Die @Leopoldina hat gerade eine Stellungnahme veröffentlicht. Sie fordert:
- die Einführung einer Impfpflicht
- neue Maßnahmen, um Kontakte zu reduzieren (eine Art Lockdown light oder strikte, sanktionierte 2G-Regelung)
- Maskenpflicht und Tests an Schulen leopoldina.org/publikationen/…
@Leopoldina Die Stellungnahme ist kurz und ich würde mir wünschen, dass jeder (besonders jeder Politiker) sie liest.
Geht schon bei der Vorbemerkung los:
"Es ist zu befürchten, dass Teile der Politik und Öffentlichkeit die Dramatik der Situation nicht in ihrem vollen Ausmaß erfassen.”
@Leopoldina Zum Impfen:
- Mehr Berufsgruppen mit impfen lassen
- Impfzentren wieder auf (mit langen Öffnungszeiten)
- mehr “aufsuchende Impfangebote”
- Impfpflicht für Ärzte, Pfleger, etc
- Vorbereitung einer allgemeinen Impfpflicht
@Leopoldina Zur Kontaktreduktion:
Die Autoren machen zwei Vorschläge 1. Kontakte für alle jetzt sofort für wenige Wochen stark reduzieren
Das "würde bei stringenter Umsetzung den exponentiellen Anstieg der Neuinfektionen in der 4. Welle beenden”
@Leopoldina 2. 2G-Regeln konsequent durchsetzen
"Dies wird allerdings weniger effektiv als Option 1 sein, weshalb mit einem längeren Verlauf der 4. Welle und einer erhöhten Zahl von Todesopfern gerechnet werden muss”
@Leopoldina Zu Kindern/Jugendlichen:
"Unter Berücksichtigung der aufgeführten direkten und indirekten Folgen ist eine Impfung von Kindern und Jugendlichen ab fünf Jahren mit einem geeigneten Impfstoff zu empfehlen”
Außerdem:
- Maskenpflicht und Tests an Schulen
- Weihnachtsferien vorziehen
@Leopoldina Die Stellungnahme kritisiert dann noch die Änderung des Infektionsschutzgesetzes und endet mit einem interessanten Abschnitt zu “Wertfragen”:
@Leopoldina "Auch die Einführung einer allgemeinen Impfpflicht ist unter den aktuellen, vor einem Jahr so nicht vorhersehbaren Umständen ethisch und rechtlich gerechtfertigt: als letzte Maßnahme, um eine Impflücke zu schließen, die sich augenscheinlich anders nicht beheben lässt."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One question at the heart of the #h5n1 outbreak in US cows has been: Is there something special about this virus? Or is H5N1 generally able to do this and this particular version was just "in the right place at the right time"?
Quick thread, because it seems we have an answer
Researchers in Germany have done an experiment in a high-security lab infecting cows directly with the strain of #H5N1 circulating in cows in the US (B3.13) and infecting others with an #h5n1 strain from a wild bird in Germany.
(I wrote about the plans here: )science.org/content/articl…
In both cases they infected the udders directly through the teats and in both cases the animals got sick. They "showed clear signs of disease such as a sharp drop in milk production, changes in milk consistency and fever." That suggests there is nothing special about B3.13.
The thing that I find most frustrating about the entire mpox/gain-of-function debate is how the uncertainties that lie at the base of it all just become cemented as certainties that are then carried forward.
(If you know anything about me you know I love me some uncertainty...)
Most importantly: The interim report on the investigation into these experiments released on Tuesday numerous times calls clade II "more transmissible" or even "much more transmissible".
But that is a claim that has very little evidence at all.
In fact you can find plenty of literature that argue the exact opposite, that in fact clade I is more transmissible.
Just, as an example, here is Texas HHS:
"Clade I MPXV, which may be more transmissible and cause more severe infection than Clade II..." dshs.texas.gov/news-alerts/he…
Some more details on the latest (3rd) human case of #H5N1 #avianflu linked to the current outbreak in dairy cows:
- second case in Michigan but not linked to the other case (different farm)
- reported cough and eye discomfort with watery discharge
- given oseltamivir, isolating at home
"As with the previous two cases (one in Texas, one in Michigan), the person is a dairy farm worker with exposure to infected cows, making this another instance of probable cow-to-person spread."
"The patient reported upper respiratory tract symptoms including cough without fever, and eye discomfort with watery discharge. The patient was given antiviral treatment with oseltamivir, is isolating at home, and their symptoms are resolving."
A thought on communication:
In today’s presser's opening statement @USDA presented work on killing H5N1 in ground beef through cooking. They mentioned no virus being present at 160°F and 145°F. Only later when someone asked, they mentioned that at 120°F there was some virus left.
@USDA I have thought a lot about trust and transparency in the wake of the #covid19 pandemic and to me this seems exactly the kind of communication style that does not build trust.
Yet another lesson not learnt in my book...
Researchers at @USDA have done a “ground beef cooking study” to test at what temperature #H5N1 in meat is killed. To be clear: Tests have found no H5N1 in beef samples, so this was done “in the interest of scientific inquiry and to further reaffirm consumer confidence”
@USDA So researchers added #H5N1 to ground beef patties then cooked them:
“There was no virus present in the burgers cooked to 145° [Fahrhenheit] internal temperature, or roughly medium, or 160°, which equates with a well done burger, which is the recommended cooking temperature”
@USDA At lower temperatures, some virus survived. "Cooking to I believe it was 120° [Fahrenheit] did show that there was virus still in the cooked hamburger patty, although at much, much reduced levels."
(But remember that these were experimentally infected burgers.)
#h5n1 presser by @USDA and @HHSGov just ended. Had some some interesting bits (but what I would really love to see is still... serology):
@USDA @HHSGov - USDA researchers have done a “ground beef cooking study” to test at what temperature #H5N1 in meat is killed. To be clear: Tests have found no H5N1 in beef samples, so this was done “in the interest of scientific inquiry and to further reaffirm consumer confidence”
@USDA @HHSGov So the researchers added H5N1 to ground beef patties then cooked them. “There was no virus present in the burgers cooked to 145 degrees internal temperature, or roughly medium, or 160 degrees, which equates with a well done burger, which is the recommended cooking temperature”