Re: A child tests positive for H5N1

On 11/21/2024 6:18 PM, RonO wrote:

On 11/20/2024 5:28 PM, RonO wrote:

On 11/19/2024 5:28 PM, RonO wrote:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/avian-influenza-bird-flu/california- reveals- suspected-avian-flu-case-child-mild-symptoms
>
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OPA/Pages/NR24-037.aspx
>
The California child is day care age and was showing symptoms while attending the day care so they are administering preventive treatment and testing of contacts.
>
The child had no contact with farm animals, and the source of the virus has not been determined.  They need to sequence it and determine if it is the dairy virus.  If it is the dairy virus, infection via dairy products should not be ruled out.  It would be just like the Missouri infection where there was no known source except that they had consumed dairy products.  I only saw the milk claim in one article, and it seems be suppressed at this time.  The child is only claimed to have had respiratory symptoms.
>
They tested the family members, but they need to do antibody testing in order to rule out that any of them had been infected since the child was late in the infection when tested (low amounts of virus) and was negative 4 days later at the next testing, a family member could have infected the child and recovered before being tested.  If they aren't going to test them properly they should contact trace the family members to determine if they can track back to a possible source of the infection.
>
They do not seem to be doing things that they should be doing.  The California report repeats the claim that pasteurization kills the virus, and it does, but they do not admit to the CDC research indicating that the the 72 degree C for 15 to 20 sec method of pasteurization did not kill the virus and some infective virus survived the treatment to be detected as infective virus.  The FDA is supposed to be doing more testing, but they don't seem to be doing it properly, and have not reported their results at this time.  The CDC results were reported in October, but no one is taking the results seriously, at least, no one wants to consider the possibility.  Has anyone else even heard of the CDC tests and results?  I only found out because they published the results in their November newsletter published in October.  I haven't seen anyone else citing that newsletter report.  In early November the FDA claimed that they were going to start another round of testing, but it didn't sound like they were going to do the testing the way that they should.  It is stupid to ask for volunteers and claim to just forget where the milk came from.  They need to test the milk out of each truck, and test the milk after pasteurization to see if any positive loads leaked viable virus, and they need to test each pasteurization method multiple times at multiple processing plants handling infected milk. This isn't rocket science and doing things with the intent to fail is just stupid.
>
What this article doesn't say is that San Francisco, San Jose, and Palo Alto have had H5N1 detected in their city waste water.  Look at were Alameda county is (the child is claimed to live in Alameda county). This child would have been putting virus into their city waste water.
>
Ron Okimoto
>

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/avian-influenza-bird-flu/avian-flu-infects- more-poultry-4-us-states
>
Another dairy farm in California confirmed (total 336).  3 more commercial poultry farms went down in California.  Everyone should know by now that they get infected by dairy workers that also work on poultry farms.
>
Hawaii, Minnesota, and Washington have more poultry outbreaks.  They need to sequence to determine if it is the dairy virus.  Minnesota should know by now that they have infected herds because multiple poultry farms have gone down with the dairy virus, but they won't test their herds.  Where do these guys think that the virus comes from?
>
4 states that the USDA wasn't going to test by bulk milk tank testing are going to test their dairy herds.  Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Massachusettes.  Massachusettes may already know that the infection did not get into their state.  I recall that they claimed that they were going to test over a month ago.  Oklahoma already had some positive herds, but didn't test after the first couple of positives.  Arkansas was on the first FDA list of states producing positive milk products back in May, and they may finally be testing.
>
More detections in wild birds, but they likely need to confirm what virus infected them.
>
Ron Okimoto
>

 The CDC is listing the Oregon case as among the dairy virus infections, but Oregon is still calling it bird flu.  They have had a couple of commercial flocks go down, apparently, with the dairy virus, but they refuses to test their dairies.  Oregon is recommending that people do not drink unpasteurized dairy products, so they likely have a good idea where the virus is coming from.
 https://www.opb.org/article/2024/11/15/oregon-first-human-case-bird- avian-flu-influenza/
 The refusal to identify all the infected dairies and try to contain the infection is just crazy at this time.
 The workers do not know that they should be wearing protective gear, and more of them can expect to be infected.
 Ron Okimoto
 

https://www.cdc.gov/bird-flu/situation-summary/mammals.html
It looks like a lot of herds since the last update 11/18, with most having 11/18 confirmation dates, have been added to Californias total today the total on the excel sheet went up to 398.  It was 336 before the update.  It may be a glitch in how they updated their data, but the highest sample submission number is now CA417 so there are still unconfirmed samples in the que.
The USDA still haven't posted any numbers from their state wide bulk milk tank testing that they were going to start within 30 days a couple weeks ago.  Who knows what they are going to find.  It looks like California has identified around 400 herds so far just by contact tracing of dairies that share workers and equipment.  There are only 1300 dairies in the state, and samples have been submitted for over 400 of them for verification.  Just think what they would have found if Texas and Michigan had started contact tracing and testing herds at the beginning of this fiasco.  California was confident that they could contain the infection because most of the dairies were large enough to have full time staff and would not have workers working on multiple dairies like states with smaller herds and part time staff.
There are obviously more states than 15 with infected herds, and more infected herds in the infected states that are not looking for infected herds.
Ron Okimoto