Public discussions have exaggerated the transmissibility and threat of
an avian flu virus strain modified by scientists in the Netherlands to
be more easily passed between mammals, the top researcher behind the
effort said on Wednesday.
The determination, described by study leader Ron Fouchier at an event in Washington, has resulted in U.S. steps to reassess information produced in the study, the New York Times reported.
The U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity last year called for withholding some data from any published version of the research at Erasmus University Medical Center in the Netherlands, which yielded an iteration of the H5N1 virus more easily passed between ferrets in laboratory tests. The board, motivated by concern over the data's potential bioterrorism applications, made a matching request regarding research conducted at the University of Wisconsin (Madison).
The virus modified by the Dutch team did not take root in every ferret in the vicinity of microbes exhaled by animal carriers, and infection did not consistently result in death or severe symptoms, Fouchier said. The avian flu virus had no effect on animals with prior exposure to seasonal flu, suggesting a preponderance of physically mature humans might have some ability to resist the pathogen, he added.
“We heard many times that this virus would spread like wildfire if it would come out of our facility,” he said. “We do not think this is the case.”
The scientist has withheld the information pending completion of an assessment of which details were safe to release (Denise Grady, New York Times, Feb. 29).
Direct insertion of large quantities of the virus deep into the respiratory system was more generally fatal to test animals, Fouchier added in comments reported by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.
"This virus does not kill ferrets when they are sneezed upon," the scientist said, adding he had yet to see any "severe disease" spread between members of the species by airborne means.
He added: "If anything, our data suggests that this virus spreads poorly. ... Whether this virus if it would escape our laboratory would start spreading, we don't know."
The U.S. National Institutes of Health believes the federal biosecurity panel should study the Dutch research with the additional information taken into account, said Anthony Fauci, who heads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy release I, Feb. 29). The panel is expected to resume activities this month, the Times quoted him as saying (Grady, New York Times).
The new details produced "substantial clarification" of the Dutch research when they surfaced at a Feb.16-17 gathering of flu specialists sponsored by the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, Fauci added, without specifying whether similarly significant data became available for the Wisconsin study.
The WHO panel called for the full release of data from both projects after a period of months .
A European Center for Disease Prevention and Control report published on Wednesday offers tentative support for the WHO moves, but notes that the unavailability of comprehensive data from the studies complicates any effort to issue advice on the matter, CIDRAP reported.
Response options include providing related data to the European Early Warning and Response System; monitoring the modified pathogens through an existing WHO network; and restricting the quantity of facilities permitted to pursue comparable research, the document states. A mechanism for withholding the flu studies would prove arduous to develop, said the report's authors, who called on academic journal managers to pursue a global agreement on the treatment of sensitive biological research (Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy release II, Feb. 29).
http://www.nti.org/gsn/
The determination, described by study leader Ron Fouchier at an event in Washington, has resulted in U.S. steps to reassess information produced in the study, the New York Times reported.
The U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity last year called for withholding some data from any published version of the research at Erasmus University Medical Center in the Netherlands, which yielded an iteration of the H5N1 virus more easily passed between ferrets in laboratory tests. The board, motivated by concern over the data's potential bioterrorism applications, made a matching request regarding research conducted at the University of Wisconsin (Madison).
The virus modified by the Dutch team did not take root in every ferret in the vicinity of microbes exhaled by animal carriers, and infection did not consistently result in death or severe symptoms, Fouchier said. The avian flu virus had no effect on animals with prior exposure to seasonal flu, suggesting a preponderance of physically mature humans might have some ability to resist the pathogen, he added.
“We heard many times that this virus would spread like wildfire if it would come out of our facility,” he said. “We do not think this is the case.”
The scientist has withheld the information pending completion of an assessment of which details were safe to release (Denise Grady, New York Times, Feb. 29).
Direct insertion of large quantities of the virus deep into the respiratory system was more generally fatal to test animals, Fouchier added in comments reported by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.
"This virus does not kill ferrets when they are sneezed upon," the scientist said, adding he had yet to see any "severe disease" spread between members of the species by airborne means.
He added: "If anything, our data suggests that this virus spreads poorly. ... Whether this virus if it would escape our laboratory would start spreading, we don't know."
The U.S. National Institutes of Health believes the federal biosecurity panel should study the Dutch research with the additional information taken into account, said Anthony Fauci, who heads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy release I, Feb. 29). The panel is expected to resume activities this month, the Times quoted him as saying (Grady, New York Times).
The new details produced "substantial clarification" of the Dutch research when they surfaced at a Feb.16-17 gathering of flu specialists sponsored by the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, Fauci added, without specifying whether similarly significant data became available for the Wisconsin study.
The WHO panel called for the full release of data from both projects after a period of months .
A European Center for Disease Prevention and Control report published on Wednesday offers tentative support for the WHO moves, but notes that the unavailability of comprehensive data from the studies complicates any effort to issue advice on the matter, CIDRAP reported.
Response options include providing related data to the European Early Warning and Response System; monitoring the modified pathogens through an existing WHO network; and restricting the quantity of facilities permitted to pursue comparable research, the document states. A mechanism for withholding the flu studies would prove arduous to develop, said the report's authors, who called on academic journal managers to pursue a global agreement on the treatment of sensitive biological research (Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy release II, Feb. 29).
http://www.nti.org/gsn/
