Does the following oft-repeated statement still hold true? Are we reaching parity between the number of B2H vs. the number of H2H cases and cases of “unknown origin,” at this point, or is that point on the near-term horizon?
“So far, most human cases have been traced to contact with infected birds, but Nesbit said the public should not lower its guard even though the warning has now become somewhat old.”
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/breaking_news/15543496.htm
My assumption is that H2H is exponential, whereas B2H is fairly linear, so the numbers have got to be catching up, rendering that usual disclaimer sentence null & void. Removing the “contact with birds” disclaimer from MSM reports would certainly create interest if it is valid to do so.
Is anyone keeping a count of the B2H cases vs. the H2H and the “unknown origin” cases? We have seen strings of B2H followed by H2H cases in Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Indonesia, for example.
Ideally, someone like Dr. Niman would be definitive on this subject as he keeps track of precisely what kind of carrier the latest subject was infected by (i.e. he knows exactly how many of the latest Indonesian cases were definitely not infected by birds).
How many of the known cases can we now say were NOT infected via contact with birds? Are the cases with non-bird sources of infection reaching a number totalling over 50% of the known cases at this time? This information would make a considerable difference in how many individuals and communities think about and plan for a pandemic since many dismiss it still as just mainly a “bird disease.”
Is anyone keeping their own best estimates of the H2H or “unknown origin” case numbers out of the total case numbers?
Pixie,
You may want to check out this thread H5N1 Spreads More Efficiently H2H Than B2H. There are a number of links contained within it they may address your questions.
Pixie. You have a read of Monotreme’s excellent thread…and then if you want to discuss it further…we will. Thanks.
Thanks Monotreme and TomDVM. Yes, I read Monotreme’s thread as it developed over time, and others like it. The progression noted there is what has led me to ask this question.
My instinct is that we are now in a situation where the statement “most human cases have been traced to contact with infected birds” is simply untrue.
If this is the case, then MSM should now be saying “most humans have been infected by other humans or via unknown causes.” That would be a major paradigm shift. I think we’re there.
However, hard numbers have to be offered in support of that thesis. I was hoping somebody may have been keeping track. Interestingly, the hard evidence that would answer this question does not seem to be readily available, which may tell us something in itself. I’ve been digging through several sources, and thanks for the heads up on Monotreme’s thread links - I’m now exploring them also. Hopefully, this will prove to be a question that does have a quantifiable answer. I think we all intuit that it’s about time for TPTB to admit that H5N1 infections in humans is mostly (50%+ of cases) aquired either from other humans or from unknown causes, not birds.
Pixie, I’m trying to get hard evidence too, but it’s difficult. I’ve started work on database linking sequence data to particular cases and onset dates. The only way to be sure that H5N1 was transmitted h2h instead of b2h is by tracking the sequences in clusters. I have a hunch that proper analysis of the sequences will show that there are more clusters than is appreciated currently. It’s great that more sequences are becoming available, but they should each be linked to a specific case. That’s the only way we can be sure how many h2h2 cases have occured.
Yes, I agree that to be rigorous, the way to do it properly is to link cases with sequences. I suspect that Dr. Niman is the one person who we can be most confident would have that data (and has probably kept his own current count based on the best information available). Dr. Niman?
To be less rigorous, we know annecdotally that within clusters most likely a uncle was infected by a niece, or that one cousin infected another, but even that tally is difficult to construct. That does not mean that we should not give it a try, however. The current mantra that most H5N1 cases are contracted via birds is just as suspect as it is likewise based on annecdotal and not recently examined information (constantly stated as fact).