Very interesting..... bird flu, human-to-human transmission, and musings from others around "Flubogia"

There is an interesting thread posted on a pandemic flu-watching blog that I follow:

http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2008/04/bird_flu_staying_calm_about_pa.php

First interesting point: It refers to the recent release of information about human-to-human transmission of bird flu in China, just published in the British medical journal The Lancet. The case reported, which actually occurred in December, was a transmission from son to father.

So far, all of the human-to-human (H2H) transmission has been between family members, mostly family members with a genetic relationship rather than marital relationship (second interesting point!). That is leading some of the scientists to believe that there could be a genetic predisposition to infection with this H5N1 virus.

Another interesting aspect of this report was how the father was treated. He was vaccinated by transfusing him with blood from someone who had been vaccinated with a trial H5N1 vaccine. Wow. However, a noted health reporter, Helen Branswell (The Canadian Press), emphasizes that there is no way to be sure that the transfusion is what led to the father's recovery.

The follow-up postings meander from the report to Chinese motives, to authenticity of the information, to the pan flu threat (more "interesting points").

There are some conversations about being too melodramatic about pandemic flu. One person feels that all this pandemic flu stuff is another Y2K - nothing to worry about.

He says, "H5N1 is going nowhere fast, much to the chagrin of the fear mongering crowd. The situation has remained unchanged over the past 4 years and there is ZERO evidence that it's evolving into a human pandemic virus."

And, finally, a highly respected writer, Jody Lanard, reminds us how a message of "don't panic" is interpreted. From Dr. Lanard:

On telling people to stay calm:
Here is an excerpt from Appendix 5, "The Problem with Saying 'Don't Panic'," which I wrote as part of the draft background document for WHO's Outbreak Communication Guidelines in 2004:
Officials clearly have the fear or belief -- the mental model -- that panic is imminent. Instead of diagnosing, validating, and addressing the public's actual level of anxiety, officials repeatedly warn them not to panic.
To the public, "There is no need to panic" implies at least four things:
1. "The officials think or know that people are close to panicking. Things must be pretty bad." This increases public alarm.
2. "The officials think we're about to panic. How insulting." This decreases respect for officials.
3. "The officials are close to panicking themselves." This increases public alarm.
4. "Sometimes there must indeed be a need to panic."
Very hard lessons to teach officials.