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.
--
Bob C.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)