Swine Flu Name Change…Putting Lipstick on a Pig?

Swine Flu Name Change…Putting Lipstick on a Pig?


By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer

[Note from BFIA:  Before we get to the name-changing story, may we also recommend Nick Johnson's blog for a predictably thorough review of the issues.  Here is a teeny-tiny sampling of the great stuff you will find on his site:

“Mexican authorities seem to believe there is a connection between hog lots and swine flu, and the hypotheses they assert strike me as at a minimum perfectly plausible. Doesn't their hypothesis – after all, they're there, at ground zero, dealing with over 1000 infected Mexicans – at least deserve reporting by America's mainstream media, and investigation by our public health institutions?…”


Here's a list of content on Nick's blog that you can click on when you get there.  Must read… ]

Smithfield's Pork
Smithfield's Hog Lots
The Data: Do Hog Lots Cause Swine Flu?
. Mexican Health Official: Yes
. University of Iowa Researcher: Yes
Blockbuster Extra! They've Known All Along!
Where Are the Media and Experts?
Will Iowans Take Charge?
Qualifications
Can We Eat Ham?
Anyone Care for Some Chinese Ham?
More Sunday Stories
Conclusion: Media Owe Us Investigation
N.Y. Times acknowledges, buries, Smithfield connection
And so does the Times of London
Wednesday Morning Thoughts
. Pigs' Public Relations
. Lipstick on Pigs = “North American Flu”?!
.  Pigs in the Oval Office
. Safe to Eat?
. Risk Assessment
. Smithfield's Disingenuous Defenses
. Pigs Politics Mean Investigations Unlikely
. Vegetarian Thoughts
Blockbuster: Why Healthy Hogs Harm Humans

Here's an excerpt from the AP story:

WASHINGTON – No matter what you call it, leading experts say the virus that is scaring the world is pretty much all pig. So while the U.S. government and now the World Health Organization are taking the swine out of “swine flu,” the experts who track the genetic heritage of the virus say this: If it is genetically mostly porcine and its parents are pig viruses, it smells like swine flu to them.

Six of the eight genetic segments of this virus strain are purely swine flu and the other two segments are bird and human, but have lived in swine for the past decade, says Dr. Raul Rabadan, a professor of computational biology at Columbia University.

A preliminary analysis shows that the closest genetic parents are swine flu strains from North America and Eurasia, Rabadan wrote in a scientific posting in a European surveillance network.

“Scientifically this is a swine virus,” said top virologist Dr. Richard Webby, a researcher at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis. Webby is director of the WHO Collaborating Center for Studies on the Ecology of Influenza Viruses in Lower Animals and Birds. He documented the spread a decade ago of one of the parent viruses of this strain in scientific papers.

“It's clearly swine,” said Henry Niman, president of Recombinomics, a Pittsburgh company that tracks how viruses evolve. “It's a flu virus from a swine, there's no other name to call it.”

Dr. Edwin D. Kilbourne, the father of the 1976 swine flu vaccine and a retired professor at New York Medical College in Valhalla, called the idea of changing the name an “absurd position.”

The
name swine flu has specific meaning when it comes to stimulating
antibodies in the body and shouldn't be tinkered with, said Kilbourne,
88.


(click here to read the entire story)

This entry was posted in Main Page. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Swine Flu Name Change…Putting Lipstick on a Pig?

  1. Unknown's avatar Anonymous says:

    It doesn't really matter where this flu virus appeared. It does matter how the government is handling it. We need better hospital services, more dedicated staff and a lot of caution.

    Like

Comments are closed.