Could swine flu provide immunity against bird flu?

Post Reply New Topic

(Don't know if this is the right forum, but hey.)

Someone on the BBC News website left a comment saying that catching swine flu could give you immunity against bird flu (bird flu being a lot more dangerous than swine flu). Is that true??

My first reaction was that it isn't true, because they are two different viruses, so one couldn't provide immunity against the other. This is also why we don't become immune to the common cold, because the viruses that cause you to catch (on average) five colds per year are all slightly different.

But then I remembered about Edward Jenner's experiments with smallpox, and how that kid got cowpox and became immune to smallpox. So I thought maybe one virus can make you immune to a similar virus.

No, it absolutely would not. Having human flu doesn't even protect you against next year's human flu.

And we don't yet know whether swine flu or bird flu would be more dangerous. We've yet to see a full-on pandemic of either, and either or both could mutate into something drastically different from what they are now.

Jenner's results were successful because cowpox and smallpox were very similar viruses with relatively static genomes.

Thanks, Orwell.

The swine flu outbreak is now officially a pandemic, though, and the Spanish flu of 1918 was supposedly some kind of bird flu (but I'll have to check that...).

Right, it is "officially" a pandemic, but... well, people haven't exactly been dying off in droves. "Pandemic" normally carries a far more sinister connotation. I think there have been two swine flu cases in my county, no deaths, and this makes us one of the hardest-hit areas in the world. However, this is out of flu season. It's entirely possible that it could start to really suck once we get into actual flu season- I read one estimate saying about a third of the population would catch it. The Spanish Flu pandemic was indeed bird flu, but we've had a couple swine flu pandemics before as well.

OK.

Another swine flu related question: I read somewhere that asthmatics are more at risk. Exactly how much more at risk?? I'm worried cos my best friend is asthmatic and goes to one of the schools in London that have swine flu.

I wouldn't know. All I could say is that any respiratory infection is made more dangerous by a preexisting chronic respiratory problem like asthma. I don't think someone with asthma would be any more likely to catch swine flu, but someone with asthma would be more likely to die if they caught swine flu than an otherwise healthy person would be.

Yeah, that's what I read. I noticed that wherever it was I read it (probably the BBC) said "slightly" more at risk, so I was thinking the increased risk could possibly be relatively insignificant.

When I last checked, one person in the UK had died of swine flu, a woman in Scotland who had just had a (premature) baby, and therefore would have been more at risk anyway.

Yeah, so far it doesn't seem like the toll has been so great. Actually, the swine flu scare has been great for me- during spring semester my university started enabling my obsessive-compulsive tendencies by putting hand sanitizer everywhere.

It's not getting much media attention right now, but I suspect it's a lot more prevalent than most people think. Someone I know has had it, and then passed it on to three other family members, and several other people they were in contact with. Apparently, the symptoms were quite bad, and their doctor couldn't get hold of Tamiflu, initially, because Gordon Brown is rationing it so that when the s**t hits the fan public sector workers are protected. They had to get swabs tested and it confirmed it really was swine flu, then they were granted permission to receive the treatment. It was sent by courier, and finally arrived about a week after they first contacted the state health services (UK). So, you can forget Tamiflu over here, because if you get flu really bad you may be dead before they let you have it.

I went round school disinfecting everything with a cloth, and now every time certain people pass me in the corridor they start sneezing at me and saying, "I got swine flu!" Very annoying and unhygienic.

I wasn't being paranoid or anything, though, cos I didn't do it out of fear, it was because it seemed like a sensible idea at the time (probably wasn't, though, LOL).

I read they have enough for half the population. And if Orwell is correct in that it could affect one third of the population (I know he meant the world, or the USA, but it would probably be a similar percentage in the UK), there should be enough.

@ascan: Really? About a year ago my dad's physician wrote him a prescription for Tamiflu without any diagnosis. He just had a cold.

You need to take it within 48hours of symptoms appearing for it to be of any use. By the time they've swabbed you, tested it, and sent the Tamiflu to you, it's too late. The stockpile has two purposes: to keep the country running by protecting workers in critical areas, and to prevent mass panic by the ignorant masses.


Yes, really. I think you'll find it's a lot more difficult to get hold of now. In the UK, to get it on the NHS, you actually need a diagnosis. If you want to get it privately, then I suspect you've not a cat in hells chance, as all the available stock has been bought-up. I'm assuming from what i know of the person in question that they had the means to get it quicker than most. It still took a week, though they weren't exactly at death's door.

OK, now I'm worried. *gets bottle of disinfectant out*

There are plenty of other things more likely to kill you. In its present form it's no more dangerous to an individual than the flu that comes around during winter every year. All the people I mentioned who had it are now better -- without taking the Tamiflu.

That's good news, but the possibility of further mutation is worrying.