Rhiza Labs FluTracker Forum

Unfortunately, you continue to post UTTTER NONSENSE. The committee voted to leave alll three vaccine targets UNCHANGED for the 2011/2012 season.
Go back to your babble board where someone might believe your fanatsies. You have ZERO credibility.

_________________
www.twitter.com/hniman

http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArt ... leId=19843
The crude VE estimate for the 2010/11 vaccine was 46% , similar to other European studies.

2006/7:32%
2007/8:60%
2008/9:20%
2009/10:48%
2010/1:46%

_________________
no patents on genes, publish the GISAID sequences !

Just to clarify, the Air Force provided real data that the vaccine against H1N1 wasn't working. The CDC claimed that the low reactors detected by Mill Hill was "lab error" due to the cell line being used to identify low reactors. The CDC has created this fake assay which doesn't detect low rectors to they can claim that the vaccine is a "match" and does not need to be changed, which is why they are a hazard to the world's health and why there is concern about the Chihuahua sub-clade, becasue the massive vaccination program using California/07 to control it spread will FAIL.

_________________
www.twitter.com/hniman

Thanks.

Even just on that, it's obvious that the vaccine is failing.

Look on the bright side for you Dr N - every day where you are it's getting warmer, and down here it's getting colder....

On the other hand, this does have an eerie echo to events 2 years ago.

If it it follows the script of two years, then there will be Yanks going for holiday in Mexico about now, and returning with a nasty little gift from Mexico. From memory, the USA had an unusual and nasty summer of of flu in 2009.

It's not good news on any level. And I'd bet govts either i the northern or southern hemispheres are utterly clueless about what is about to hit them.

Thanks.

Wasn't there also data from the UK that showed a high vax failure rate?

VE = Vax effectiveness?

Interesting.

Yes, and that was the basis of the low reactor question regarding Mill Hill and the CDC tried to blame the assay.

The bottom line is the receptor binding domain changes near position 190 (S186S, S188T, A189T) are effective in immunologocal esacpe, but the CDC "antigen characterization" test rarely picks these changes up (last season all CDC H1N1 low reactors in the US had changes at position 159).

It is a GARBAGE assay used for propaganda claims of vaccine match, and the Chihuahua sub-clade will extract a HEAVY price for the game being played by the CDC.

_________________
www.twitter.com/hniman

Speaking of CDC games, they are also in denial about the importance of D225G:

"This difference is statistically significant and our data are consistent with a possible relationship between this mutation and the clinical outcome," says the report by A. Kilander and colleagues, published today in Eurosurveillance. "To our knowledge, this is the first identification of a change in the pandemic virus that correlates with a severe clinical outcome."

However, Dr. Nancy Cox, director of the Influenza Division at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said global H1N1 data so far do not show a clear association between the mutation and severe illness.

"If you look globally you can see that this mutation is neither necessary nor sufficient for a severe or fatal outcome," Cox told CIDRAP News.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/conten ... ation.html

_________________
www.twitter.com/hniman

> With that, this is the conclusion. As I mentioned, for H1N1, representative
> recent pandemic A(H1N1) virus was covered well by the vaccine
> containing A/California/07-like virus

there should be other reasons for the bad US-army H1-effectiveness

_________________
no patents on genes, publish the GISAID sequences !

-----------------------------------------------------

UK: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/ ... t19791.pdf
2009/10 , monovalent adjusted vaccine effectiveness 34%
2010/11 , trivalent: 46%
both : 63%
I'm surprised about the 34% since the pandemrix in 2009/10 was said to have been
very effective in other studies

-----------------------------------------------------------------

NL: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArt ... leId=19843
The crude VE estimate for the 2010/11 vaccine was 46% , similar to other European studies.
2006/7:32%
2007/8:60%
2008/9:20%
2009/10:48%
2010/1:46%

---------------------------------------------------------------------


US-army:
http://www.fda.gov/advisorycommittees/c ... 249303.htm
2010/1: 0%(H1),64%(H3),61%(B)

2010/1: 41%(H1), overall 81%
2010/1: overall TIV:60% , LAIV:30%

Kentucky/9/2010. There is a severe mutation in amino acid 155.
Here it is right in the critical region of 155-158.

now you can see that the HI titer from reassortant 179A or 181 have a relatively higher titer,

With that, this is the conclusion. As I mentioned, for H1N1, representative recent pandemic A(H1N1) virus was covered well by the vaccine containing A/California/07-like virus

_________________
no patents on genes, publish the GISAID sequences !