Hello together,

Thie is one of the few articles I could find concerning HPAI and lack of major clinical signs. I have no access to the full article

Are ducks contributing to the endemicity of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus in Asia?

Sturm-Ramirez KM, Hulse-Post DJ, Govorkova EA, Humberd J, Seiler P, Puthavathana P, Buranathai C, Nguyen TD, Chaisingh A, Long HT, Naipospos TS, Chen H, Ellis TM, Guan Y, Peiris JS, Webster RG.

Division of Virology, Department of Infectious Diseases, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105-2794, USA.

Wild waterfowl are the natural reservoir of all influenza A viruses, and these viruses are usually nonpathogenic in these birds. However, since late 2002, H5N1 outbreaks in Asia have resulted in mortality among waterfowl in recreational parks, domestic flocks, and wild migratory birds. The evolutionary stasis between influenza virus and its natural host may have been disrupted, prompting us to ask whether waterfowl are resistant to H5N1 influenza virus disease and whether they can still act as a reservoir for these viruses. To better understand the biology of H5N1 viruses in ducks and attempt to answer this question, we inoculated juvenile mallards with 23 different H5N1 influenza viruses isolated in Asia between 2003 and 2004. All virus isolates replicated efficiently in inoculated ducks, and 22 were transmitted to susceptible contacts. Viruses replicated to higher levels in the trachea than in the cloaca of both inoculated and contact birds, suggesting that the digestive tract is not the main site of H5N1 influenza virus replication in ducks and that the fecal-oral route may no longer be the main transmission path. The virus isolates' pathogenicities varied from completely nonpathogenic to highly lethal and were positively correlated with tracheal virus titers. Nevertheless, the eight virus isolates that were nonpathogenic in ducks replicated and transmitted efficiently to naive contacts, suggesting that highly pathogenic H5N1 viruses causing minimal signs of disease in ducks can propagate silently and efficiently among domestic and wild ducks in Asia and that they represent a serious threat to human and veterinary public health.

PMID: 16103179 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16103179&itool=iconabstr&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum

greetings

Thanks, yes, I've seen this [full paper], and a related paper (on whether ducks are trojan horses)
An important straw for some to clutch at in blaming wild birds. Key part of blame-the-wild-birds, no matter the evidence.

Notions H5N1 is in wild birds simply aren't borne out by facts. (One thing - even if mild in ducks, it would kill other birds. Otherwise, arguing for H5N1 becoming benign in wild ibrds.)

Guan Yi, among experts I quote in another thread, is among authors of paper. He's independent minded bloke, though.

As I noted in a post above, inc re such experiments with/results from captive birds (see also thread here re Trojan ducks):

For H5N1 to become non virulent in wild birds, need considerable evolution; not seeing this in wild (and there is considerable testing; also lack of wild bird deaths from H5N1 pretty near everywhere).
Lower path H5N1 in domestic/experimental ducks in low titres cloaca; ducks don't French kiss and I've never seen wild ducks sneeze, so spreading it tough. Swans in Croatia also low titres cloaca; other birds on ponds with them not infected [source of the swans infection a mystery: why swans here, Volga, predominating among the - rather few - wild birds affected in Romania?]

The real blame is elsewhere; not at all hard for poultry industry to move bird flus around - been proven before.
Big question, then - why so much focus on wild birds, when even FAO noting that H5N1 not found in healthy wild birds? (Are minor almost exceptions, mentioned on this forum.)
Why?
Why not put at least an equivalent spotlight on farming? (see thread here)

These are sad times for "science".

Martin<br><br>Post edited by: martin, at: 2005/12/23 00:17

Hello together


The real blame is elsewhere; not at all hard for poultry industry to move bird flus around - been proven before.
why so much focus on wild birds, when even FAO noting that H5N1 not found in healthy wild birds?
Why not put at least an equivalent spotlight on farming? (see thread here) I think we all (or I hope so) on this forum agree. This said we should not cease to bring new data into the forum and try to come to conclsions and evaluate new aspects(see also : http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/aflu/Pathology.htm

Vaccination technology seems to progress, focus is on recombinant fowlpox (alive) Vaccine and reverse genetics produced vaccines (see China vaccination program) and new DIVA strategies. There is reason to believe that the strict culling ideology in many countries is about to weaken

Thanks, yes, I've seen this [full paper], ) Could you give me a link? I’d be particularly interested in the discussion and the methods.

greetings

Post edited by: Gänseerpel, at: 2005/12/23 13:04<br><br>Post edited by: Gänseerpel, at: 2005/12/23 13:06

Had a bit of correspondence lately with Canadian medical reporter Helen Branswell - some time ago she interviewed me for story on wild birds and H5N1; more recently written of &quot;avian equivalent of the stealth bomber&quot; spreading H5N1 west from China. (A belief, then, in the Tooth Fairy Bird.)

Followed my sending her short email re Grain report on farming and H5N1; she replied saying thought it odd some conservationists still denying some role in the spread.

Here's email I sent:

&quot;some birds playing some role, that they are one possible route of
introduction of the virus to a new area&quot; - I have not seen any
ornithologists/conservationists dispute this. So far, remains only
possible route, and all the attention on wild birds is excessive, and
leading to problems - latest is region in Russia, about to shoot birds
(near poultry farms?) said a news item a couple of days ago.

Major conservation implications. Wild birds themselves have no voice,
so people like me get active on their account - extremely unfair wild
birds getting so much wrong blame for the poultry industry's wrongs.
see Grain report. Instead of wild birds, should be major questioning
of FAO, and industrial farming.
But, FAO v loud - especially Domenech.
And somehow media seems to love idea of wild birds carrying a disease
that could kill us all.
Beats Hitchcock, so to editors and some sensationalist writers (step
forward Laurie Garrett), what's not to like about that? A good story,
so who cares about the details. Not sure if you do: I wrote such
shorthand in previous email so as not to bombard you.

It is not scientific to just say &quot;it must be stealth bomber birds&quot;.
Not scientific at all.

We see vast exaggeration of wild birds as carriers, based on little
more than supposition - and overlooking or ignoring the problems
inherent in poultry industry: after all, without poultry industry, we
would not have this virulent H5N1, nor a slew of other HPAIs in recent
years.

&quot;The AI scientists&quot; - not all AI scientists.
Karesh, assuming you mean Williams Karesh, not an AI scientist that I
know of; tho done important work in field when need arose last summer.
Work by him and his team among strong evidence &quot;the disease is
self-limiting in wild birds&quot;.
Curious your list appears to be all US people. Has Swayne, say, even
worked in Asia?
cf vet Les Sims, extensive experience in Asia, believes wild birds
play only minor role in spread
What of Guan Yi: no &quot;expert&quot; on AI, inc with his team's pioneering
research on virus in HK/China? Quoted saying wild birds scapegoats.
Ken Shortridge, worked with Guan and co before, co-authored paper in
Lancet, showing wild birds not key vectors for 2003/04.

Why do you not think when discussing H5N1 and wild birds that it's not
important to consider views views of ornithologists with some or
detailed knowledge of migratory species, timings, routes etc?
- when examine various cases n some detail, the story re wild birds as
spreaders becomes weak or highly improbable. Niman manages this
ignorance; but hardly science.

&quot;it doesn't kill some duck specie&quot; - not true. Situation is more
complex than this. All I've seen: some strains highly lethal to ducks
(check out species list on USGS website), some strains may kill small
percentages.
Less lethal strains were excreted in low amounts - so how are ducks
going to transmit them? Sneezing and French kissing?
Does seem domestic ducks in Thai rice fields play important role in
sustaining H5N1 there. But in the wild?
One case with science: swans in Romania excreted little; birds sharing
ponds with them not infected.

Six apparently healthy wild ducks at a lake in e China had H5N1. But
virus did not move in direction birds migrate from Poyang.
Same paper: H5N1 has evolved distinct regional strains in China,
Vietnam: major scientific evidence against wild birds being major
carriers, yet overlooked.

As yet, no cases of wild bird transmission to H5N1 known. Doesn't mean
that hasn't happened - it's hard to say for sure just what caused
several outbreaks - but none certain, yet wild birds readily blamed.
French turkeys had no contact with wild birds, yet they got it. Again,
wild birds a red herring for the most part: and by watching the skies
for virus, when it arrives in other ways, could be just helping
spread.

I do believe wild birds - esp swans - flying around with H5N1; and
dying of it in too many cases.

Yes, sentinels; H5N1 is around. But where did they get infected?
Looking like e Europe/Black Sea area for the most part.
Might they even have been fed (dumped?) chicken feed? Contaminated
feed
thought to be behind at least one poultry outbreak in Russia. Mute
swans tend to be tame, often residents.

Looks like virus has been moved - by transport links - across Russia
to Europe. Now infected wild birds, especially swans for some reason.

Isn't first time wild birds fingered. With H5N1 2003/04, &quot;wild birds&quot;
so often blamed - which is when I got interested and active, seeing
that evidence was to contrary.
Earlier blamed for HPAIs in US, 83/84; Netherlands for H7N7; Australia
also. In all cases, wild birds said to be or thought maybe vectors,
yet evidence showed they weren't.

I write from Hong Kong, which is surely at the epicentre of H5N1 in
poultry and even humans, just down the road from first location for
H5N1 of Guangdong goose 96 lineage.
Hong Kong lies on migration flyways; birds here from breeding grounds
including northeast Asia, and Japan; some travel as far south as
Australia, while many overwinter, including around 50,000 waterbirds
in
a relatively small wetland on northwest border w Shenzhen.
Have been occasional cases of H5N1 in dead wild birds here. Extensive
testing - 16,000 or more healthy birds tested at wetland, not one
positive.
So, H5N1 has indeed proved self-limiting in with birds here; no
evidence wild waterbirds migrating through Hong Kong are carrying it.

Suppose you could visit this wetland, see all these birds in the heart
of H5N1 territory, might you then have a slightly different viewpoint
than from Canada?

Alas, Ms B not to be swayed, and maybe a tad grouchy on day my email arrived:

Sadly, I believe my moment of epiphany is not near. The fine organization I work for has a limited travel budget, and somehow I think covering Canadian troops in Afghanistan is going to trump any proposal that I should trek through the marshes of Hong Kong so that I can fully appreciate how woefully I have maligned the birds of the world.

In the interim, you may perhaps wish to read other writers.

Good luck with your crusade.

Too bad re sense of humour failure, repeated in a further email from Ms B, with further dig re &quot;crusades&quot;; though at least her notion does suggest one possible Latin name for the Tooth Fairy Bird - Anas stealthbomberensis.

Whilst the Tooth Fairy Bird - the wild bird(s) that can survive and sustain and spread H5N1 - remains a theoretical creature, which has taken hold in the popular imagination and the brains of various journalists, the &quot;experts&quot; who believe in it are still virus people rather than ornithologists.
Instead, people who actually know about wild birds still doubt its existence.


French League for the Protection of Birds article here - machine translation.
http://www.protection-des-animaux.org/actualites/archives-512.html
The migratory birds are not the &quot;rats of the sky&quot;

Regarded too often as principal vectors of the H5N1, the wild birds
are transformed little by little into &quot;rats of the sky&quot;. The LPO
condemns this detrimental process with regard to an extremely
fragile. It biodiversity makes a point of pointing out the major
role played by the illegal transport of wild or domestic birds in
this file.

Some mesestimees realities

The wintering of the birds in Africa

During the summer 2005, whereas migratory birds of contaminated zones
(Siberia, Asia), were on the point of leaving their surfaces of
nesting for their districts of wintering, in Africa, with the
Middle-East, but also towards Australia, one predicted the emergence
of new hearths aviaires on these various destinations, and the
hecatomb of many wild birds to us. Actually, it does not have of it
anything be, in Africa but also in Australia and Nouvelle Zealand.

Nigeria

The confirmation, February 08, 2006, of the flu virus aviaire H5N1 in
Nigeria concerned, initially and exclusively, of the industrial
breedings of birds. To date, in Nigeria, no contaminated wild bird
was found. It cannot be excluded that the original tank of these
hearths is the poultry trade coming from China and Turkey. According
to the laboratory of reference of the animal World Health
Organization (OMSA) and Funds' of the United Nations for the food and
agriculture (FAO), the stock isolated from the virus in Nigeria shows
the same genetic characteristics as that discovered in Turkey, which
itself are connected with the stock of the Chinese lake of the
province of Qinqhai, hearth of origin of the disease. *

Spain

February 15, 2006 in Benidorm, in the province of Alicante in Spain,
2 tons of poultries were seized. Imported illegally of China, they
were conveyed in Spain by truck. It seems that their final
destination was to be Chinese restaurants.

These poultry movements can take part seriously in the diffusion of
the virus through the countries and even the continents. They show
the importance of the frontier checks to dismantle illegal networks
of trade. This while at the same time &quot;universalization processed
chicken in cash migrating and the movements of chickens around the
world occur 365 days per annum, unlike the seasonal migrations of the
wild birds&quot; to take again the assertion of Leon Bennun, director of
international Birdlife.

Traffic of the birds of ornament

The illegal trade of the birds of ornament bound for France is
currently estimated at more than 4 million individuals each year.
This figure also corresponds to the number of legally marketed birds,
which represents nearly 8 million birds in all.

Among the sought birds, one notes that many sparrows are originating
in South Asia east and China, while the parrots come mainly from West
Africa and Tanzania. In the same way, other species come from South
America.

Consequently, without denying the possible role of the migratory
birds, the LPO stresses that, in spite of the put regulation opens
some to manage the crisis, it appears obvious that the involuntary
non-observance of measurements of precaution must also be taken into
account in the analysis of the situation.

Allain Bougrain Dubourg President of the LPO<br><br>Post edited by: martin, at: 2006/03/12 08:03

Those of us who have been studying avian influenza and other bird diseases for decades, when few people beside pet owners and the poultry industry cared, are dismayed that voices of reason are being drowned out with regard to the role played by wild birds in the spread of the H5N1 virus.
This past week alone, both the United Nations and the Office of Homeland Security implicated migratory birds as the most likely carriers of H5N1 to American shores, while cable news scrambled to get bird migration maps.
Migratory fowl could, of course, bring H5N1 here on the wing. But there is an equal, if not greater, chance that H5N1 will fly to North America on an airplane transporting poultry legally or otherwise. Recently a shipment of chicken feet was smuggled into the United States from Thailand, arriving in Connecticut marked &quot;jellyfish.&quot; Luckily, our trade surveillance system worked and the chicken parts were confiscated.
Over the last 30 years we have learned a tremendous amount about how avian influenza spreads. In nature, avian influenza viruses live innocuously in many types of wild birds and cause only mild effects, sometimes none at all, similar to many bacteria and viruses that live in humans.
This is not to say that the virus can't be carried by, and kill, wild birds, because it can. Yet the spread of H5N1 did not result from the activities of wild birds, but from a very human activity - trade.
We know that international trade in wild or exotic birds, both legal and illegal, has helped moved H5N1 around the world. However, the virus has likely gotten its biggest boost through the trade, both legal and illegal, in poultry.
As part of a multi-billion dollar industry, poultry markets and farms span the globe. The conditions of these facilities vary greatly; some are plagued by highly unsanitary conditions and close bird-to-bird contact. This environment provides the ideal setting for deadly strains of the avian flu virus to develop.
Moving these infected poultry and poultry products as well as contaminated fecal matter on trucks, boots or in cages results in the further spread of avian flu.
The current focus on the role of migratory birds in the spread of H5N1 has shifted discussion away from this trade.
...
(Robert Cook is chief veterinarian and vice president and William B. Karesh is director of the Field Veterinary Program at the Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx Zoo, New York.)
Don't blame the wild birds

Recent article in Le Monde looks at whether H5N1 is an artificially created and spread virus.

via babelfish.altavista.com, includes:
Beyond the case Nigerian, the ornithologists point certain inconsistencies in the scenarios implying the wild birds. &quot;There is no important migratory road of the east towards the west, and the exit of the virus of China towards Europe cannot be explained by migrating&quot;, known as thus the Richard Thomas, one of the persons in charge for Birdlife, an association of ornithologists based in London. &quot;On the charts, adds Olivier Dehorter, specialist in the biology of the populations of birds to the national Natural history museum of natural history (MNHN), one distinguishes besides rather clearly that the infectious hearths follow the layout of the Trans-Siberian one.&quot;

In the same way, the researcher adds, who does not exclude a minor contribution from wild fauna to the propagation of the virus, &quot;the second wave of contaminations which touched Turkey seems related to human activities - trade, displacements, etc. - that with movements of wild birds.&quot; In addition, known as Pascal Orabi, ornithologist with the League of protection of birds (LPO), &quot;Australia and New Zealand, places of wintering of certain species which fly over Asia, remained unscathed&quot;.

A strong argument in favour of the implication of migrating remains the discovery in China, on the Lake Poyang (the World of February 8), of healthy wild ducks carrying the viruses, i.e. able to transfer it onto long distances. But wild fauna cannot be held for only culprit, according to Ward Hagemeijer, one of the persons in charge for Wetlands, the organization of study of the water birds based in the Netherlands, which undertook a study with the FAO and the international Center of research for agronomy and the development (Cirad). &quot;We took nearly 7 000 wild birds in Africa, and no operational carrier of the virus was detected, specifies Mr. Hagemeijer. Even thing in the European Union, where 10 000 apparently healthy birds were tested, without positive result.&quot; The official results of these taking away, which continue, should be known in the next weeks.

Le H5N1, virus sauvage ou domestique ?

Marwaan Macan-Markar

BANGKOK, Aug 25 (IPS) - When new strains of the deadly bird flu virus were recently detected in poultry in Thailand and Laos, wildlife enthusiasts had reason to feel vindicated. The prevailing hot weather was off season for migratory birds, often blamed for spreading avian influenza.

By the time ducks in Cambodia showed signs of being infected, the theory that wild birds carry the H5N1 strain of the virus across international boarders was further discredited. This view had first gained hold in this region in 2004 when the current outbreak of the lethal virus began and rapidly spread across a broad sweep of countries.

''There has never been any conclusive, properly documented evidence that wild birds are carriers of the virus,'' Richard Thomas, editor of 'World Birdwatch,' said in an e-mail interview.
...

This summer reprieve for the wild birds is consequently throwing more weight behind the view of the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) that the unchecked trade and movement of infected poultry is the main trigger behind the spread of the lethal virus.
...

''FAO recognises that poultry trade across borders is continuing in South-east Asia and East Asia despite well-known risks to the governments and people in the region,'' the U.N. agency adds.

The new H5N1 strains in Thailand and Laos have distinct genetic make up that betray their origin. ''There are three broad clusters of the virus and sub-clusters,'' says Gleeson. ''The new virus strain in Nakhon Phanom was different to the strain that has been circulating in Thailand since 2004.''

Gleeson attributes human activity, rather than migratory birds, to the spread of bird flu in Indonesia, which has suffered the highest number of human fatalities due to avian influenza. ''It is pretty clear the virus spread in Indonesia is because of poultry products being moved and not because of wild birds.''
...
'Migratory Birds Not Spreading Bird Flu'

Here's summary of paper on Centers for Disease Control site:

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 expanded considerably during 2005 and early 2006 in both avian host species and geographic distribution.

Domestic waterfowl and migratory birds are reservoirs, but lethality of this subtype appeared to initially limit migrant effectiveness as introductory hosts. This situation may have changed, as HPAI H5N1 has recently expanded across Eurasia and into Europe and Africa.

Birds could introduce HPAI H5N1 to the Western Hemisphere through migration, vagrancy, and importation by people. Vagrants and migratory birds are not likely interhemispheric introductory hosts; import of infected domestic or pet birds is more probable.

If reassortment or mutation were to produce a virus adapted for rapid transmission among humans, birds would be unlikely introductory hosts because of differences in viral transmission mechanisms among major host groups (i.e., gastrointestinal for birds, respiratory for humans). Another possible result of reassortment would be a less lethal form of avian influenza, more readily spread by birds.
Birds and Influenza H5N1 Virus Movement to and within North America

In the littoral the measures for the preventive maintenance of the bird influenza strengthened

In connection with the autumnal migration of birds in the territory
of Primorskiy Kray the measures for the preventive maintenance of
bird influenza are intensified. From July through September the
specialists of boundary veterinary service took more than 1 100 tests
of the blood in wild, migratory and poultry from the different
regions of littoral. Not one case of the disease of feathered by bird
influenza it is revealed.<br><br>Post edited by: martin, at: 2006/09/28 03:36

Azerbaijani bird flu monitoring results announced

Azerbaijan's Ecology and Natural Resources Ministry in conjunction
with Agriculture and Health Ministry has announced the results of the
next bird flu monitoring in the country, the Ministry told the APA.

The symptoms of bid flu have not been detected in any of the blood
samples taken from different wild birds during this monitoring. The
monitoring covered Absheron, Aggol, Shirvan National Parks,
Gizilagach State Reserve, Sarvan in Devechi region. /APA/

The discussion, which was held by National Geographic Indonesia, concluded that migratory birds were not to blame for the movement of bird flu.

A vet from the Bogor Institute of Agriculture, I Wayan Teguh Wibawa, said separate studies had shown there was no proof anywhere in the world that migratory birds carried the virus.

Studies of migratory birds in Malaysia, China and Australia that have been carried out over the past six years have shown no migrant birds in the three regions had the H5N1 virus, he said.

Wayan, who is also a member of the National Commission for Bird Flu, said that the poultry trade was the most likely cause of the spread of the virus to 29 of Indonesia's 33 provinces.
Cats can carry bird flu, study says [link no longer works; see next post]<br><br>Post edited by: martin, at: 2006/10/12 01:19

Martin wrote:

Cats can carry bird flu, study says

Maybe a wrong redirecting link??

This one works.
http://avianflu.futurehs.com/?p=2724

Thanks, Coleman - link to Jakarta Post item was working when I posted message, but not now.
Martin<br><br>Post edited by: martin, at: 2006/10/12 01:21

HUNTING AND AVIAN FLU PROBLEM IN VOLOGDA REGION

In fall 2006 hunting season for monitoring of the avian flu purpose 70
samples of the wild ducks and geese was taken. All give negative
results.

According “Russian Hunting Newspaper” cancellation of the hunting on
ducks, implemented in spring 2006, give limited positive results for
amount of this birds in fall. Reason – wide scale “avian flu”
preventive measures, when hundreds of wild birds was shoot without any
place and time limits. Journalist hope, this officially supported wide
scale poaching will not happen again.

Sources: http://www.transmit.ru/news/2006/10/16/251/, http://www.mk.ru/numbers/2415/article84781.htm