First human case of avian flu in Texas(politico.com)
politico.com
First human case of avian flu in Texas
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/01/first-human-avian-flu-case-texas-00149949
84 comments
I would hope that the majority learned that hygiene and masking are effective enough for us to continue to live our lives, but I doubt it.
The good news is that masks and hand sanitizers are much more effective against the flu, as seen in the pandemic when it virtually disappeared.
You won’t want to live your life normally if there is a 60% mortality rate airborne virus around.
A virus with that kind of mortality rate would have no chance to spread very far anyway, so all good!
That depends on the time difference between when it becomes transmissible and when it causes death. If it's short, it won't spread much. If it's long, it'll spread all over the place.
> A virus with that kind of mortality rate would have no chance to spread very far anyway, so all good!
Give it a two week incubation time (not that far-fetched) and it will spread far and wide.
Give it a two week incubation time (not that far-fetched) and it will spread far and wide.
Sure, if that proves to be the case I would happily lock myself up. I can quarantine with the best of them. But the fact of the matter is that we don't know a lot about H5N1 infections in people due to the extremely low number of known infections. The individual in question here appears to be having more mild symptoms.
The number of infections is low in the US but we have a lot of data from China and south east Asia where it’s more prevalent. 800 people have been infected in total so far with about a 50% mortality rate since the late 90s.
Do we know the rate they tested at? Do we think it's possible they caught everyone infected?
To be clear in this, I took COVID very seriously, I still carry a mask in my pocket and use it when I travel, but I'm trying to be realistic about the situation.
To be clear in this, I took COVID very seriously, I still carry a mask in my pocket and use it when I travel, but I'm trying to be realistic about the situation.
> Do we think it's possible they caught everyone infected?
It's not. The CDC only caught this case because they are proactively testing workers at farms that have confirmed animal outbreaks.
> "The patient reported eye redness (consistent with conjunctivitis), as their only symptom, and is recovering." [1]
Diseases like ebola or hendra virus that actually have 50%+ mortality rates don't have mild forms like this.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/p0401-avian-flu.html
It's not. The CDC only caught this case because they are proactively testing workers at farms that have confirmed animal outbreaks.
> "The patient reported eye redness (consistent with conjunctivitis), as their only symptom, and is recovering." [1]
Diseases like ebola or hendra virus that actually have 50%+ mortality rates don't have mild forms like this.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/p0401-avian-flu.html
There are over a million dead in the United States for whom your statement is not true.
My generous interpretation of OP is that during the covid pandemic our precautions that kinda-sorta slowed down covid were adequate to basically remove influenza from the human population as indicated by being the least amount of influenza activity on record[0]
[0]https://www.cdc.gov/flu/season/faq-flu-season-2020-2021.htm
[0]https://www.cdc.gov/flu/season/faq-flu-season-2020-2021.htm
It's not widely agreed upon that this was due to mitigations, and there's unfortunately no evidence they slowed down COVID either. All claims that mitigations slowed COVID fall apart when examined carefully (often they aren't even real, they're just model predictions being presented as if that was the same thing as empirical evidence).
Rather, there seems to be some mechanism by which some viruses push out others. This can also be seen in how new SARS-CoV-2 variants would often rapidly exterminate the prior variant within weeks, instead of co-existing.
Rather, there seems to be some mechanism by which some viruses push out others. This can also be seen in how new SARS-CoV-2 variants would often rapidly exterminate the prior variant within weeks, instead of co-existing.
That doesn't make sense. If that were the case then the cold & flu wouldn't intermingle, though they very much do. And now, when fewer mitigations are around, we see people hospitalized with COVID, influenza, and RSV. Why, when mitigations are removed, is COVID no longer so dominate it's pushing the flu out?
> Why, when mitigations are removed, is COVID no longer so dominate it's pushing the flu out?
Because nearly everyone has had it already. The mitigations were removed because Omicron so visibly ignored them that everyone just gave up at that point.
Because nearly everyone has had it already. The mitigations were removed because Omicron so visibly ignored them that everyone just gave up at that point.
Here in Alberta it's still killing at nearly 5x the rate as the flu, so it's still very much present. Unfortunately, it's impossible to argue further because of the lack of population testing (Alberta only tests those hospitalized), but more people here were found to have COVID this season than influenza[1].
If we're now largely immune to COVID why isn't influenza now pushing it out?
https://www.alberta.ca/stats/dashboard/respiratory-virus-das...
If we're now largely immune to COVID why isn't influenza now pushing it out?
https://www.alberta.ca/stats/dashboard/respiratory-virus-das...
I'm not being clear. The interference appears to be related to how recently you were infected with something else. If lots of people around you are getting COVID, then they aren't getting something else. Once most people are immune to it, they aren't getting infected with it anymore and other viruses can compete again.
> it's still killing at nearly 5x the rate as the flu
The way they define COVID deaths make such numbers incomparable.
> it's still killing at nearly 5x the rate as the flu
The way they define COVID deaths make such numbers incomparable.
Whatever the number of dead, it wouldn’t be true for them. If we don’t take precaution X then Y more people die, but that doesn’t mean every X is worth it.
Imagine how many more would have died if no one washed their hands.
Very few. Covid mass infection events happened mostly through the air, much less so through touching a surface. We learned that early in the pandemic. Hand washing after the first few months was mostly kept as hygiene theatre and for preventing transmission of infections other than covid.
> Very few. Covid mass infection events happened mostly through the air, much less so through touching a surface. We learned that early in the pandemic.
No, "we" didn't. The CDC and, by extension, much of the coverage was insisting on surface sanitization even though there was plenty of evidence for airborne transmission already. I distinctly remembered going with the CDC recommendations until a friend pointed me out to a bunch of published articles with a preponderance of evidence for airborne transmission. It took many months for the CDC and other agencies to change their stance, by which time the whole 'surface cleaning' was already entrenched in everyone's minds.
No, "we" didn't. The CDC and, by extension, much of the coverage was insisting on surface sanitization even though there was plenty of evidence for airborne transmission already. I distinctly remembered going with the CDC recommendations until a friend pointed me out to a bunch of published articles with a preponderance of evidence for airborne transmission. It took many months for the CDC and other agencies to change their stance, by which time the whole 'surface cleaning' was already entrenched in everyone's minds.
If you only wash your hands because of "hygiene theatre" please don't invite me to dinner.
That's not what they said. Read it again.
It is not clear to me that any significant number of deaths were prevented by lockdowns once vaccines were available, only delayed by a maximum of 3 years. Everyone still got covid. Some people didn’t make it through the filter, that’s what new diseases are like.
[deleted]
Given that people are still dying of COVID, "a maximum of 3 years" is incorrect.
A million dead people, sufficiently far from us in any particular dimension, don’t matter. It’s a funny piece of human psychology. Deaths years ago or years in the future, or in Africa or wherever. Just don’t matter to most people. Goes double when they are “other”.
“sufficiently far from us in any particular dimension” is where that falls apart, though. One million dead within the US alone means a lot of people were touched by COVID death.
Aren’t they not at all far from us, in any dimension whatsoever, except that they are not literally us?
99% of them are far from you physically. If you weren’t personally affected it probably doesn’t matter to you.
I was unlucky and lost 3 grandparents between my wife and I. Matters more to me probably.
I was unlucky and lost 3 grandparents between my wife and I. Matters more to me probably.
I doubt that they're disproportionately far from my physically.
I am really aiming for density here. I don’t think it’s weird (or debatable) that humans don’t care as much about other humans that are far away. They care about ones that are closer.
The thing is lack of density was sufficient to trigger this lack of care. Kind of interesting.
The thing is lack of density was sufficient to trigger this lack of care. Kind of interesting.
> I doubt the world would go into prolonged lockdowns again.
Most of the world didn't go into any lockdowns. Sure, most gatherings were banned and places like restaurants couldn't have people dining in. But most people could go outside and do almost anything they wanted, provided they didn't gather in crowds.
The lockdowns like China enforced where people had their doors barred and could only leave once a week for groceries (or had groceries delivered by the government) were an outlier.
If we ever see mortality rates in the double digits, expect real lockdowns.
Most of the world didn't go into any lockdowns. Sure, most gatherings were banned and places like restaurants couldn't have people dining in. But most people could go outside and do almost anything they wanted, provided they didn't gather in crowds.
The lockdowns like China enforced where people had their doors barred and could only leave once a week for groceries (or had groceries delivered by the government) were an outlier.
If we ever see mortality rates in the double digits, expect real lockdowns.
Most countries implemented policies they called "lockdowns" so whatever personal definition you're using isn't very helpful. Certainly, being able to go outside was seen as a regrettable bug and not a feature in many places. For example, the UK police notoriously used drones to find couples sitting on park benches. Where I live I was forbidden from leaving my apartment for a couple of weeks when my wife got COVID, for any reason except purchasing groceries. So that was definitely a China-style lockdown.
> If we ever see mortality rates in the double digits, expect real lockdowns.
We'll see them because our ruling classes are psychologically and politically unable to push back on corrupt academics, not because they work. Lockdowns had no effect on COVID because respiratory viruses are able to spread long distances on air currents, but lockdown policy assumes they can't.
> If we ever see mortality rates in the double digits, expect real lockdowns.
We'll see them because our ruling classes are psychologically and politically unable to push back on corrupt academics, not because they work. Lockdowns had no effect on COVID because respiratory viruses are able to spread long distances on air currents, but lockdown policy assumes they can't.
> Most countries implemented policies they called "lockdowns" so whatever personal definition you're using isn't very helpful.
That doesn't make much sense. Just because some country called their measures "lockdown" doesn't make the situation comparable to another country with different measures who called theirs "lockdown" as well. I suggest doing a duck-test ("if it walks like a duck, ...").
> Where I live I was forbidden from leaving my apartment for a couple of weeks when my wife got COVID, for any reason except purchasing groceries. So that was definitely a China-style lockdown.
That doesn't require a lockdown. Technically even the status of your wife and yours was different at the time. Your wife was in medical isolation and you were quarantined (at least it sounds like you were not testing positive at the time which makes all the difference here).
That doesn't make much sense. Just because some country called their measures "lockdown" doesn't make the situation comparable to another country with different measures who called theirs "lockdown" as well. I suggest doing a duck-test ("if it walks like a duck, ...").
> Where I live I was forbidden from leaving my apartment for a couple of weeks when my wife got COVID, for any reason except purchasing groceries. So that was definitely a China-style lockdown.
That doesn't require a lockdown. Technically even the status of your wife and yours was different at the time. Your wife was in medical isolation and you were quarantined (at least it sounds like you were not testing positive at the time which makes all the difference here).
> Where I live I was forbidden from leaving my apartment for a couple of weeks when my wife got COVID
So, you were told to self isolate because you were in a household with a sick individual. Wouldn't that be the prudent thing to do anyway?
Also, what does 'forbidden' means? What would have happened if you went out anyway?
> Lockdowns had no effect on COVID because respiratory viruses are able to spread long distances on air currents
Citation needed. Also, the viral load at 'long distances' is unlikely to be problematic.
So, you were told to self isolate because you were in a household with a sick individual. Wouldn't that be the prudent thing to do anyway?
Also, what does 'forbidden' means? What would have happened if you went out anyway?
> Lockdowns had no effect on COVID because respiratory viruses are able to spread long distances on air currents
Citation needed. Also, the viral load at 'long distances' is unlikely to be problematic.
> So, you were told to self isolate because you were in a household with a sick individual. Wouldn't that be the prudent thing to do anyway?
That'd very much depend on what the reason to leave the house was, wouldn't it? I never got sick anyway so must have been immune to that variant.
> Also, what does 'forbidden' means? What would have happened if you went out anyway?
I think there were fines. I forget exactly, it was a few years ago now. I'm not sure how it was policed.
> Citation needed. Also, the viral load at 'long distances' is unlikely to be problematic.
Go look at any regression analysis of lockdown/masking severity vs outcomes, there are plenty out there. Or study what happened on the Diamond Princess way back in Feb/March 2020. The data from that semi-controlled experiment is only compatible with long distance transmission on air currents. Or look at how SARS-1 was able to spread between buildings, and apartments within the buildings. They were able to show it was spreading through ducts within the buildings and then on wind currents between buildings.
Or if you want a more direct approach, look at the old graphs of case numbers for a country you aren't familiar with and try to work out when mask mandates or lockdowns were implemented or relaxed. I've tried, it can't be done. If these policies worked you'd see clear impact because clear impact is the definition of worked. No impact can be seen, as you'd expect from gas-cloud type spread.
That'd very much depend on what the reason to leave the house was, wouldn't it? I never got sick anyway so must have been immune to that variant.
> Also, what does 'forbidden' means? What would have happened if you went out anyway?
I think there were fines. I forget exactly, it was a few years ago now. I'm not sure how it was policed.
> Citation needed. Also, the viral load at 'long distances' is unlikely to be problematic.
Go look at any regression analysis of lockdown/masking severity vs outcomes, there are plenty out there. Or study what happened on the Diamond Princess way back in Feb/March 2020. The data from that semi-controlled experiment is only compatible with long distance transmission on air currents. Or look at how SARS-1 was able to spread between buildings, and apartments within the buildings. They were able to show it was spreading through ducts within the buildings and then on wind currents between buildings.
Or if you want a more direct approach, look at the old graphs of case numbers for a country you aren't familiar with and try to work out when mask mandates or lockdowns were implemented or relaxed. I've tried, it can't be done. If these policies worked you'd see clear impact because clear impact is the definition of worked. No impact can be seen, as you'd expect from gas-cloud type spread.
thank God for the essential workers risking their lives for 6 bucks an hour. bless their hearts
This exact virus (H5N1) has at least 15-30% mortality. The exact number is really hard to know, because there have been too few cases, but it's certain to be at least 20 times as deadly as SARS-CoV-2.
No, that's not certain at all. The total number of confirmed human cases in the world is under a thousand [1] in 20 years. That's not enough data to get any kind of mortality statistic for an influenza variant.
Chances are >99% of cases are so mild they were never tested. It's pretty surprising this one was detected at all. It's only the second confirmed case in the US despite tons of confirmed animal cases in poultry and migratory birds.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/chart-epi-curve-ah5n1.html
Chances are >99% of cases are so mild they were never tested. It's pretty surprising this one was detected at all. It's only the second confirmed case in the US despite tons of confirmed animal cases in poultry and migratory birds.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/chart-epi-curve-ah5n1.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_mortality_from_H5N1
> It's only the second confirmed case
We know it doesn't transmit very well in humans. Luckily people have been working on that:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/controv...
> It's only the second confirmed case
We know it doesn't transmit very well in humans. Luckily people have been working on that:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/controv...
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/p0401-avian-flu.html
> The patient reported eye redness (consistent with conjunctivitis), as their only symptom, and is recovering.
This is not a disease with a double digit mortality rate, no matter how many times people try to do math with a three digit sample size of poor people in developing countries.
The CDC only caught this case because it's literally testing anyone with symptoms at the cattle farm.
> The patient reported eye redness (consistent with conjunctivitis), as their only symptom, and is recovering.
This is not a disease with a double digit mortality rate, no matter how many times people try to do math with a three digit sample size of poor people in developing countries.
The CDC only caught this case because it's literally testing anyone with symptoms at the cattle farm.
i'll never understand the compulsion to do these hybridization experiments to find out if its possible, how about we just live life assuming its possible and work on figuring out how to help humans recover from disease in general
> We know it doesn't transmit very well in humans. Luckily people have been working on that:
You make it sound as though they're working on making it transmit well in humans. Oh wait, they are! What's wrong with them?!
You make it sound as though they're working on making it transmit well in humans. Oh wait, they are! What's wrong with them?!
Lockdowns make sense if emergency rooms cannot keep up with the emergency rate. Other than that*, we'll see a lot of people going back to WFH on a temp basis and lots of masks and hand sanitizer.
Yeah, this is why lockdowns were started. The ER was full of sick people and, if you were in a car wreck or had a heart attack, you would likely die from lack of beds. Go back and look and the ER/ICU/All-Bed occupancy rates were >95% over most of the country for months.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8852235/
This is what it looked like in Dec 2020: https://www.statista.com/chart/23746/icu-bed-occupancy-rates...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8852235/
This is what it looked like in Dec 2020: https://www.statista.com/chart/23746/icu-bed-occupancy-rates...
95% is not as scary as it sounds. it's currently like 80% and without COVID it peaks to 85% all the time:
https://www.cdc.gov/respiratory-viruses/data-research/dashbo...
https://www.cdc.gov/respiratory-viruses/data-research/dashbo...
In my jurisdiction occupancy rates peaked in 2022.
> The preparedness paradox is the proposition that if a society or individual acts effectively to mitigate a potential disaster such as a pandemic, natural disaster or other catastrophe so that it causes less harm, the avoided danger will be perceived as having been much less serious because of the limited damage actually caused.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preparedness_paradox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preparedness_paradox
Why does a private hospital's ER capacity dictate my ability to freely move about?
Because the goal was really to close businesses rather than forcing service/retail workers to serve as a Petri dish. Politicians/bureaucrats are intrinsically authoritarian and often overshoot with simplistic heavy handed responses. Then a political movement formed around acting like idiots out of spite, cementing the opposing positions.
I was in a blue state that issued a strongly worded stay at home recommendation, but no "lockdown" with legal force. It worked great, owing in part to still having some sense of social cohesion. When your society can't get through novel disruptions with leadership informally keeping most everybody on the same page, that's what you should be worried about.
I was in a blue state that issued a strongly worded stay at home recommendation, but no "lockdown" with legal force. It worked great, owing in part to still having some sense of social cohesion. When your society can't get through novel disruptions with leadership informally keeping most everybody on the same page, that's what you should be worried about.
Just a bit of a SWAG (Scientific, Wild-Ass Guess) here but it looks like this is probably not you. [0]
[0] https://www.dallasnews.com/arts-entertainment/state-fair/202...
[0] https://www.dallasnews.com/arts-entertainment/state-fair/202...
[deleted]
9% mortality (with treatment) with flu like transmission rates would quickly destroy the functionality of our medical system.
Soon new patients would live or die with no medical care and death rate for the diseases and anyone who is at risk of dying wo care would skyrocket.
50M people would ultimately die in the US alone everything would collapse and people would lock down of their own accord.
Soon new patients would live or die with no medical care and death rate for the diseases and anyone who is at risk of dying wo care would skyrocket.
50M people would ultimately die in the US alone everything would collapse and people would lock down of their own accord.
As an European… sigh, bidets are not a replacement for toilet paper…
> unless we see mortality rates in the double digits, I doubt the world would go into prolonged lockdowns again.
You should have learned from the last pandemic that going in a lockdown is the prevention measure to avoid mortality rate in the double digits…
> unless we see mortality rates in the double digits, I doubt the world would go into prolonged lockdowns again.
You should have learned from the last pandemic that going in a lockdown is the prevention measure to avoid mortality rate in the double digits…
Likely referring to the Japanese-style bidet, aka washlet, which have a built-in dryer so zero toilet paper is required. But even a cheap one without a dryer will drastically reduce the amount of toilet paper required.
Yes, they're only called bidets for lack of a better word in English. Mine has adjustable water temp, heated seat, air dry, variable pressure, front/rear wash, oscillation, and several more modes I've not even dared to try yet. Got mine from Costco during one of their periodic sales. I highly recommend them even when there's no toilet paper shortage.
> going in a lockdown is the prevention measure to avoid mortality rate in the double digits…
Huh? Mortality rate is the mortality rate, its independent of a lockdown; unless more vulnerable people are "locking down" at rates different than less vulnerable ones, but at that point we're not talking about a "lockdown".
The purpose of the COVID lockdown wasn't to suppress the mortality rate; it was to suppress the total infected/mortality.
Huh? Mortality rate is the mortality rate, its independent of a lockdown; unless more vulnerable people are "locking down" at rates different than less vulnerable ones, but at that point we're not talking about a "lockdown".
The purpose of the COVID lockdown wasn't to suppress the mortality rate; it was to suppress the total infected/mortality.
In normal times the experienced mortality rate is based on most of the sickest people receiving supportive care in the hospital that greatly blunts mortality rate.
When your medical needs exceed resources mortality rate converges toward untreated mortality rate.
Try this on for size what is the untreated mortality rate of a single gunshot wound to the chest. Its close to 100% but the overwhelming majority survive with prompt treatment. You wouldn't say that the mortality rate was what it is.
When your medical needs exceed resources mortality rate converges toward untreated mortality rate.
Try this on for size what is the untreated mortality rate of a single gunshot wound to the chest. Its close to 100% but the overwhelming majority survive with prompt treatment. You wouldn't say that the mortality rate was what it is.
I suppose the mortality rate could go up if the healthcare system in a particular area is fully overwhelmed, such that significant number of normally treatable cases end up in death rather than recovery. The morbidity rate is probably less affected though.
> again
We are still “in” one, in all seriousness.
We are still “in” one, in all seriousness.
Especially if Texas is ground zero.
This flu has a 60% mortality rate. If it becomes airborne you can bet there will be lockdowns.
This is just 1 of the problems with animal ag.
- Pandemics
- Antibiotic resistance (The sheer stupidity of using the same antibiotics we depend on to stay alive just to make animals grow faster and be more profitable.)
- Climate change (1/6th of all emissions)
- Soil, air, water pollution
- Deforestation
- Higher food prices
- Less net food available
- Pandemics
- Antibiotic resistance (The sheer stupidity of using the same antibiotics we depend on to stay alive just to make animals grow faster and be more profitable.)
- Climate change (1/6th of all emissions)
- Soil, air, water pollution
- Deforestation
- Higher food prices
- Less net food available
> The illness is mild and the worker is expected to recover
How do cases like this ever get diagnosed? IME the standard of care for mild respiratory illness in the US tends to be basic symptom management, or maybe a standard diagnostic panel to determine whether to prescribe antibiotics. How does someone with mild symptoms get tested for a rare virus in the first place?
How do cases like this ever get diagnosed? IME the standard of care for mild respiratory illness in the US tends to be basic symptom management, or maybe a standard diagnostic panel to determine whether to prescribe antibiotics. How does someone with mild symptoms get tested for a rare virus in the first place?
Seems it was diagnosed in cattle and this was a dairy worker, so probably everyone working in contact with infected cattle are tested
From the CDC press release:
> CDC is working with state health departments to continue to monitor workers who may have been in contact with infected or potentially infected birds/animals and test those people who develop symptoms. [1]
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/p0401-avian-flu.html
> CDC is working with state health departments to continue to monitor workers who may have been in contact with infected or potentially infected birds/animals and test those people who develop symptoms. [1]
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/p0401-avian-flu.html
Just started playing Talos Principle 2 and cross species infections is really on my mind.
For those who enjoyed Portal, it is a nice first person puzzler. Completely different mechanics. I do not think it required much (any?) high precision/twitch actions. Not finished, but I think I am preferring original Talos Principle vs Two, because there were not so many annoying NPCs in the first.
For those who enjoyed Portal, it is a nice first person puzzler. Completely different mechanics. I do not think it required much (any?) high precision/twitch actions. Not finished, but I think I am preferring original Talos Principle vs Two, because there were not so many annoying NPCs in the first.
Any status of the human that caught the "Texas Flu"
In all seriousness, even if we get into a pandemic again, unless we see mortality rates in the double digits, I doubt the world would go into prolonged lockdowns again.