Article <vjcamj$1jj7r$1@dont-email.me>

Deutsch English Français Italiano
<vjcamj$1jj7r$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Another California child infected by H5N1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 09:21:55 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 219
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vjcamj$1jj7r$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vj7l19$im7c$1@dont-email.me> <vja695$13vf2$1@dont-email.me>
 <s1jhljdvgeho9fe75pv8eg0upsh3vuq9g2@4ax.com>
Reply-To: rokimoto557@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="55587"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EowdZRS7dCfYOrOdfb3gm3mgHBo=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <s1jhljdvgeho9fe75pv8eg0upsh3vuq9g2@4ax.com>
Bytes: 16125

On 12/10/2024 5:25 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 13:54:12 -0600, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>:
> 
>> On 12/9/2024 2:47 PM, RonO wrote:
>>> https://medicalxpress.com/news/2024-12-h5n1-bird-flu-case-california.html
>>>
>>> They haven't confirmed that it is the Dairy virus, but it seems to be
>>> H5N1.  Marin County is North of San Francisco.  The first child was in
>>> Alameda that is South of San Francisco.  The child has no known exposure
>>> to animals.  If it is the dairy virus they have to start testing the
>>> milk supply.  That is the direct contact that these kids have with dairy
>>> cows, but they did not test the milk supply after the first child
>>> because it is bad for the dairy industry.  Pasteurized milk is supposed
>>> to be safe, but the CDC's own research indicated that the virus could
>>> survive the most common pasteurization method and could survive in whole
>>> milk for 4 days.  The FDA claimed that it was doing further tests on the
>>> milk supply after that study, but nothing has been published about their
>>> results (Project started in early Nov.) and they were doing the study
>>> incorrectly.  They were asking for volunteers and claimed that they
>>> would keep the dairies anonymous.  The processing plants that did not
>>> volunteer are the ones that you want to test as the most likely to have
>>> issues with their pasteurization.  The method may be 100% effective when
>>> within specifications, but how often are those specifications not met?
>>> That is the main question that the FDA has to answer.
>>>
>>> Ron Okimoto
>>>
>>
>> https://www.cdc.gov/bird-flu/spotlights/h5n1-response-12092024.html
>>
>> The CDC has just released that the virus that infected the first
>> California child was genotype B3.13 and is the virus that has infected
>> dairy cattle and dairy workers in California.
>>
>> In their follow-up actions they continue to make the claim that there is
>> no evidence for human to human infection, and refuse to acknowledge that
>> the only contact to the dairy virus that this kid had was the dairy
>> products that they ingested.  How can they keep ignoring the most likely
>> avenue of infection?  They refuse to acknowledge their own research
>> indicating that the virus can survive the most common form of
>> pasteurization, and do not recommend testing of the California milk
>> supply.  They are in denial even though a second California child has
>> likely been infected by the dairy virus.  They should stop calling it
>> avian influenza when it is being spread by dairy cattle and dairy
>> workers.  These kids are likely getting infected by the dairy cattle
>> somehow, and dairy products are what they have been consuming.
>>
> *Is* there any evidence that it's "...being spread by dairy
> cattle and dairy workers."? Were the infected children in
> direct contact with dairy workers? Or are they being
> infected by ingestion of dairy products? If that's the case,
> then the claim that there's no evidence of human-to-human
> infection seems justified.
>>

The first dairy worker found to be infected in Texas was found to be 
shedding live infective virus that they were able to culture and it 
became the standard test virus even though the sequence indicates that 
it branched off early in the dairy infection.  Poultry farms started to 
go down (+million bird layer flocks) in both Texas and Michigan in March 
and April.  Both states found that around 7% of dairy workers on 
infected farms also worked on poultry farms.  Dairy work is part time at 
most dairies so the Dairy workers work at more than one dairy or at 
other farms like poultry farms.  They Have known this since May, but no 
one ever started contact tracing to determine how the poultry farms are 
being infected except Utah that after their layer flock went down they 
started testing the nearby dairies and found 8 infected herds in the 
same county as the layer flock.  None of those 8 dairies had self 
reported being infected so the dairy workers were free to move from farm 
to farm.

The USDA and CDC have known from the beginning that the virus is viable 
and infective off skin and clothing for less than 30 minutes, so they 
proposed that equipment was exchanged between dairy and poultry farms, 
but no such equipment exchange was ever verified.  Influenza virus can 
survive as infectious virus for 24 hours on a smooth surface.  The only 
verification was that dairy workers from infected farms also worked on 
Poultry farms.  Infected dairy workers were known to be shedding live 
virus, but the CDC kept claiming that there was no human to human 
transmission mainly because they never tested for it, and they ignored 
the possibility that the dairy workers were taking live virus to poultry 
farms and other dairies.  Dairy workers are the only way that dairy 
cattle got infected in states that never got infected cattle.  Kansas 
and South Dakota were both infected by the same lineage of the Dairy 
virus that was one lineage most closely related to some Texas dairy 
herds, but they never got Texas cattle.  The only way that they could 
have been infected is if a dairy worker was infected in Texas and shed 
virus in those states, but they never implemented contact tracing in any 
state with infected cattle.  My guess is that a migrant dairy worker 
left one of the infected dairy herds in Texas, and worked in Kansas for 
a bit before moving on to South Dakota or another infected worker in 
Kansas took the virus to South Dakota, but Kansas and South Dakota never 
tried to identify all their infected herds, nor did they implement 
contact tracing.

California is the only state that implemented contact tracing of dairy 
workers, and equipment and started identifying a boat load of infected 
herds.  They also identified a lot of infected dairy workers (total 31), 
and for some reason they stopped testing dairy workers after the first 
20 were confirmed.  The CDC may still be working on the first batch of 
39 samples sent to them by California before November.  The CDC has 
claimed to have confirmed 31 with one failure to confirm, so far.

I predicted early on that it would only take around 5% of the dairy 
workers to be infected to account for the spread and infection to the 
nearby poultry flocks.  The study that should have been done months 
before was finally put out late October where they found 7% of the dairy 
workers tested had been infected with the virus, but had not been tested 
previously.  39 samples included in that study were the initial samples 
that Michigan collected from dairy workers that had never shown 
symptoms, and they found them all the be negative, so there were only 
around 80 samples in the study that had been collected randomly (as they 
came to the workers whether they had shown symptoms or not) so the 8 
positives they found made the findings closer to 10% than the 7% 
claimed.  Only 2 of the 8 positives claimed to have not had symptoms. 
Texas had previously only tested 13 dairy workers that had shown 
symptoms and had found 2 antibody positives in July (one of the 
positives had not had contact with cattle, and had only contact with 
other dairy workers).  So it was already known that the positives could 
be a significant number of dairy workers, and that the virus was 
infecting people that did not have direct contact with animals.  The 
Texas study claimed that it was evidence for person to person infection 
(the two positives worked on the same farm) but the CDC has never 
acknowledged these results, and still do not list them as dairy workers 
that have been infected by the virus.  It seems to be policy to not 
include any antibody positive results in the number of infected humans. 
They have not included the Colorado and Michigan study positives nor the 
Missouri close contact that was found to be antibody positive.

The CDC and USDA continue to deny that the dairy workers are responsible 
for a significant portion of the spread of the dairy virus, but 
California and all the infected poultry farms are telling them that they 
are lying to themselves.  There is very little chance that live virus is 
coming onto poultry farms on the workers skin and clothing.  The 
infected dairy workers are shedding live virus, and can obviously infect 
other cattle and the birds that they work with.  The USDA and CDC want 
to deny this simple fact because they do not want to admit that there 
has likely been human to human transmission between close contacts of 
dairy workers, and they have refused to test the close contacts to find 
out.  They haven't even tested the dairy workers to find out if they 
were infected in order to test their contacts.  California wanted to 
test the close contacts of the positive dairy workers, but that never 
seems to have happened.  In October California claimed that they wanted 
to test the close contacts of the dairy workers, but they either never 
started, and they seem to have quit testing dairy workers.  After the 
Colorado and Michigan antibody results and the fact that asymptomatic 
workers had been infected the CDC claims to have implemented some 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========