trader Joe's in the SF Bay Area mid-December 2019 and received gawks and offhand verbal insults (jeers). The nature of the threat was then unknown and epidemiological data later showed community spread was already occurring, so it seemed an entirely prudent precaution even in retrospect.
OTOH, people wearing masks outside now when no one else is around and without evidence to show COVID transmission can happen in these conditions, it must be a practice for non-medical reasons.
Best to apply good, individual judgment with precautions because some people with irrational tribal beliefs are intent on proving cigarettes or COVID "can't" kill them.
I remember the feeling. I wore a 3M N95 mask into a Trader Joe's in the SF Bay Area mid-December 2019 and received gawks and offhand verbal insults (jeers). The nature of the threat was then unknown and epidemiological data later showed community spread was already occurring, so it seemed an entirely prudent precaution even in retrospect.
OTOH, people wearing masks outside now when no one else is around and without evidence to show COVID transmission can happen in these conditions, it must be a practice for non-medical reasons.
Best to apply good, individual judgment with precautions because some people with irrational tribal beliefs are intent on proving cigarettes or COVID "can't" kill them.
> s outside now when no one else is around and without evidence to show COVID transmission can happen in these conditions, it must be a practice for non-medical reasons.
Actually, masking outdoors is fantastic for my allergies, which are one of the main triggers for my asthma. To be clear I use the 3M Aura 9210, which is a very good N95 (actually meets N99 standards based on independent tests, but no one buys those so they are labeled as N95). Very good against my broad spectrum allergies to "the outside" (dust, mold, ragweed, pollen, etc).
Actually, masking outdoors is fantastic for my allergies, which are one of the main triggers for my asthma. To be clear I use the 3M Aura 9210, which is a very good N95 (actually meets N99 standards based on independent tests, but no one buys those so they are labeled as N95). Very good against my broad spectrum allergies to "the outside" (dust, mold, ragweed, pollen, etc).
[deleted]
My only issue with masks is that they're a bit too annoying to wear and they reduce my ability to understand what people are saying because I can't see their mouth.
I would happily wear masks if they're more convenient.
I would happily wear masks if they're more convenient.
As a person with Autism, I too have trouble with understanding people with "modified" or muffled speech. I am not sure if it's full-on Auditory Processing Disorder, but it's really annoying in meetings :/
Yeah, that can be an issue, more with some than others.
As a fellow autistic person I find masking pretty helpful honestly, if nothing else it reduces the constant mental strain from having to do so much other the other kind of masking, in terms of facial expressions and what not. I also find it tends to be a interpreted as a signal to not engage in a bunch of performative small talk, which I don't exactly mind either.
As a fellow autistic person I find masking pretty helpful honestly, if nothing else it reduces the constant mental strain from having to do so much other the other kind of masking, in terms of facial expressions and what not. I also find it tends to be a interpreted as a signal to not engage in a bunch of performative small talk, which I don't exactly mind either.
As a vulnerable person, I wear an N95 as much as practical when I go out, and frankly at this point expect that to just be a thing going forward. As you said, it's really nice basically not getting sick. I've got multiple chronic conditions (asthma, T2 diabetes are the biggies, but far from the only) that both tend to act up either from being sick or the drugs you take when you're sick.
Ironically I'm about 2 weeks off some sort of what was probably some weird viral infection (not COVID, not traditional flu, not strep). Very well could have been bird flu, although there's a possibility that was also caused by an (insurance forced) asthma medication change that I possibly had a moderate allergic reaction to. In any case, I now have an approved prior auth and am back on the old med.
Ironically I'm about 2 weeks off some sort of what was probably some weird viral infection (not COVID, not traditional flu, not strep). Very well could have been bird flu, although there's a possibility that was also caused by an (insurance forced) asthma medication change that I possibly had a moderate allergic reaction to. In any case, I now have an approved prior auth and am back on the old med.
The last three times I’ve had some sort of viral infection the doctors have not been able to ID it. They even did panel tests for the top 20 viruses and none of them were positive. There are thousands of viruses we have no idea about.
What is the common ground? I for one am happy that the vast majority of people do not find the tradeoff acceptable. Ubiquitous masking during COVID was dystopian and damaging and I couldn't imagine having this indefinitely.
In my opinion, I'd be happy if people masked up if they have any cold-like symptoms. That would prevent some infections being passed, and wouldn't require people to be masked 100% of the time.
Would that be acceptable to your social group do you think?
Would that be acceptable to your social group do you think?
Personally I'd be happy to never see another masked person again, if you have an infection that you suspect is serious just stay home. If you have to go out you better wear a real effective respirator mask and not a piece of cloth.
But I'd rather prozelitize about taking measures for one's defense (everything to support the immune system, vitamin D, proper nutrition, etc), than the theatrical masking we've seen so far.
Again, if it's serious than at least wear a mask that offers some believable protection.
But I'd rather prozelitize about taking measures for one's defense (everything to support the immune system, vitamin D, proper nutrition, etc), than the theatrical masking we've seen so far.
Again, if it's serious than at least wear a mask that offers some believable protection.
That sounds nice, but many diseases,including COVID19 have a phase where the person is very contagious BEFORE they get symptoms.
Even with millions of deaths, we were incredibly lucky that CV-19 had only a ~2% case/fatality rate. Many other diseases are far higher, including the Avian Flu H5N1 at over 50% in humans.
Being healthy is a false sense of security (i.e., you don't know what you are talking about and are spreading ignorance). For example the group the 1918 Flu pandemic killed most was yoing healthy males (incl my wife's GGP). Why? Because it caused a huge immune system response called a cytokine storm, and the most healthy males had the strongest immune response, and it killed them (yes, our biological system has a few bugs).
The entire job of diseases is to overcome healthy subjects and spread despite this.
Stop spreading ignorant wishful thinking.
Even with millions of deaths, we were incredibly lucky that CV-19 had only a ~2% case/fatality rate. Many other diseases are far higher, including the Avian Flu H5N1 at over 50% in humans.
Being healthy is a false sense of security (i.e., you don't know what you are talking about and are spreading ignorance). For example the group the 1918 Flu pandemic killed most was yoing healthy males (incl my wife's GGP). Why? Because it caused a huge immune system response called a cytokine storm, and the most healthy males had the strongest immune response, and it killed them (yes, our biological system has a few bugs).
The entire job of diseases is to overcome healthy subjects and spread despite this.
Stop spreading ignorant wishful thinking.
[deleted]
I don’t think there’s any common ground with people who want to normalize masking in public.
Personally, I get daycare-related colds/flus all the time and don't go visit a testing center each time