An AP report in The Daily Star (Egypt) says the head of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) is complaining that fears of a flu pandemic caused by H5N1 are overblown. He's talking to the press so presumably he understands that he has to be careful how he says things. So we also have to assume that when Bernard Vallat said that he meant to send a message. But what is the message?
Vallat said the H5N1 virus has proved extremely stable, despite concerns that it could mutate into a form that could spread easily among humans."We have never seen such a stable strain," Vallat said.
He said concerns a few years ago that a flu pandemic from H5N1 might be imminent lacked scientific proof.
"It was just nonscientific supposition," he told reporters. (Daily Star)
Since we aren't told exactly whose fears he is referring to it is hard to refute or confirm this. Either he was specific and the reporter didn't report it or he was just speaking in generalities. If the latter, it was not a very good idea.
Since he talked to the press and this is what the press made of it, he is in large part responsible for what came of it. So let's parse the statement -- as reported by the AP. The first part is that the virus is extremely stable, meaning in this context, stable in terms of changes that might turn it into an animal virus that becomes easily transmissible to and between people. Maybe Director General Vallat knows what those changes are. If he does he should tell the scientific community. I, for one, would certainly like to know. Without knowing that, how could be possibly know how stable the virus is? It does change and adapt. So it isn't stationary.
His second statement, that any prognostication a pandemic is imminent was not based on scientific proof I would half agree with. Since we don't know what would make this virus a pandemic strain we have no basis for making a prediction of imminence. By the same token we don't know that it isn't either. The only reasonable course of action (IMO) is to act as if the emergence of a pandemic could happen at any time and to plan accordingly. The principal investment is in national and community public health and social service infrastructure, and investment that is usually deferred but which would benefit us in all sorts of ways whatever H5N1 does or doesn't do. Getting governments and their citizens to invest infrastructure is always difficult. Unfortunately M. Vallat's ill considered press meanderings won't make it any easier.
Anybody has the right to shoot off their mouth without first engaging their brains. But the Director General of OIE isn't just anybody.
- Log in to post comments
Pity the media have already spread the "good news" unquestioningly.
A longer excerpt:
"We have never seen a virus which has been so stable for so long. Compared to other viruses, it is extremely stable, which minimises the risk of mutation" into a pandemic strain, he told reporters.
Vallat said a system to beef up veterinary surveillance, especially in poor countries, had borne fruit, enabling outbreaks of H5N1 in poultry flocks to be identified and swiftly eradicated.
"It took two years for our voice to be heard," Vallat said. "If we had been heard before, the virus would have been stopped in its tracks."
Vallat said, though, "there are three countries, Indonesia, Egypt and to a lesser degree Nigeria, where the disease is endemic, and this creates reservoirs from which it can bounce back."
"If we could eradicate the virus in those countries, the problem of a pandemic from Asian H5N1 would be resolved," said Vallat.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jpPvXJJ3VTHifJCBo7w3zW8DCzsQ
I do not have professional credentials in this area so please forgive any mis-statements. I have read multiple times from multiple sources with the relevant credentials that flu virus mutates at a high rate (presumably in comparison with other viruses) and H5N1 mutates at higher rates than typical flu virus. This guy then appears to say the opposite - I presume his statement of stable meaning slow / little mutation (or resortment as appropriate). It strikes me that should be basic science and the folks who do have credentials in that area could straighten this out in fairly short order. The virus does or does not mutate / resort at a higher rate than typical for such viruses.
Frankly, I just took the guy as a political hack parsing / deconstructing the word "stable" in order to say that H5N1 was no big deal since political bureaucracies tend to like political / economic stability and want to reassure markets and industries that everything is under control etc.
From the WHO http://tinyurl.com/253ttv
Of the 15 avian influenza virus subtypes, H5N1 is of particular concern for several reasons. H5N1 mutates rapidly and has a documented propensity to acquire genes from viruses infecting other animal species
carl, Mono: I don't know there is evidence H5N1 mutates faster than other influenza viruses. ss RNA viruses make a lot of mistakes when replicating and the influenza viruses can reassort and possibly recombine so there are a lot of sources of genetic variation (and hence mutation). But I am not aware that H5N1 does this "better" than other flu viruses.
I'm going to throw in my 2 cents here, and I hope that it doesn't offend anyone. I believe they are announcing this because they truly might feel that h5n1 will not mutate into a human form, similar to when the swine flu never made the jump. Sooner or later, they would need to start breaking people away from the current situation as they see the threat ending. Therefore, this is not a bad sign, and averting an h5 panflu would be very good news. I have also subscribed to the theory that it will either happen this winter, or never, with regard to h5n1.
Now, having said all of that, I personally think that it's still a little too early to give the all-clear. I would say maybe another 12 months or so before we can all go home, lol.
My gut feeling also tells me to be extra careful when people initially start saying the threat is over. We've all seen these types of famous last words before, just before youre blindsided. The OIE director may also be thinking to himself that if an h5n1 panflu does happen, people will never remember he said it either way by the time everything is over. Of course, we never let anyone off the hook around here.
On a side note, its probably safe to also say that there must not have been any additional cases in Egypt.
revere, I'm not sure if the suggestion that H5N1 mutates faster than other flu viruses has been published, but it has certainly been stated by a number of flu scientists. In any case, that is not the issue. Director Vallat has suggested that H5N1 is remarkably stable. That is clearly false. Multiple SNPs can be identified in strains isolated from a single individual. So, the mutation rate is obviously high. In addition, H5N1 strains have reassorted with other flu A viruses and themselves. And as you point out, there is no scientific basis for saying that these mutations and reassortments will not result in a pandemic strain.
What I don't understand is why none of the flu scientists are not publicly correcting Director Vallat. They know he is making false statements. In other fields, there would be pushback, even when a powerful person is making the false statements.
Albert: We don't take offense at anything that contributes to our thinking this through. I just don't want rivalries over different perspectives to be fought out here. Now to your point. I don't see how anyone could confidently give either an "all clear" or an "imminent warning" on the basis of the science as we know it today. If they do, they need to exhibit the reasoning and the evidence, neither of which they have done (in either case). So we are still in the realm of decision making under conditions of uncertainty, which is normal. Regarding Egypt and other places, I think the one thing that is safe to assume is that there have been unrecognized cases. The evidence so far has been that the fact we haven't recognized them hasn't meant that transmissibility has changed, only that case finding is imperfect. Regarding Vallat's comments, the part that disturbs me is that it interferes with repairing already damaged and weakened systems that are needed for many things, not just public health, and they are comments not based on sound scientific reasoning. Not at all helpful, IMO.
Thanks revere, and in all fairness, I do owe you an apology for the pseudo confrontation of snowy on your site. This was the only other site that I had posted on in the last couple years and I probably got a little carried away.
I agree that nobody is really qualified to give the "all-clear" in this case. It's still too early either way. In the last 120 years, we have never gone more than 40 years between flu pandemics. This next 12 months marks the 40th year since the last one. Like I said, it's still a little early yet to call this one. In fact, it's probably quite the opposite.
Just remember, if we do have an h5 panflu, and you see old Albert a couple of years from now exposing the OIE director for his comments, try to remember this event, lol.
Is M. Vallat looking at the same H5N1 phylogenetic tree that the rest of us are looking at?
http://www.who.int/csr/disease/influenza/tree_large.pdf
This is a virus that is not mutating, that appears "stable"? The variants of Qinghai H5N1 alone are astonishing, and we don't have anywhere near complete data on it (or really much data at all on the Fujian H5N1 strain). This phylogenetic tree already has to be read with a microscope and it's incomplete due to a widespread lack of sample sharing.
Of course, M. Vallat has, in fact, seen H5N1's phylogenetic chart since it was his organization, along with WHO and FAO, that had to sit down and meet as part of the WHO/OIE/FAO Working Group to hammer out a "Unified Nomenclature for the Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Avian Influenza Viruses" (note the plural) in Toronto last year:
"An international core group of eight scientists and their collaborators were convened to initiate this process with the encouragement and approval of three international agencies: the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Phylogenetic analysis was performed using a variety of approaches on all of the publicly available H5 HA sequences that have evolved from the A/Goose/Guangdong/96 H5N1 isolate. The initial results support the idea that the currently circulating highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 viruses could be effectively grouped into numerous clades logically designated by a hierarchical numbering system. For example the so-called 'Fujian-like lineage' within the antigenically distinct Clade 2.3 of H5N1 would be designated Clade 2.3.4, with other distinct clade 2.3 branches called 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 and so on, while the 'Qinghai lineage' would be designated Clade 2.2."
http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/guidelines/nomenclature/…
H5N1 is evolving so efficiently, pervasively, and consistently, that they had to sit down and figure out how to even begin to name and approach the variations so that they could at least talk intelligently about them. Did M. Vallat miss this meeting? It is a good thing the scientists worked out this unified approach to H5N1 nomenclature because I can't begin to imagine what these phylogenetic charts will look like in another two years' time. I don't think that the WHO/OIE/FAO scients met in Toronto because they had surmised that what was upcoming for the virus was anything like "stability" based on the charts before them.
There's now a Reuters version of the story that reports Vallat's comments somewhat differently:
"We notice that the virus is now extremely stable but there is no basis to say that H5N1 will not mutate," OIE President Bernard Vallat told reporters. "Bird flu will always remain a risk, be it H5N1 or another."
Makes you wonder if he gave two press conferences.....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/feedarticle?id=7214646
I can't believe that years later, after some sequences have been released, that this Virgin Birth vs recombination continues to be open to debate.
At this site are some smart virologists and now trained polymorphism-trail scouts.
I have not seen a single argument supporting reassortment as the major, and repeating cause of the repeating changes that have occured in H5N1. So, let's just park reassortment in the corner and say that like a 9 Rickter Scale event, it's not common and we've not seen them in clusters, ever, in the lifetime of H5N1, since China/Vietnam.
Nor have I seen support for random mutation. Random is random. It ain't random. The infection trails are obvious, in location and time. This is not a random event.
Point mutation. If it were true, where are the weird, new, nonsensical polymorphisms at the RBD? Not there? No. We are not the MSM. We don't eat inexplicable circumstances as unquestionably good nourishment. There's no rational justification other than there is no other explanation so point mutation wins by default. So did the devil during the Inquisition.
Your attention is called to the Uva Lake polymorphisms. They are appearing "randomly" and "pointedly" all throughout Europe and the MidEast.
Don't you guys wonder why that could be? Dumb random luck?
A magic in the sunbeams causing point mutations to all be those with Uva Lake markers?
When will you finally get baptized? I think it's already been years too long. Your scientific "scepticism" is making you appear foolish. I think you who have failed to address this strongly have done a great deal of damage to the pursuit of a solution and to the reputation of scientists as wise and thoughtful, and have done a great deal to support the notion that scientists are no more than technicians parading in tenured positions.
The facts will continue to speak for themselves. The trees and individual polymorphisms tell us there is a trail and the trail can only be explained one way, homologous recombination, or it can just be denied for lack of more data. The choice is ludicrous. It's time to hang "you're fired" tags on the office doors of way too many who take public money and donations and hawk their hoary philosophical wares.
GR: Yes, we know you have made your scientific judgment on it. You have also invested in the outcome. Most of the rest of us don't see it the way you do. Difference of opinion. Let's leave it at that.
"Your scientific "scepticism" is making you appear foolish."
--------------------------------------------------
If you looked up "foolish" in some future dictionary, I would think that it might include some reference to blindly following a single, failed "scientist" that was so unsure of his own lunatic theory that he refused to submit a single paper for peer review.
Here is my problem with this from the OIE. They are basing this on WHAT? Do they have an inside crystal ball on mutation or not? Are they peeking at the Indonesian sample data and coming to conclusions without spilling their beans.
How can they call it stable when its infecting people that have other viruses in residence? I am not a doctor but everyone out there knows that assumptions are made from the sequences and this is how they make vaccines. Without the Indon information in the loop so to speak, how can the DG be making this kind of statement and obviously how can we make a vaccine for the bug in Indon?
Are there active programs trying to mutate it in a forward manner? Capua and others were starting to be accused of hoarding Nigerian sequences but they published the other day so thats off the table. IS there something else we dont know about that they do?
Think of it in the vein that Revere posited.......You better not plan on holding onto your job if you are wrong.
The answers provided to the question now raise bigger questions. The worst part is that the answers dont fix the first question and that is "What did they base this on?"
Stan, you can attack the messenger all day long. If you were sophisticated, your position wouldn't appear to be the shallow ad hominem that you think is the winning view.
There's not a scientist alive who will not revisit the underlying methodology and assumptions. As you're not a scientist, you can rant as you wish.
The moment a paper is published, does that terminate your line of non-reasoning? I'd say so.
So, we'll wait a bit longer and watch the sequence chains and changes, and wait as the virus not surprisingly didn't reassort in a way the reassortment became dominent, and the virus did not just go away as this OIE mouthpiece wants us to believe, and the new releases of sequences continue to reflect the movement and conservation of new polymorphisms at the RBD.
But alas, facts seem not to matter, because "most of us" don't think so.
Most of you should long ago have been booted from your positions, irrespective of your command of argumentation and diction. You've failed the acid test, and that's the small matter of following the polymorphism trail.
Revere, I stood up for what I saw as high probability. Thanks for the early recognition. As the evolutionary path to me is obvious, albeit yet unproven, I'd appreciate if you'd do the same favor later as the risk assumption is enormous and the rewards are uncertain, but if correct, I will have done my small part in the protection of humans and the society in which I have prospered, and for that I don't ask a tenure or a retirement.
@revere: As a layman in these matters, I'd be grateful if you could direct me to a discussion of the issues concerning various theories of viral evolution that are mentioned in these comments.
Helblindi: There are three possible sources of genetic variation: random mutation, reassortment (swapping of whole segments) and recombination (swapping of portions of segments). Most flu scientists believe the first two are the main ones for this virus. Henry Niman and the Griffiths in Australia think recombination is the driving force. They are in a small minority in this, but I don't consider it settled. Niman has formed a company (Recombinomics) that sells the ability to make predictions on the basis of recombination. Gaudia Ray is a lawyer that has been around the flu boards for years. He has invested financilly in Henry's company, presumably because he feels strongly it is the right idea (and not the other way around). I have an open mind about it but the pro and anti-Niman invectives are tiresome and destructive and I don't want them here. If they continue I will ban those who engage in it. It has destroyed several other flu sites and gotten people banned from a number of others. I don't like to do that so I ask everyone to take notice.
"and the virus did not just go away as this OIE mouthpiece wants us to believe,"
-- by this, I meant that H5N1 didn't become more virulent or more transmissible to Level 5 or 6, to which this outrageous non-thinker at OIE alludes.
Ever since we got the squeaky wheel explanation from WHO by a vet, then in a major spokesperson position, who was kicked upstairs, I've recognized the WHO to be a distrusted entity, irrespective of its best intentions.
GR, not surprisingly you've completely missed the point. I'm not attacking the messanger, I'm attacking your false prophet, Mr. Spring Bride, Mr. Crumbling Pillars, Mr. Won't Submit a Paper. The fact that you think his view is the "winning view" not only makes you look foolish but also delusional.
It's funny to note that as your hero continues to fade into the ash heap of failed propagandists, your screeching get's more pronounced. Many of us really find it entertaining. Guess that investment isn't working out too well for you huh?
Revere,
Just wanted to let you know that I've said what I felt needed to be said to GR and am done with the anti-niman stuff.
Stan: I hope so. Because even wanting to get the last word in is an invitation to more nonsense.
I am not attacking Dr. Niman, but this is the first time I've heard that he has a vested interest in h5n1. That explains the crazy commentaries and desperation. If any of the forums new he had a "financial interest" in avian flu, I'm sure they would understand him better and probably get rid of him. I thought the guy was just trying to help everybody, and that maybe he was just an alarmist. I should have stuck with my original instincts.
I hope the other 2 or 3 people who are currently hyping Egypt right now are not also silent investors in Niman's site, or that they know him personally, although that would explain the suspected-case hoax still going on. T42 and Niman have been doing this routine for years now, dating back to CE from what I could tell.
If there is no panflu, my site will eventually fade away as well. The tradeoff works good for me.
Helbindi-Hi, here are a couple of links. Its a pretty good little primer on random mutation, reassortment and recombination. Breaks down the differences.
http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/reprint/80/10/2535.pdf
Now if you have a totally open mind as you should in science the Aussies put this report together regarding GM crops (genetically mutated) and how they could by one of the above processes make a jump on their own. Doesnt say that it does, just that it could. Same thing apparently happens in humans but with a different twist when a bird bug or any other appears. Do we swallow the stuff that could make a super-bug?
GM crops are one of Jonny Singletons favorite subjects and I think he would "Kill Them All" to coin a phrase used often here. He believes if understand his position that all of the GM food out there is sexed up with a couple of chemicals that are basically bug steroids. That stuff he contends enters us and the food chain directly and indirectly. We eat the food, the birds eat the food when its cut and the remains are left on the ground. We feed the sexy grain foods to the chickens and then they are fed to us. In the fields, ducks, swans, geese, etc. have bird bugs and suddenly its starts to mutate using one of the above processes that we kind of helped along ...maybe.
We also have bugs that normally wouldnt jump us suddenly kicking our ass. SARS? Jon could cover this better but read up first. Its boring as Hell but once you get past that and then go to "GM crop dangers" in a web search and then read THAT, you might be a little more concerned.
Afterwards, you will be sure that recombination, reassortment, and random mutation are at work, all the time. Maybe not equally but in all bugs at least one or more of them are very likely at work at all times. This stuff might be the makings of a Stephen King novel. We sexed it up for yields, the yields might be bigger crops of bigger bugs.
Of course there is no proof but XDR-TB might be a product of it as the first thing that they did in those developing countries is to introduce sexy soybeans and corn. Wasnt long afterwards that super TB started showing up. Coincidence? I would like to think so. Conjecture for the scientists. I like reading the educated bottom line even though that line is often obscured. This one is very unclear. Wouldnt matter, they would still do it anyway.
The Aussies final report leaves a nagging doubt in my mind. Take your pick of what process you want your viruses to mutate under and remain open minded. It doesnt matter really how it gets there unless you are trying to make vaccines. The fact is that if it does get there we are screwed and screwed big. The nagging doubt is not something I cant get over. But if the clover suddenly starts eating cows rather than the other way around ....well......
http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/publications/biotechnology/fi…
.
Albert wrote:
The OIE director may also be thinking to himself that if an h5n1 panflu does happen, people will never remember he said it either way by the time everything is over.
GilmoreAz replies:
Bernard Vallat Director General of OIE, rope, tree. Some assembly required. . .
P.S. to M. Randolph Kruger:
Stephen King's "The Stand" 5+ Stars
.
.
So long as new polymorphism trees are being constructed and we see the same polymorphisms that have come to the forefront in areas far removed physically from the most currently released outbreaks, like Nigeria and Uva Lake, there is a need for an explanation.
That explanation has been first reassortment, by a then very respected virologist at St Jude and his ex-students and colleagues. That went by the wayside and is now a side issue, though the incantation is "reassortment". We're talking about individual polymorphisms here, not chunks of chains.
It's just hard to swallow that logic, at least to me. The word, "reassortment" has coopted the more responsible word, "mutation", and in fact, inexplicable mutation.
I still wish those who support reassortment would apply it to the continuing stream of additional data releases. They don't do it convincingly, at least to me.
My bet is it's shallow thinking. Hence my support for an alternative.
Random mutation is an impossibility. For things to be random, they must be random. They're not.
So, what's left? Do appreciate, I wouldn't care what's left as long as I can selfishly see the answer and prepare myself against a Level 6 of a CFR that for now years has varied and returned to catastrophic.
As nobody else seems to be presenting the "new way", I'm sticking with the only logic pattern that makes sense to me.
Further recognize that I'll back the side I think will win the argument as I need the true fact and true logic. And I need it BEFORE the virus jumps the curb and slams into the pedestrian populace.
The director may also have made a plain mistake as well with the announcement. We don't want to rule that out. If it was a well planned decision to announce it, he probably wouldn't have used such a strong word as "overblown". I can see him perhaps subtly edging in the term "stable", but "overblown" is way over the top and nobody is going to approve that statement. He probably wants to gamble on being the first to announce the threat is over. I hope he gambled right because there is a lot at stake with h5n1, and je just put all of the WHO on the line with this.
ANTARA, the official Indonesian government news agency, has now added Vallat's comments to the end of a news story about their latest confirmed positive patient. So his "overblown" and "stable" comments are starting to make the rounds.
I just thought I should post this link to a speech by WHO DG Chan at the opening of the New Dehli Conference on pandemic. This speech was not noticed at all by main stream media, and I only bumped into it accidentally while searching for a story about Dick Thompson leaving the WHO. What I noticed is the the WHO position is exactly opposite in many respects to the OIE position, FWIW.
http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2007/20071204_new_delhi/en/index.html
I share Monotreme's bewilderment when he writes (above):
Vallat's statement that "We have never seen such a stable strain" reeks of intentional over-reassurance, and cries out for citations, in the unlikely event that Vallat actually believes it to be technically true. I bet it was just Vallat's hyperbolic way of expressing annoyance at those he thinks are over-reacting -- an attitude which pervades the whole briefing.
It should not escape expert comment. I hope some medical reporters are busy interviewing their scientist contacts for reaction and clarification.
It is ironic that Vallat's comments were published the same day (January 10) that UN System Influenza Coordinator David Nabarro appeared on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, and then gave a speech at the London School of Economics, entitled "The Global State of Influenza Pandemic Preparedness."
Nabarro didn't say anything about the virus being stable, or that "the risk was overestimated" (another direct quote from Vallat's interview with the unnamed AP reporter).
Dr. Nabarro told the BBC:
Predictably, the BBC reporter asked how many people might be likely to die in an influenza pandemic.
Dr. Nabarro answered:
A very different tone from Vallat's dismissive quotes.
Hi BeWell, of course the terms are already making the rounds. Either way you slice it, Vallat is now going to be a hero for being the one to call it. If you ask me, we should probably ask the WHO for clarification about all of this.
At this point, it wouldn?t surprise me a bit if we don?t soon see Vallat in a parade held in his honor, going down the street as he's waving to the crowd, lol.
Revere, if you could humor me for a moment here I would appreciate it. I don't want to get into the pissing match respecting Niman that Ray has initiated in a way that is both shrill and annoying (maybe it's a lawyer thing). Anyway I access Niman site regularly. I seem to remember him talking about Quinghi lake when no one else took notice he also details clades, binding sites, etc. in a way I don't see on the flu boards where there are folks like me without scientific credentials saying what they "think" (that's why I don't waste anyones time with my laymans opinion on the technical stuff). Nimans technical descriptors make him appear credible to me. His argument respecting recombination appears credible to me. Would it be accurate to say that many of the people who have relevant credentials feel he is bamboozaling the public primarily because of his failure to submit work for peer review?
carl: I think failure to publish is an issue but I'm not sure it is the main issue. I'm not particularly interested in the debate as I don't see it as making much of a difference regarding what we should do. I do not believe he has an inside track on the science. This is a difficult area and he is entitled to his opinion. The way to make it more forcefully for the scientific community is to publish it and that's what will win or not win the debate there, but meanwhile who really cares? In my view his heavy emphasis on sequences as the ultimate secret goes far beyond what we know about the biology, which accounts for my perspective. He has a proprietary hammer and everything looks like a nail to him. The scientific flu community considers him a gadfly who scores points on the basis of organizing support on the internet and they resent it. That's not a scientific stance, either. Maybe he will prove them all wrong (but I rather doubt it). That's just my opinion based on my science assessment (it's not just sequences) but I offer it with great hesitation, responding to your direct question. But I'd rather not discuss it here. In my view it doesn't make much difference. and those arguments have shown themselves to be remarkably divisive and go way beyond science, becoming immediately very personal, often vicious and over the top and extremely unconstructive.
So let's leave it at that. I have nothing further to say on the matter and do not wish to pursue it.
There's a great article in CIDRAP with the sort of professional repudiation of Director Vallat's statements that I was hoping for [hat-tip, Average Concerned Mom]
OIE chief's downplaying of pandemic risk draws fire
http://tinyurl.com/yuzk7n
Is Albert acting as an apologist for Vallart?
Albert, the guy has a position. He lives by it or he gets off the stage. He didn't hire you to be his apologist. If you recognize his position is untenable, why not write the guy or call him up?
Looks like CIDRAP issued a statement contesting Vallat's remarks. The problem is that it's in the form of a "statement" on their website, instead of being in Press Release form. This means that CIDRAP?s rebuttal will never hit the news wires, as Vallat's comment did.
Since you folks are good at getting newswires out around here, it would be nice if you could somehow get this information out as soon as possible regarding CIDRAP "firing back". Who knows, maybe the AP will pick up on it, if you all can get it out there. These are two significant government entities that are going at it and it should be fairly big news. We just need to push them a little closer together via a wire so we can really get it out in the open and learn the truth.
Even Osterholm is firing shots..
"Infectious disease expert Michael T. Osterholm, PhD, MPH, a leading pandemic preparedness proponent, recommended viewing the reports of Vallat's comments with caution because of their differences. Nonetheless, he took strong exception to the idea that the virus is stable and doesn't represent much of a threat."
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/avianflu/news/jan110…
If Dr. Vallat wants to prove his point..... he should have all the sequences released and let the world's scientists have a good close look.
I see this as another "dont worry be happy" attempt by TPTB to lull the populous into a nice spending sleep.
I heard enough:
ABBF
dead birds dont fly
no H2N
Very limited h2h
possible h2h
limited but not sustained h2h
shall I go on?
The attempt of certain agencies to make it appear to the public that the threat of a severe H5N1 Pandemic is receding while moving ahead with incredibly expensive pandemic planning is making me vomit.
The virus is entrenched in multiple countries and continues to cause human illness and death. It didnt do that before 1997. It has evolved and continues to do so... that's nature.
I cannot forget what I have read over the past 3 years... H5N1 is a monster and anyone who says otherwise has got to prove it. PERIOD.
albert: Mike has pretty good and solid press contacts (better than ours). I doubt we'd make much difference in getting this picked up. The press doesn't report what bloggers say, even when they use our information (there are some exceptions, but not many, and the exceptions in this area read CIDRAP as well as us).
Why you Revere say this always leaves me deflated, "I don't see it as making much of a difference regarding what we should do."
Everyone here believes we know what should be done. That's a no brainer after years of discussion on the many blogs.
What you want is an improvement in the general state of public health, and an advance in flu prep will advance your agenda. That's little more than yet another competing demand for now left of the moon scarce resources.
And where has it gotten us? The public is as conscious as a cow. The words are always placating, like those in the UK now, "Nothing to be concerned about."
They learned it from Dick Thompson; his retirement is most welcomed. Dick, as a lead, has undermined your need for raised consciousness. There are so many bureaucratic spokespeople, like what Albert's doing, who keep pulling the stinger from the impact of this virus, and as an aside, from the area of your interest, more intentional support of public health.
As DEFRA's now saying, "Nothing to be concerned about."
Thanks Dick.
"The scientific flu community considers him a gadfly who scores points on the basis of organizing support on the internet and they resent it."
Well at least Dr. Niman is available to discuss his views in a public forum (at FluTrackers if not elsewhere), which I, as a member of the public, appreciate (even though the idiots who run Flutrackers banned me for nothing), as I appreciate the degree to which you will allow this subject to be civilly discussed here. I can't contrast Dr. Niman's views with those of the scientific flu community because I'm not aware that they have been willing to publicly respond to his criticisms of them - for the sake of the many people who are reading those credibly presented criticisms and wondering if they are correct. Dr. Niman could not have the "support on the internet" that he does if he did not seem credible.
I personally think Dr. Niman has contributed far more to people becoming aware of the need to prepare for a pandemic than probably all the people who enjoy taking personal and usually anonymous potshots at him because not everything he has said has been correct. I think it doesn't occur to people like Stan that maybe Dr. Niman purposely exaggerates at times as a way of getting people to pay attention to the issue, without concern as to whether he has a record of having always been right. I don't know for sure that he's been doing that, but I suspect that he has.
I haven't seen anybody face as much insane hatred directed at him (at CurEvents) with as much civility and humor as Dr. Niman has. Even if his theory of recombination does not turn out to be true, he has surely raised the consciousness of many people through his Internet postings. If the scientific flu community resents that, then I don't think they're too smart.
b.vallat@oie.int
Perhaps a guest invite so he can put this puppy to bed? Osterholm too?
Whatever the case guys lets ease up a bit. There are the preppers, the doomers, the aint gonna happens, the might be gonna happen. But, its a moot point until nothing happens or it does. How can we even get as far as establishing a timeline for NOT? We cant. Thats another part of this problem
We are really getting nasty here about this stuff and lets face it even the naysayers would take a big hiccup if we posted up 50 confirmed cases someplace in the world. Does anyone kow for real whats going on in Egypt? I dont. On the other hand we still dont really know what happened in Turkey either and if it doesnt come in a year then statistically the naysayers are going to be right.
Eventually they would be wrong because pandemics do happen. Maybe it will, but maybe it wont and if it doesnt, fine by me. have to say this has gotten everyones backs up and it needs to stop. You wouldnt go in and cuss someone out for telling you that you heard that an asteroid was going to hit according to NASA. Then an hour later the ESA says not? This is really where we are folks. Its not us... its them.
How about a little respect on all sides of the argument? I always do my level best to make sure my point is made but I do it respectfully. I dont make personal attacks unless there are deliberate baitings and generally only after two or three and after I warn them.
Its okay to poke at a position but dont assert someone is just stupid or that they are in a position to make monetary gain. If you have proof of it then make sure you can back it up. Dont make statements that you know will set the other guys off. Its a blog. If you want to bitch someone out go yell at your wife or husband and kick the dog. Here I have four, I'll loan you one... Sorry Tom.
Do try to word them a little differently so as not to incite a blog writing riot. Its sucking up the bandwidth.
I am sure that if we were sitting in an auditorium discussing this that we would be a lot nicer to each other. This is starting to broach up on name calling and its getting and has gotten out of hand. Dont assert that people do drugs or that they are con men/women when they dont agree with you. That can get an ISP violation and you might find yourself logging on several thousand bucks shorter because you slandered or libeled someone. The accountability section of your ISP requires your civility. Its not an option. When you are warned you have to stop. Thats in there too. As Revere said, its already happened on other blogs and ISP's have been sued along with the perps. Want to have your computer confiscated under discovery? Do you want to even have to defend yourself? Most attorneys in that particular vein make 250 per hour-plaintiff or defense.
So what is this really? Truly folks its not really any of us. Our biggest problem is the multiple entities that are responsible for dealing with the problem are sending up mixed smoke signals. Some see Indians, the others a camper with a cook fire. Either way the cavalry is spending money to prepare for this and either we need to or we dont. Those entities need to stand up, make their positions known via papers, the newspapers and the media and a single voice piping the official corporate line so that we can all breathe easier or to let us know we will be doing it intubated. Like I said one would affect me deeply, the other well Goleee! We dodged that bullet now didnt we?
Those entities need to tell us what they think. They need to tell us what they know. They need to quit sending up trial balloons to see who shoots at them or to try to get a grant. One group would be sending Vallat down the Champs-Elysees in a motorcade as a hero. Another would be sending him down strapped to the hood of a car and only because its on the way to the Bastille with a circumcision starting at the neckline the next morning. Hey, he is telling us what HE thinks... Some just dont buy it. Okay but dont be nasty about it either side.
And above all the damned health services folks in every country need to stand up in one voice and quit all this double talk BS. Its not dreaded BF.... Its that dreaded killer....BS! That has killed more people than WWII! The same day they are making announcements that its no big deal another group is announcing Human to Human transmission. So what in Hell is the world supposed to think?
I HONESTLY DONT KNOW if its coming or not. I HONESTLY DONT KNOW WHAT TO THINK! It is an actual or perceived threat or not. I have learned across the years to go with my gut instinct and that said for my particular position to prep. That also might have come across as doom and gloom to some. It shouldnt. There isnt a thing we can do for BF in quality or quantity so I embrace the horror and prepare myself and others. Is it necessary? Maybe, but I do and did and now here is why....
In the last two days there have been four tornado's, one passing within a mile of my kids school It shorted out a fuse panel while they were there. The kids bailed out. The power has been in and out. So I fired up the gennie which is sucking fuel out of the ground and providing power directly to the fuse panel, I kicked on the wireless N, popped a top from the fridge, pulled the laptop up and turned on the satellite and TV and started watching this exchange go on and on, ad naseum.... During the commercial breaks I ran my pre-cut 600 volt and 20,000 amp power lines over to my nearest neighbors on both sides and plugged their multiple extension cords in so they wouldnt lose the freezer and the heat.
We are all sitting around being bad people to our neighbors who disagree with what we think. Okay. Agree to disagree and move on.
Its tiresome to listen to this over and over. If it comes it comes, if it doesnt it doesnt. I always get by with a little help from my friends either way.
Start there.
I often wonder, when I see these statements, (Dr. Nabarro was *attributed* to be "guilty" of something similar just weeks ago), if this is so much the human "dance". The lover who chases and the one which runs away. The alarmist becoming apologist, then, once again, alarmist. I feel that we have seen something of this type of cycle "attributed" to these people because of the frailties of human nature in the reporters themselves, if not the speaker. When everyone fears the pandemic, how normal to "hear" what one wants to build a story about how over rated it is? When/if the authorities appear to be calming down, how much more, will be quoted and promoted the one that cries the alarm? The press is sometimes attracted to the fact that the lone voice bucking the tide can make a good story - if not by what they said, then by what can be taken *out of context* from what they said.
It's incumbent upon the leaders of these organizations to always bear this in mind.
Due to the economic needs of the individuals and political needs of governments who have been accessing this data for the past 5 years during which I've had an interest in H5N1, the genetic facts have been blocked entirely or slowed dramatically, as compared to real time.
For anyone here to assert that the public, accessing data via the internet, should not be shown the facts, is amazing in and of itself. In the world, I thought freedom meant a bright light of exposure, acting as an antiseptic against extremist views and supporting allocations of precious research money. Yet, the other day, here, there was such an allusion and imo suggestion. And it went by without quick and sharp rebuke.
Revere has been very generous with the world's readership here by posting the contents of the email from another of the talking heads at WHO, and calling the world's attention to Vallart of OIE.
What those people represent are political positions based on exposure to facts which have been interpreted by their own staff and consultants. In today's world, a much more even playing field, their statements are frankly of little value and are always suspect...because of their bias and their oft ignorance of the facts.
For quite a while, Revere advocated for release of the sequence data. Then Ilaria's group vitiated the argument, gathering data and releasing it late, yet releasing it. Meanwhile, people such as Ian Brown at Weybridge sincerely believe they are exempt from any obligation to release data. They are data blackholes. And WHO still tolerates and supports that behavior.
And to add the cherry on top, we have some people saying that pandemic is not just about the sequences, it's about something else. About what else??? Sociological behavior? Attitudes? Money??
The virus' evolution is in the sequences. If not, please whoever is seriously and really qualified, tell us here why it is not.
If not about the sequences, then I'm all for an investigation of those "new" risk factors. If it is about the sequences, then we, through guys like Niman and monotreme, can independently see the evolutionary direction and see the superspreaders and see the clusters.
I'm yet not a mushroom. Those days are long over. WHO and the MSM can treat the rest like that and feed them manure, but I and many here are independent thinkers. We want to know the true facts, and we will reach our own conclusions.
Revere, do you think the effort to release the sequences has been effective regarding the WHO-consultant held data?
Revere, what are the other factors besides the sequences we should be considering as we attempt to determine the probability that H5N1 may be a virus which can cause pandemia.
Revere, if you believe that viral evolution can be both traced by examining the sequences (100% on that point), do you also believe it responsible and necessary for researchers to attempt to find a method by which to predict viral evolutionary direction?
GR: I think I've made my position quite clear here. I believe that the genetic sequences should be released immediately to a public database. I've said it repeatedly and taken to task scientists who have not done so. I think Henry and other scientists should release all of their information -- algorithms, data, predictions (if they have any), arguments -- so that if there is any value to it we can all examine it and think it through together. I think in the field of pandemic flu, companies, including Henry's company Recombinomics (the company you have invested money in despite the fact you don't understand the science -- if you do, feel free to explain it to us in detail), should not be allowed to patent and license. I've said this about Big Pharma. too, and much more often. I am not picking on him. At least Big Pharma is required to disclose and test their products. Henry isn't.
Regarding viral evolution, my concern is not evolution but epidemiology. Infection is the interaction between the host, the environment and the virus. You cannot predict the biology solely from looking at the sequences. That's an area where I believe I have more experience than you. The idea that the sequence tells all was the lay person's error with the human genome project (after all, we have the sequence now, don't we?). It is just the beginning of the story. If Henry has a method to predict from sequences, let him put the method on the internet so we can all use it and test it. If he has algorithms and software he should release it to the public with no patents or licenses. Put it in the public domain so we can all examine it, try it out. If it is already out there, tell me where the software is and where I or anyone else can download it and use it the way Henry is using it. Then if it does handle a part of the puzzle more people can work on it. Make it an Open Source project, the way I have done with my research.
If his method can give us the probability of a pandemic in the next six months, or two months, or one month or next year, tell us what that probability is and how it was arrived at. Don't tell me to read the patent application. Until then I can't take this seriously. It is vaporware. It's like the man who bragged that on the Isle of Rhodes he could jump higher than anyone else. His audience replied, Hic Rhodus, hic saltus. (Consider this Rhodes; jump now).
GR, you are a prolific commenter on other people's sites. Why don't you start your own blog and then you can say just what you want, just how you want it. If it makes sense you will get an audience. Hic Rhodus, hic saltus.
I withdraw my comment above about the people who run FluTrackers. They're not idiots, they just make mistakes like we all do. I'm actually grateful for their site, which I visit every day.
Revere, I may be fumbling in the dark here but if people aren't allowed to patent scientific innovations in medical research, isn't that going to remove a large part of the incentive for them to do years and years of work developing those innovations? If someone spends a lifetime developing a cure for cancer, should society have the right to just take that from him because we need it and he "should" care about others more than himself? I think that would be bad public policy because it doesn't recognize and accept the natural selfishness that we all have, and would stifle scientific development.
Jon: I'm talking specifically about pandemic influenza. Vaccines, diagnostic kits, etc., for pandemic influenza, should not be patented IMO). The Indon fiasco is a good example why not.
revere, pointing out how much we don't know about H5N1
-or how little others know - is not really an argument to
invest in preparation. You might invest in preparing
for an alien attack, since we know even less about it
Jon and Revere:
The value of patent system in fact is to make the inventions become public property, The public offers certain period of years for the inventor to enjoy; nevertheless to exchange the inventor to publicize his/her design by documentation.
We can encourage the inventor to shorten or waive the patent right as Revere rightly voice, but we have to respect that is his/her (mostly now is Corp.) right.
Having said that, the patent relating to Nature, agriculture, biology especially is very complicated domain. As people jokingly says, you can not patent what God(Nature) originally has created.
anon: That's because I am not arguing the investment just for H5N1 but for whatever might come along.
Stroke of luck that Nasdaq picked up the response from CIDRAP. I had a feeling that Osterholm's rebuttal would get someone's attention. Now that Osterholm's comments can be seen by the general public, this could put more pressure back on Vallat.
Small victory I Suppose.
why aren't the H5N1-related articles not public ?
Often you need a subscription of the journal.
When the research is funded by public money,
(government) then why don't they report the
result to public ?
Howdy Randy, sometimes real life plays out stranger than fiction -- Stephen King was travelling across Oz late last year using a storage trailer (constructed by my cuz) that has ended up in the garage of my Aunt's home.
Given my belief his fictional novel and tv movie "The Stand" appears now to be more a doco, I was just too spun out to say howdy the day he dropped off this trailer... What would I say, "Gee, Mr King, how does if feel to watch words written thirty-some years ago jump off the page!?!"
Anyway, I'm stil pissed off at the bloody West Aussie tossers that psychologically raped me for being ahead of the curve!
Subject: Avian flu To: photoniqueer@yahoo.com From:
Hazel.Mendonca@dh.gsi.gov.uk Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006
15:04:28 +0000
Our ref: TO00000073916
10 March 2006
Dear Mr Singleton,
Thank you for your email of 5 January [2006] to the
Home Office about avian flu. As this is a health
related matter, your email has been passed to the
Department of Health for response. I have been asked
to reply.
With regard to a possible link between genetically
modified food and avian flu, may I suggest that you
address your concerns to the Food Standards Agency as
they are best placed to comment on this matter...
************************
C21*S*E*Research -- The Politics of Horizontal Gene
Transfer (how the H2H H-this N-that virus evolved and
painfully destroyed half the human species)
I suspected genetic engineering was dangerous back in
the late 90s when first seeing a tv news item on H5N1
contamination in Hong Kong -- six people (adults and
kids) "cytokine storm" died of this transgenic flu
during a late 1997 outbreak in Hong Kong's Special
Administrative Region.
Even a major pharma company, Roche, was worried back
in 1997 'bout the global implications -- in its Media
News 16 (May 2006) Roche says:
"Roche has been in discussions with governments as
early as 1997 regarding pandemic preparedness..."
http://www.roche.com/med-cor-2006-05-16
So how did H5N1 get here?
H5N1 is a transgenic polymorphic pathogen, a fast and
fiesty fracker of a virus. This highly mutable cross
species multi-strained virus probably originated from
genetic engineering.
Since the mid 1990s, consumption of GM (genetically
modified) crops by wild and domestic birds, animals
and humans (who eat crops, birds and animals) have
increased dramatically. It is very probable GM crops
containing CaMV 35S transcription promoter are the
horizontal gene transfer (HGT) causation vector thru
which transgenic viral pathogens (eg. H5N1) are
recombining (homologously) into existence with such
ease, speed and spread.
The "homologous recombination" process has, according
to Recombinomics.com, always been the explanation for
viral evolution and not "random mutation". But, the
thang bout the flawed technology of remix tweaking GM
organisms (eg. crops) sees Las Vegas-styled
"hyper-acceleration" and "unpredictability" entering
natural DNA evolution -- thangs move a darned sight
faster in dangerous directions...
Recombinomics -- Random Mutation Explanation of Flu
Genetics Is Fatally Flawed (March 30, 2006) @
http://www.recombinomics.com/News/03300602/Random_Mutation_Flawed.html
The defence against evolving polymorphic viruses is
rather simple and has been repeated many times by
numerous scientists worldwide -- cease the corporate
controlled release of genetically modified organisms
within the global environment.
Before the end of 2005, official gov-based efforts in
sequence tracking the genesis of H5N1 were criminally
lackluster -- we now know cross species strains are
present in birds and mammalian populations across the
entire planet...
But still, the question remains unanswered, how did a
transgenic virus with far reaching destructive power
appear out of nowhere?
The probable (but unproven) cross species vector is
GM/GE crops eaten by wild birds, etc, from the mid
1990s to present, HGT recombining H5N1 (via CaMV 35S
promoter) into a transgenic polymorphic pathogen, now
infecting and killing humans with an ever increasing
efficiency...
So, basically I'm saying gene flow has occurred as a
consequence of transgenic crops doing a CaMV 35S
promoter recombination hotspot remix in the bellies
(and bodies) of all organisms consuming such crops.
Prof. Joe Cummins was the first to warn against using
the CaMV 35S promoter or any viral genes in plants
because it had been shown that such viral transgenes
in plants could gene flow recombine with naturally
occurring viruses to generate, in some cases,
super-infectious viruses.
Subsequently, the CaMV 35S promoter has been found to
substitute for the promoter of many plant and animal
viruses to produce infectious viruses.
* Remixed excerpt ISIS Press Release 29/11/04 -- Fluid
Genome & Beyond @
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Fluidgenomeandbeyond.php
************************
In March 2006, I received a positive legal email from
Gloria Allred, a California attorney (see below):
http://www.amglaw.com/bio/GloriaAllred.asp
Her email concerns were focused on lawsuits vis a vis
time periods -- this is ironic given two facts...
* FOI have been stalling, withholding info since the
get go -- FOI are legally culpable for stonewalling!
* The primary issue concerning and justifying the WA
police and medicolegal establishment's violent 1997/8
mistreatment of me was my so called "drug induced"
"delusional" belief in an impending global disaster --
ie. the H2H H-this N-that viral Pandemic...
Due to my questioning character, I happened to be one
of those who awakened early to the pandemic threat of
H5N1.
Midst the traumatic time of 9/11 2001, I was usually
found perched on a library computer doing my research
thang. Due to my early 30s agebracket, OUT sexuality
and smalltown existence, I was not taken seriously in
both a personal and work related context.
Indeed, I was viewed as a "simpleton" for expressing
both an "outside the box" scientific explanation of
and sociopolitical overview of H5N1. Most people in
my life (intimate and non) made the conscious choice
to perceive me as "nuts" for believing a disaster was
just round the corner...
Due to reading many articles on genetic modification,
my new transgenic DNA worldview perceived the genesis
linkage between H5N1, speedily recombining itself to
cross-infect many lifeforms, vis a vis the mid 1990s
onward release of genetically modified crops.
But for the defective CaMV viral promoter technology
contained within GM products, H5N1 would probably not
exist as a viable threat in the early 21st Century.
In retrospect, my lengthy role within H5N1 education
and prevention -- viewed with scepticism and scorn by
Australian government authorities -- places me in an
ironic and bizarre public position: even though many
people may die, I happily flip the "bird" (finger) at
a homophobic Oz society and publicly say, "Frack you
tossers, my instincts were correct all along!"
This has been my adult existence for a decade, since
1997/8. A period during which I suspected all was not
what it appeared to be when tv viewing an item on
human H5 infection and "cytokine storm" death in Hong
Kong.
Yes, back in 1997, I had an instinct-based belief a
vast number of people were shortly going to die in a
rather painful manner... It's as darned bizarre and
melodramatic as that, actually.
During this time, my then lover, family, friends, the
government, homophobic WA police, psychiatrists, etc,
did not understand my world view primarily cos they
had not digested the same global media sources...
It was the beginning of a paradigmatic seachange and
my early views were officially considered "chemical
induced delusions" -- how odd, I had no psychoactives
(eg. THC) in my blood when an Australian psychiatrist
misdiagnosed me as suffering drug induced delerium.
The senior medical officer at Graylands Selby-Lemnos,
Dr B. Zawadzki, took a disturbing interest in my gay
psychosexuality and acted in an sexual manner toward
my physical person whilst a drugged (Risperidone 1mg
twice/day) involuntary patient. On 6th of Jan 98, my
worst nightmares became a reality -- I was literally
locked within a nazi-homophobic environment, drugged
against my will and sexually abused by a senior staff
member. With only me and her present in her office,
Dr Zawadzki lifted my shirt and suggestively touched
my torso under the pretext of a "medical examination."
But, let's now return to the lead-up events:
Back in 1997, I'd just completed a university degree
and was "chilling" in a twenty-somethang dude manner
-- like many before me (eg. Bill Clinton), I imbibed
cannabis/THC a wee bit -- did I actually inhale!?!
But, I was also freelance writing for a local queer
newspaper and various other publications (see "WA's
Surveillance Devices Bill" By Elena Jeffreys and John
Curran (prior name before change to Singleton) @
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1998/343/343p8d.htm )
Basically, some people are "media junkies" and appear
to be "out of their time" in "world view paradigm" vis
a vis the rest of the human herd.
For better or worse, I'm very much of this personality
type and, in the late 90s, freaked out some homophobic
and Hyacinth-Bucket-Conservative members of the West
Australian community with my visceral perceptions.
Because of these views and writing, I was branded and
dehumanized by the WA medico-legal establishment in a
relative manner comparable to victim-survivors of the
nazi doctors...
The problem I have is the legacy of these events --
the West Australian government has been ignoring me
and refusing to accept liability for the actions of
its employees.
I've been rather patient these past years, waiting for
the authorities to Freedom Of Information (FOI)
release the documentation I need in order to attain
medico-legal closure.
All through this Nazi-esque medico-legal farce, never
once have I compromised the integrity and community
responsibility I enact as an unpaid health worker.
(((Re: FOI ACCESS APPLICATION REF #01/862)))
In this application of a few years ago, the WA FOI
Information Commissioner made a decision on 20th Feb
2002 to censor all documents containing names of WA
police officers prior to sending me photocopies --
why!?!
Why have police officers names been blanked out on the
few relevant docs sent thus far? Why are these folk
afraid to have their names publicized re: corruption
and queer bashing?
* Re: Drugs -- Inventory And Movement Document
(stamped D67179)
* On 31/12/97 "approx 22gms leaf material believed to
be cannabis" was given the tag/bag number B82374.
* On 12/03/98 this evidence was given a new tag/bag
number B91282.
* On 29/04/98 this renumbered evidence was "opened for
re-analysis" and given a new tag/bag number BB049208.
* On 13/07/98 order for destruction of this evidence
BB049208 was given.
Where is the hardcopy toxicological analysis (a legal
document) showing the chemical composition of the
"approx 22gms leaf material believed to be cannabis."?
*******************************
Subject: Your legal inquiry
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006
From: "Gloria Allred"
To: photoniqueer@yahoo.com
Dear Mr. Singleton,
I am in receipt of your email outlining your legal
claims.
I regret to inform you that due to our heavy caseload
and other commitments, neither I nor my law firm are
in a position to become involved in this matter. You
may wish to contact your county's Bar Association
fora referral to an appropriate attorney.
Please be advised that in every case there is a time
period in which an individual must file a lawsuit or
forever lose the right to do so. I have made no
attempt to ascertain what that time period is as it
pertains to the set of circumstances you describe.
In addition, the fact that I cannot represent you
should not necessarily be construed to mean that you
have no case. If you wish to pursue this matter
further, I would strongly urge that you seek a lawyer
immediately to evaluate the facts and to advise you as
to the time period available within which to file a
lawsuit.
I appreciate your inquiry and wish you success in your
pursuit of justice.
Very truly yours,
ALLRED, MAROKO & GOLDBERG
I should probably add in closing, I wasn't surprised a bit that Birdflubreakingnews.com didn't run our release. Every news feed in the country picked up on it, but not them. They didn't run our release or the one copied by the Santa Barbara Times, which I might add, I have no idea how the Santa Barbara Times took our release and released it on the wires 3 minutes ahead of ours. The total sending time is only about 5 minutes, lol. Either way, we were lucky they ran it too I suppose.
Anyway, the only news site in the country to not run our release (or the one from the Santa Barbara Times) was birdflubreakingnews.com. That also explains why they never returned my emails in the past. I must admit, it's unfortunate having such a disliked website at times. Although, the bfbreakingnews.com site is also a machine for putting out and touting the false translations via their blog section, so I'm not all that surprised.
Revere, I appreciate the use of your site as a common ground for all of us to figure out what to do about the Vallat fiasco.
Take care,
A
Well, this post is off the front page of Effect Measure, but just to document a later development:
OIE issued Comments on recent OIE Director General statements on the avian influenza situation.
OIE does not acknowledge that Vallat had any responsibility for the dismissive tone which was captured by both the AP and AFP reporters, regardless of whether they misquoted his actual words or not.
and
The London School of Economics posted a link to an mp3 audio version of Dr. David Nabarro's January 10 speech, The Global State of Influenza Pandemic Preparedness.
(As I noted above, the Vallat comments were published the same day as Nabarro's speech.)
"The event was not a press conference to deal with avian influenza, but it was a welcome breakfast for the new year for ****selected members*** of the press."
Sorry, My quote is from the OIE directly...as in: "Now OIE has sent out this message:"
Shit... you mean the media gets all the fun and doesnt press Dr. Vallat?
Hey PF and Tom... for a ballroom dinner OIE gets to raise the already dead.