H5N1 bird flu and how we're risking another global pandemic

[NiHaoMike]

https://www.reddit.com/r/H5N1_AvianFlu/comments/1cfdykj/opinion_this_may_be_our_last_chance_to_halt_bird/

Spillovers from animals to humans are common, yet pandemics are rare because they require a chain of unlucky events to happen one after the other. But pandemics are a numbers game, and a widespread animal outbreak like this raises the risks. When dangerous novel pathogens emerge among humans, there is only a small window of time in which to stop them before they spiral out of control. Neither our animal farming practices nor our public health tools seem up to the task.

It's inevitable that factory farming is going to cause another pandemic. If not H5N1, it will be something else later. It adds to the many other health problems related to factory farming as justification to phase it out and replace it with sustainable farming.

[Zero999]

It's true there will be another pandemic and nothing has been learned from the one just gone, but isn't this a bit too off-topic?

[magic]

Nice reddit drama thread.

You forgot to add that you don't intend to bash the US because China uses industrial farming too and mention something about chipageddon to make it electronics-related

[ConKbot]

Oh no, even chickens bad now, the only solution to save humanity is to switch to industrially produced protein supplement brick meals! Totally not because it's very very profitable for us to turn any garbage protein, fat, and carb source into kibble for humans.

[themadhippy]

it will be something else later. It adds to the many other health problems related to factory farming as justification to phase it out and replace it with sustainable farming.

And then mother nature will find another novel way of trying to keep the population of the most destructive  species on the planet under control

[CatalinaWOW]

Sustainable farming will only support a sustainable human population.  Which may take a pandemic to achieve.

[Zero999]

There's no need for a pandemic. Current farming practices are sustainable, because population grow will come to a halt and reverse, within the next few decades. The fact our current economic system relies on population growth is a problem and will eventually collapse, due to a lack of new workers and too many pensioners.

[nctnico]

https://www.reddit.com/r/H5N1_AvianFlu/comments/1cfdykj/opinion_this_may_be_our_last_chance_to_halt_bird/

Spillovers from animals to humans are common, yet pandemics are rare because they require a chain of unlucky events to happen one after the other. But pandemics are a numbers game, and a widespread animal outbreak like this raises the risks. When dangerous novel pathogens emerge among humans, there is only a small window of time in which to stop them before they spiral out of control. Neither our animal farming practices nor our public health tools seem up to the task.

It's inevitable that factory farming is going to cause another pandemic. If not H5N1, it will be something else later. It adds to the many other health problems related to factory farming as justification to phase it out and replace it with sustainable farming.

It doesn't work that way. You have to keep in mind that humanity is factory farming humans. The only advantage of factory farming humans is that humans can be vaccinated to higher levels as humans don't need to be consumed. Farm animals bread for consumption are a little more sensitive as their meat ends up in our food chain. Either way, infectious disseases will spread and the only way out is through keeping vaccination levels up to high percentages. Over here in the NL people (mostly young kids) die again of disseases which have not been problematic for decades due to stupid people not trusting vaccines due to spread of false information. Herd immunity is key.

History has shown world-wide pandemics occur about once every 100 years so you are safe.

[AVGresponding]

History has shown world-wide pandemics occur about once every 100 years so you are safe.

That's a risky assumption; because A, always A. Living in the universe is inherently unsafe, probably best not to dwell on it too much, but take sensible precautions (wash your hands before eating, after using public transport etc)

[nctnico]

History has shown world-wide pandemics occur about once every 100 years so you are safe.

That's a risky assumption; because A, always A. Living in the universe is inherently unsafe, probably best not to dwell on it too much, but take sensible precautions (wash your hands before eating, after using public transport etc)

That is just basic hygiene your parents should have taught you 

[coppercone2]

too much fried chicken. eat some fucking vegetables people.

another 50 trillion dollars down the drain because you need chicken and bacon three meals a day every day

[strawberry]

I think, next thing will be communism or human exhaled carbon emissions tax

too much fried chicken. eat some fucking vegetables people.

another 50 trillion dollars down the drain because you need chicken and bacon three meals a day every day

chicken and bacon are fed vegan food so it is vegan food

[Zero999]

It doesn't work that way. You have to keep in mind that humanity is factory farming humans. The only advantage of factory farming humans is that humans can be vaccinated to higher levels as humans don't need to be consumed. Farm animals bread for consumption are a little more sensitive as their meat ends up in our food chain.

Lack of genetic diversity is a problem in animal farming, just as much as overcrowded, unhygienic conditions an poor welfare standards, which reduces the efficacy of the immune system.

Either way, infectious disseases will spread and the only way out is through keeping vaccination levels up to high percentages. Over here in the NL people (mostly young kids) die again of disseases which have not been problematic for decades due to stupid people not trusting vaccines due to spread of false information. Herd immunity is key.

Herd immunity can only be achieved with viruses which can be controlled with vaccines such as polio myelitis. Good levels of hygiene are also required.

Vaccines are great for preventing the transmission of some pathogens, but poor at controlling respiratory viruses such as influenza and SARS-Cov-2. This is because these viruses mutate rapidly, are highly contagious and the vaccines don't induce mucosal immunity, which is required to prevent transmission and is short-lived anyway. The only thing these vaccines might do is reduce the risk of getting severely ill, although that's not even certain, given the lack of randomised data.

The authorities spreading misinformation, exaggerating the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines and downplaying the risks, as well as trying to force people to have them, have heavily contributed to an increased lack of trust in vaccines. If they were honest about their limitations and didn't push people so hard into taking them, we wouldn't be in this position.

[nctnico]

This has beend debated before. You are right about respiratory viruses mutating a lot (hence the big outbreak every 100 or so years and 'flu' vaccines needing adjustment for every flu season) but you are wrong about good respiratory vaccinations not being effective at all. The main problem is that the general public doesn't understand what kind of level of protection to expect from getting vaccinated due to all the mis-information being spread. The truth is that getting vaccinated for any dissease doesn't mean you won't get sick; just not seriously ill to a near 100% number of cases. The cancer called social media however zooms in on the 0.00000001% getting seriously ill (usually combined with other medical issues which are left out) and claiming the vaccines are not effective at all in order to generate more views and money. Add in some government conspiracies paid for by dubious sources and the chaos is complete.

[Zero999]

This has beend debated before. You are right about respiratory viruses mutating a lot (hence the big outbreak every 100 or so years and 'flu' vaccines needing adjustment for every flu season) but you are wrong about good respiratory vaccinations not being effective at all. The main problem is that the general public doesn't understand what kind of level of protection to expect from getting vaccinated due to all the mis-information being spread. The truth is that getting vaccinated for any dissease doesn't mean you won't get sick; just not seriously ill to a near 100% number of cases. The cancer called social media however zooms in on the 0.00000001% getting seriously ill (usually combined with other medical issues which are left out) and claiming the vaccines are not effective at all in order to generate more views and money. Add in some government conspiracies paid for by dubious sources and the chaos is complete.

Okay, where's the randomised data for seasonal influenza vaccines? I've not seen any. All we have is population wide data which appears to show a reduction in severe disease in vaccinated cohorts, but it could easily by attributed to something else. Correlation doesn't mean causation. There is plenty of evidence of a healthy vaccine bias skewing the data.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26474974/
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-015-1154-y

The fact that those who have taken vaccines are at lower risk of road fatalities, shows the two groups are not the same, which might explain the disparities in severe disease and death, rather than the vaccines.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9716428/

Until I see randomised data, I will be sceptical, which is the only logical position to take, given throughout the history of medicine, a good number of interventions have been ineffective.

EDIT:
You also failed to address my point that the authorities gave people unrealistic expectations by claiming it protected those around you and pushing it too hard.

[strawberry]

~10k possible combinations ~50..100 can react with human cell protein
one of them is seasonal flu and mortality rate is low
one in africa everyone forgot and mortality rate was ~80% (they locked down that country immediately and cached that one person in USA)
covid 

[Wallace Gasiewicz]

Until I see randomised data, I will be sceptical, which is the only logical position to take, given throughout the history of medicine, a good number of interventions have been ineffective.

You got it right.  There are all sorts of "studies" but I have not seen any good stuff about truly unbiased studies with proper control groups.   There have been "vaccines" that have made the outcome of the disease worse.   

Herd Immunity has been touted.   It is not as simple as vaccinating.  The premise of Herd Immunity is that almost all of the Herd is immune to the point that they do not even "catch" or carry the pathogen.  So they cannot transmit it to anyone else in the Herd.  Many Vaccines do not offer this level of Immunity.   
The comments about Herd Immunity in the press are badly informed. Or "MisInformation"
I will be quite skeptical also until I see believable data in proper studies.

[nctnico]

You also failed to address my point that the authorities gave people unrealistic expectations by claiming it protected those around you and pushing it too hard.

I didn't. It is just governments pushing back against mis-information in order to make people do the smart thing after all. You can try to find all kinds of government conspiracy theories behind it but in the end the general public is not informed enough to make the right decission so tell them something that makes them do the right thing anyway.

It is like telling a random person about a great electronics shop you have found and start verbally listing all the interesting items you've seen. 999 out of 1000 persons will tune out after 2 lines; all that is interesting to most is that you found it a great place to be so stick to that part of the story if you want to keep the other party interested in anything you have to say. Sometimes you have to dumb things down to get a message across to most people while some will claim the information is incomplete. You can't have it both ways.

[jonpaul]

NOTE: This message has been deleted by the forum moderator Simon for being against the forum rules and/or at the discretion of the moderator as being in the best interests of the forum community and the nature of the thread.
If you believe this to be in error, please contact the moderator involved.
An optional additional explanation is:

[Zero999]

You also failed to address my point that the authorities gave people unrealistic expectations by claiming it protected those around you and pushing it too hard.

I didn't. It is just governments pushing back against mis-information in order to make people do the smart thing after all. You can try to find all kinds of government conspiracy theories behind it but in the end the general public is not informed enough to make the right decission so tell them something that makes them do the right thing anyway.

Rubbish. We were told to get vaccinated to protect others which was a lie. Our government even mandated it for care home workers and they were going to also mandate it for all frontline NHS staff. Fortunately they realised it didn't prevent transmission and cancelled mandates. The authorities have pushed far more misinformation, than crackpots on the internet.

I prefer to stick to the hard evidence. I'll believe it when I see proper, randomised data to show it works.

It's nothing to to with being anti-vaccine. The eradication of smallpox proves vaccines do work and I would like to see polio eradicated too. The problem is, the authorities are seriously damaging their credibility by pushing vaccines with weak evidence and making false claims.

It is like telling a random person about a great electronics shop you have found and start verbally listing all the interesting items you've seen. 999 out of 1000 persons will tune out after 2 lines; all that is interesting to most is that you found it a great place to be so stick to that part of the story if you want to keep the other party interested in anything you have to say

What a silly analogy. Most people can understand the difference between getting a cold and pneumonia.

[RJSV]

   I see and read the facts debated immediately, here.   Similar to other venues or blogs.
About every time, there can be a quick SKIP;...mention of a 'MISINFORMATION' dynamic 'OUT THERE', very brief and then on with the, uh, FACTS, as you see them.
   No disrespect intended, to those making points here, but this is equivalent of, borrowing a legal phrase;  factual and intellectual equivalent to a 'Court Mistrial, declared by a judge'...that is, the verbal or written exchanges are so riddled with stubborn and partisan phrases and cliches as render the whole pile as 'unresolvable'!   (Sorry)

   Sorry, no definitive 'facts' stated.
   Sorry, 'Fake News' is not a definitive declaration...just the opposite.

And in the U.S. now, we don't even enjoy the luxury of an 'honest' departure from an airplane or helicopter...all staged complete with 'fake' luggage hauled around, supposedly to block views of stumbles......

[SiliconWizard]

There's no need for a pandemic. Current farming practices are sustainable, because population grow will come to a halt and reverse, within the next few decades. The fact our current economic system relies on population growth is a problem and will eventually collapse, due to a lack of new workers and too many pensioners.

Yes, it will just adjust itself whether we like it or not.

[TimFox]

Meanwhile, dengue fever is getting out of hand in South America and the range of the Aedes mosquito is extending in North America due to climate change.
There’s lots of stuff to worry about.

[NiHaoMike]

Nice reddit drama thread.

You forgot to add that you don't intend to bash the US because China uses industrial farming too and mention something about chipageddon to make it electronics-related

I'm against factory farming worldwide.

Oh no, even chickens bad now, the only solution to save humanity is to switch to industrially produced protein supplement brick meals! Totally not because it's very very profitable for us to turn any garbage protein, fat, and carb source into kibble for humans.

There's already lots of that readily available at pretty much every grocery store (except perhaps a few "truly healthy" ones) as well as lots of shops specializing in it, with a mix of all sorts of chemicals to get the average consumer to buy it. It is, however, a separate although very closely related problem.

The solution to both is a sustainable diet.

Sustainable farming will only support a sustainable human population.  Which may take a pandemic to achieve.

Factory farming uses so much land (if everything is properly counted) that even "conventional" farming would be much more sustainable.

[CatalinaWOW]

Sustainable farming will only support a sustainable human population.  Which may take a pandemic to achieve.

Factory farming uses so much land (if everything is properly counted) that even "conventional" farming would be much more sustainable.

Traditional farming is sustainable.  But look at food yield per acre on various types of land using this type of agriculture (there is only a little of the very good stuff, lots of OK stuff and huge amounts of very marginal land.  Be sure to make sure that water sources are sustainable.  Then see what population it will support.  Even if we go all vegetarian.  Be sure to use solid sources for the calculations.  The posts of meat eaters and vegetarians both wildly miscount the real needs to support their preferred diet.