The original statement here includes "if Bird flu breaks out all sporting events and all concerts will be banned." Quite probably the operative word is "IF." This sounds like a typical government "don't worry, we have a plan," and possibly will reassure some of the herd-instinct masses who are concerned. At this point, "the plan" doesn't have to be realistic or even a real one.

As with much political propaganda, the reassurance given to those in a lather about the flu now is countered by those in a panic about restriction of rights?

Thus far, the avian flu that is of concern appears to be easily spread between birds, but transferable to humans only by direct contact, probably requiring ingestion of sera from the infected birds. One instance of transmission from one human to another has been reported by the Chinese. The single reasonably substantiated report of human to human transmission that I've seen was from an infected child to the child's mother. There apparently are other "suspect" infections, but it's not a simple matter to verify even that an individual case is this bird flu or to establish the mode of transmission.

The justifiable concern is that if a sufficient base of human infection occurs, it is almost a certainty that a more easily transmissible - human to human - flu having the same resistance to common antiviral medications will develop, since such mutations of flu and flu-like viral agents is the usual process observed with all similar prior agents.

Existing "human flu" varieties are too numerous, and subject to too many mutations, for us to develop any general purpose flu vaccine. We do have a number of antiviral treatments that are of some help, and most variants that currently are easily transmitted between humans respond to some extent to "standard treatments." An inter-species "crossover" may be expected to produce infections that do not respond to the usual treatments. The observed bird flu infections in humans apparently are resistant to most current antiviral medications.

Some credible historians place the first recorded flu "epidemic" in 41 or 47 BC, although it's difficult to establish exact diagnoses without RNA analysis. There have been at least 300 "epidemics" in Europe prior to about 1530 that, according to some researchers, likely were "flu" and that killed, in some individual cases, 5% or so of a "known local population."

The earliest reliably documented influenza epidemic probably began in Russia in about 1886 or 1887, reached Great Britain in early 1889. From Great Britain, it was first noted in Paris in November 1889, and reached Berlin and Vienna within a month thereafter. It took 6 – 8 weeks for it to reach the US, reached South America in about a month, to India within 4 months, to Australia and New Zealand in 5 months, and was found in remote parts of Africa within a year. Nobody who carried it took a jet.

The "big one" was the world-wide influenza pandemic of 1918-1919. The "attack rate" in affected areas was 40 to 50% ill, with a little less than 2% of those infected dying from the desease. The usual estimate is 22,000,000 dead worldwide.

Many virologists believe that this flu pandemic was a previous crossover avian/bird flu.

Some suggest that the mutations that allowed it to affect humans "infected" it with some characteristics of a prior recent "epidemic" flu , and that some people had a partial acquired immunity, hence the "low death rate" in "civilized countries." The US lost about 500,000 (0.5%), Great Britain about 200,000 (% unknown). Samoa, without prior recent infection, saw 25% of its population die, and quite a few Eskimo villages disappeared completely. India lost about 12,000,000 people, believed to be at least partly because they were in the middle of an "explosive" population jump (by about 85% 1906 – 1961) so that there were many children without prior exposure and acquired partial immunity.

There is no guarantee that a NEW cross-over virus will be susceptible to acquired immunity to previous influenza strains.

If sufficient new infections occur via the existing "bird flu" routes of transmission there is a very high likelihood that a human-to-human transmissibility will develop.

Most of the recent pronouncements about bird flu have come from people who are concerned about the funding of public health resources. In other words – propaganda to generate funding. If the need for additional funding is seen as valid, and if the requirement that governments should support disease control research and policy is appropriate, then this is "good propaganda." Particularly with respect to influenza, we have not done a very good job recently, and some agencies likely have been denied funds they, and perhaps we, should consider essential. I have not seen statements from these sources that are not credible, although I tend not to go where wilder things are said.

The second source of recent comment comes largely from governments and/or individual politicians seeking to assure those of the populace who are affected by the first-layer propaganda that "we're doing something – we have a plan." In other words – "cover my ass" political propaganda. If there really is "a plan" then this is just news, but my guess is it's largely blather – at least for the present.

It's easy enough to promise that "if A, then B" if you don't expect "A" to happen before the next election. It doesn't really matter if "B" is a good response. When "A" happens, or looks inevitable, you'll expect to promise something else "based on the current situation" and go on with your career – if you're a traditional polititian.

Note: Some data from Armies of Pestilence, R.S. Bray, ©1996, R.S. Bray, Barnes & Noble Books, 2000, ISBN 0-7607-1915-2. Additional from Smithsonian, Technology Review, and American Scientist periodicals, via short-term memory.

John