Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Must read, could really help in Pandemiic
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk

Must read, could really help in Pandemiic

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
abcdefg View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member


Joined: September 19 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 578
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote abcdefg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Must read, could really help in Pandemiic
    Posted: October 29 2008 at 12:10am
I was just at my Dr.s office where he told me that the AMA believed that the reason why most deaths occured during the 1918 Flu pandemic were due to  Staphyloccus pneumoinae. He also informed me there was no vaccine for that type of Pneumonia . He was very wrong. As of a few days ago, two new anti biotics were designed that can cure 95% of MRSA Staph. Below are two articles one on the fact that science does believe that this secondary pneumonia was the caause of death. The second one, shows that there is a vaccine for that type of pneumonia. It pays to not take everything your Dr. says as the gospel. 

Biosecurity Briefing

Subscribe | About | Current Issue | RSS | Archive

Bacterial Pneumonia Found to be a Major Cause of Death in Flu Pandemic

By Matthew Watson, August 4, 2008

The August issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases (EID) includes two articles on the impact and implications of bacterial co-infection, and resulting pneumonia in influenza patients, during a pandemic.

Authored by Dr. John Brundage and Dr. Dennis Shanks, the first article is a retrospective epidemiological review that analyzes the unusual nature and severity of the 1918–19 influenza pandemic.1 Dr. Brundage’s claim is that the high case fatality rates seen during that pandemic were not due, as some historians have claimed, to primary pneumonia caused by a hypervirulant strain of the influenza virus. Rather, he maintains that many of the deaths that occurred during the 1918 pandemic resulted from co-infection and subsequent pneumonia caused by common respiratory bacteria.

The second article, authored by Gupta, et al., identifies bacterial pneumonia as a likely source of mortality during a pandemic and offers recommendations for addressing gaps in medical pandemic preparedness. While acknowledging the scarcity of recent data regarding the incidence of bacterial co-infection during a pandemic, Gupta notes that “secondary bacterial infection is a common cause of death in persons with seasonal influenza; co-infections have been found with ≈25% of all influenza related deaths.”2

Both Brundage and Gupta agree that the pathogens most likely to cause respiratory disease are Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphyloccus aureus (both methicillin sensitive and resistant3) and Haemophilus influenza. Accordingly, the use of antimicrobial medications effective against these pathogens will be indicated—for either treatment or prophylaxis. However, due to the use of “just in time” supply chains, pharmaceutical shortages are likely. Consequently, both authors recommend that hospitals work with suppliers on stockpiling efforts in order to mitigate shortages.

The two papers also generally agree on the following recommendations aimed at reduction of mortality due to bacterial pneumonia for influenza patients in a pandemic:

  • To the extent possible, make vaccination against S. pneumoniae a priority prior to a pandemic event.
  • Once a pandemic has begun, vaccinate communities that are still unaffected with a strain-specific influenza vaccine, if available.
  • During a pandemic, isolate patients with symptomatic respiratory disease as much as possible. 
  • Conduct surveillance to track pandemic-related bacterial infections and emerging antimicrobial resistance.
  • Conduct further research into bacterial pneumonias that occur secondary to influenza infection
Vaccine protection against Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

Juliane Bubeck Wardenburg1,2 and Olaf Schneewind1

1 Department of Microbiology and 2 Department of Pediatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637

CORRESPONDENCE Olaf Schneewind: oschnee@bsd.uchicago.edu

Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia causes significant mortality in hospitalized or healthy individuals, and recent increases in morbidity are attributed to the rapid spread of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) strains, which are often not susceptible to antibiotic therapy. %7balpha%7d-Hemolysin (Hla), a secreted pore-forming toxin, is an essential virulence factor of MRSA in a mouse model of S. aureus pneumonia. We show that the level of Hla expression by independent S. aureus strains directly correlates with their virulence. Active immunization with a mutant form of Hla (HlaH35L), which cannot form pores, generates antigen-specific immunoglobulin G responses and affords protection against staphylococcal pneumonia. Moreover, transfer of Hla-specific antibodies protects naive animals against S. aureus challenge and prevents the injury of human lung epithelial cells during infection. Thus, Hla vaccination or immunotherapy may prevent S. aureus pneumonia in humans.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 29 2008 at 7:43am
Hla vaccination or immunotherapy

 may

prevent S. aureus pneumonia in humans.


MRSA
............

...It's rise in recent years has been blamed on poor hygiene and a lack of hand washing in hospitals.


...A full blown vaccine against the deadly superbug could be available within a decade, they say.


...Patients could get injections against MRSA 'within six years'


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 30 2008 at 6:07am
Originally posted by abcdefg abcdefg wrote:

I was just at my Dr.s office where he told me that the AMA believed that the reason why most deaths occured during the 1918 Flu pandemic were due to  Staphyloccus pneumoinae. He also informed me there was no vaccine for that type of Pneumonia . He was very wrong. As of a few days ago, two new anti biotics were designed that can cure 95% of MRSA Staph. Below are two articles one on the fact that science does believe that this secondary pneumonia was the caause of death. The second one, shows that there is a vaccine for that type of pneumonia. It pays to not take everything your Dr. says as the gospel. 


The situation with hospital Staph is still very bad. One of the real problems is VRSA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancomycin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus

This is a highly resistant strain is fairly resistant to some of our best drugs. In addition it was found in recent research in the medical field MRSA was using a single celled Amoeba a a jumping mixing bowl to produce strains that very VERY resistant and something akin to MRSA on steroids.

http://news.bio-medicine.org/biology-news-3/Single-cell-amoeba-increases-MRSA-numbers-1000--fold-7459-1/

Scientists in the UK have found that a type of amoeba acts as an incubator for MRSA bacteria. As amoebae are often found in healthcare environments this discovery has implications for the infection control strategies adopted by hospitals.

The single cell amoeba, Acanthamoeba polyphagam commonly eats and digests environmental bacteria. It also engulfs pathogens such as MRSA. However, instead of being digested by the amoeba, MRSA survives and replicates whilst inside the amoeba. Prof Michael Brown and colleagues at the University of Bath, found that MRSA in association with amoebae increased in numbers 1000- fold.

The pathogenic bacteria, Legionella, also replicate inside amoebae and are then released into the environment. The released bacteria are less susceptible to biocides and antimicrobials, and are more invasive than the same bacteria which have grown freely. Replication within amoebae may have the same effect on MRSA.

Amoebae, as cysts, are often dispersed by air currents, providing another means of spreading any trapped bacteria.

"We need more research into the role of amoeba in the spread of MRSA hospitals should aim to eradicate amoebae as well as the bacteria themselves" said Prof Brown of the Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Bath.

comment: in several other studies it was found that more persons died from hospital infection than the diseases they were being treated for. In addition to Staph inside the hospitals 

http://www.americansmadandangry.org/HospitalInfectionDisclosure.php

One of the greatest problems it poor reporting of hospital infections.  The current numbers are not reliable, the misdiagnosis rates, where diseases are not correctly diagnosed, and the high misuse of antibiotics to treat viral infections make a trip to the hospital for a routine condition often deadly.

J. -  Primary Investigator Medical Research Team leader - aka Medclinician

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 30 2008 at 6:32am


We may not have to worry about the deaths from influenza...

No need for eggs or animal cells.  :)  to prevent the H5N1 flu.

For seasonal flu, not having to reformulate year after year..., as it is universal.


They also want to use this type of vaccine on cancer viruses.

..........................................................................

source
http://www.vaxinnate.com/mediacenter/pr/release/20080814_001.html

excerpts-

VaxInnate's use of bacterial expression for production of influenza vaccines does not require costly expansion of manufacturing capacity, as do other influenza vaccine products.

Due to its efficiency and transferability, VaxInnate’s flu vaccine could instead be produced in existing biotechnology facilities that have microbial production capacity.

The study was supported by a $9.5 million grant awarded to UTMB by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, for better control of influenza epidemics in the developing world.

VaxInnate's universal influenza vaccine candidate is designed to target the ectodomain of the M2 protein (M2e), an ion channel protein found on the surface of influenza A viruses.

M2e is the most highly conserved surface protein of the virus, thereby eliminating the need for epidemiologists to identify and predict strain variants that emerge from year to year, as they must now.



Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down