Currently viewing the category: "H5N1"

You’ve heard of genetically modified foods? How about genetically modified pathogens? H5N1 to be exact–bird flu, made in the lab. Anybody else get the heebie jeebies from that notion?

The World Health Organization (WHO) released a strongly worded statement today warning against the dangers of the U.S. government-funded pathogenetic engineering information getting into the wrong hands and exposing the world to a potential bioterrorism threat. WHO said it was “deeply concerned about the potential negative consequences” of the study.

“This is not the kind of research that you would want to have out there,” WHO’s top influenza expert, Dr. Keiji Fukuda, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview.

On the flip side, WHO concerned that all credible scientists should have access to the information. Huh? The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) last week asked scientists at Erasmus University Medical Center in the Netherlands and the University of Wisconsin-Madison to refrain from publishing full details of their work on how to make the H5N1 virus more easily transmissible between humans.

H5N1 rarely infects humans and usually only those who come into close contact with poultry. But among those infected, up to 60% die, and scientists are closely watching the virus for any signs it is becoming more easily transmissible from human to human.

The WHO and the scientific community are concerned about the steps the NIH has taken toward censorship. Many are concerned that this move will keep important information out of the hands of those who may need it, particularly in Asia where preventing a pandemic is of the utmost importance.

Dr. Fukuda reports that WHO has not yet received copies of either group’s research, and he states wisely if not ironically, “I’m hoping that we are privy to as much of the details as possible, but like anybody else one of the questions for us is what kind of information do we need to know.”

Exactly–conundrum 101. It’s a dangerous venture designing pathogens in the lab, but the information gathered, I am certain, will be valuable if need arises to thwart a pandemic. However, there is always an inherent risk when you play with fire; we should know this in the post-Cold War nuclear era. So with plus comes minus, and our need for knowledge can create the very thing we fear–a bird flu pandemic, in this case, but caused by accident or through malicious intent.

If I told you, though, that we can’t escape conflict, would it have meaning? Listen, I’ve got no problem with the scenario as it exists. The U.S. government funding research to understand H5N1 seems as reasonable as doing so for HIV. Naturally, because of the sensitive nature of the information, it must be classified. It would be a fantasy to think that while we have this powerful knowledge and technique called genetic engineering that we wouldn’t use it. I’ve said time and again, genetic engineering is here to stay. What is important is using it wisely.

Somebody is going to try genetically engineering whatever can be imagined–may as well be under the system that’s based in checks and balances (and before you start with the conspiracy stuff, please think of which nation or organization you’d rather have the information). In that regard, I think the U.S. government and NIH have done right by censoring this information. Can’t get nuke building info easily–it shouldn’t be any different for sensitive pathogenic information. Good job U.S.A.

At the dawn of a looming bird flu pandemic, researchers say they have found a new use for the standard flu vaccine. Scientists at the National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani in Rome, have found that some volunteers inoculated against the seasonal influenza virus showed antibody protection from the bird flu. Although preliminary, experts are using these results as a way to step-up yearly influenza vaccinations.

It’s no secret how I feel about the flu vaccine–pretty useless as far as I’m concerned; but I will not discount the possibility of cross-over immunity. If, indeed, the annual flu vaccine provides a progressive tolerance to a more virulent viral strain like H5N1 (the nefarious bird flu virus) the more often it is used, then it would certainly warrant mass use. But what I can’t ignore is the convenient opportunity to use fear as a foolproof method of mass marketing.

As I point out in my upcoming book, The Six Keys To Optimal Health, public fear is often exploited as a way to pass legislation or sell product. The greater the threat, the more insidious the exploitation. Remember when North Korea had a nuclear bomb pointed at the West Coast? In L.A. it was used to scare locals into buying duct tape, plastic sheeting and other survival gear in the event of a nuclear blast. Now we’d better prepare for–gulp–the bird flu!

No doubt, an infectious pandemic is long overdo; the world hasn’t seen a bona fide one since 1968. But didn’t we hear the same things about e-bola, hanta virus, and the West Nile virus too? Just think about how many threats we’d have to protect ourselves against every year if we were to allow our fears to get the best of us. We might have to sit through a few more Dustin Hoffman duds at the very least. So why is this one any different?

The truth is that, just as experts believe that each successive flu inoculation adds strength to the vaccinated person’s growing immunity, wouldn’t it be just a likely that catching the flu every year or so would also add to one’s protection? Uh, now let’s just think about that for a minute.

One of my strongest arguments in The Six Keys to Optimal Health is to focus on strengthening our internal defenses–the immune system among other things. Only in this way can we increase our chance of surviving any catastrophe. It almost seems counterproductive to rely on the supply of vaccine and antidote for our continued survival; however, I guess it could happen. But I need way more, by way of information, than what we’ve got now to jump on that train. Until we know more–like does the annual flu vaccine provide protection for a large percentage of people, and can one develop an equal amount of immunity, naturally, through routine exposure and fighting off illness every year–then I’ll avoid the flu vaccine for now. Prove its need beyond a reasonable doubt, and you might just see me standing in the flu-line one day, after all.

Copyright © 2013 Dr. Nick Campos - All Rights Reserved.