Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Bird flu

Busy at work at the moment, so I apologise to my reader for the lack of posts, but this Bird flu crap prompts me to write.


Now I'm no medical expert, but surely the lethality of this thing is down to the fact that nobody has any antibodies that recognise it and attack it.

In order for it to be transmitted from human to human, it has to swap genes with an existing strain.

Won't the swapped genes then be spotted by the antibodies ? Hence making it...errr...a lot less lethal ?

If not, then if it's killing all its hosts, won't it stop spreading awful quickly anyway ?

Either way, I don't see why this is any different to any other virus myself...

1 comment:

Brother#2 said...

You forgot to mention the excellent standard of medical care enjoyed in the orient compared to us here in the west.

Flu epidemics kill people all the time, it's just that in reality those it kills tend to have one foot in the grave already. There is no way that a human version of bird flu will carry anything anywhere near a 50% mortality rate. Not only that but we here in the UK are supposedly looking forward to the coldest winter in over a decade. So those most at risk (elderly folk that moan about heating bills despite getting a fuel allowance) will probably die anyway because they're too tight to switch the extra bar on!

Glad to see you've finally put something new on your site, I was getting sick of hearing about the farm sluts, I wander if they shagged any birds? must have at least two readers!