Situation update for Swine Flu in Ukraine

I find it very odd that this, and other swine flu  threads haven't found their way to the CT bin . . . I wonder what, or what thinking, that represents . . .

Recombinomics has proposed the theory that the recently discovered changes in the H1N1 receptor binding site genome may result in false negative swine flu tests.  They base this theory on the evidence that shows four recent severe swine flu cases that demonstrate a mutation that may cause an affinity for lung tissue, thereby resulting in infection starting in the lungs, rather than the throat, where it may be readily tested for by nasopharygeal swab. But is this a reasonable assumption?  Can we wisely base our decisions upon it?

Just curious if you've yet heard of any reports of vaccinated individuals still getting infected by the 'regular H1N1' or new mutated versions?

Haven't heard any yet, Ruhh . . . either anecdotally, or statistically.  I'm guessing that may very well happen, down the line, after the virus has had a chance to mutate more.  As was noted earlier in this thread, the 2009 swine flu virus has a six-fold greater mutation rate than seasonal flu, and it is being exposed to significant mutagenic pressure from vaccines and antivirals.  That's something I'm watching closely.

And, since the mutations that were detected in the Ukraine were discovered after the vaccine was administered to the public, we can't be sure that the vaccine did not actually contribute some of the genetic material that has recombined with the virus, possibly resulting in the "black lung" form that is being reported in the Ukraine. 

These are complex phenomena and complex issues.

I guess I'd rather listen to sound science then amature opinions.  Pay special attention to 9:50 to the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOmu2OhTzQ0

Sorry I haven't been too closely following the situation in Ukraine. Are some of the cases of the infected people that have recieved the vaccine?

Ruhh, the vaccine has absolutely nothing to do with mutations in H1N1, at least not any deadly mutations.  The real concern is in the amino acids changes D225G to be exact.  Watch the video I posted and you'll see. 

I don't know, Ruhh.  But they wouldn't have to be, in order for exchange with vaccine particles to be the mode of recombination for the original mutation.  Once the virus has recombined in a vaccinated individual, then, if it was able to cause a full blown infection, it could be transmitted to people who were not vaccinated.  Then, we would find the mutated virus in unvaccinated individuals.  Perhaps it would cause milder disease in the vaccinated individual, and then a fulminant disease in an unvaccinated individual.  I just don't know.   Like the entire pandemic itself, we may never find patient zero.

Of course, we're dealing entirely in hypotheticals here . . . No one, to my knowledge, knows what the mechanism of mutation was.  Experts don't even agree whether the first host was a pig or a human . . .  

We are definitely speculating here . . . In the absence of facts, that's about all we can do.  I'm comfortable with speculation, as long as we remember that it is just that . . . speculation.  As long as we keep it in perspective, I think that speculation allows us to consider all possibilities, rather than being offered one answer to our questions, and swallowing it whole.

I have a mental habit of keep my information in a hierarchy . . . It's a sort of mental filing and cross-referencing system that allows me to keep track of what is known absolutely, what is asserted but unproven, what comes from unreliable sources or sources with conflicts of interest, and what is speculative.  From there, I keep a sort of mental organization chart that connects the various pieces of information.  From there, I stand far back, and look at the picture formed, and try to discern which overall explanation accounts for all the facts without relying too much on unconfirmables.  It is really complicated to explain, but not so difficult to do, not that I've gotten used to it.  It's kind of like driving a car.  Driving requires all kinds of simultaneous coordinated motor, sensory, and cognitive skills that have to be well integrated to make an appropriate decision and to react appropriately.  But once one is used to driving, it's not so hard.

I realize that some folks are not so comfortable with speculation.  I suspect that you are not one of them, because you occasionally express interest in alternate theories.  I try to make it very clear when I am speculating so that those who are able to do the mental gymnastics can take part, and those who prefer a straighter course can go to the more conservative sources for their perceptions.  Some people prefer to be told what to think.  It's a matter of style and skills, I guess.  I don't do much speculation about, say, the stock market.  I don't know enough about it to speculate, intellectually or financially.  There are others here on CM who are willing to speculate about the various investment instruments, sometimes to rather extreme extents.  This does not bother me at all.  As long as everybody is clear about the difference between speculation and fact, then nobody should get hurt, except by their own foolishness.

Even Dr. Niman, on the Recombinomics site, has been careful to note that the D225G recombination may or may not be the cause of the new lung manifestations that are being seen in the Ukraine .  It is a candidate for speculation, since it is on the receptor binding site genome.  Everything beyond that is speculation.  One cannot absolutely rule out another cause for the disease states that we're seeing in the Ukraine.  There could be nutritional differences, genetic differences, or differences in the quality of health care.

Even Dr. Niman, in the recently posted audio recording, indicates that the D225G polymorphism is "the most likely", not "the only" possible cause of what is being seen in the Ukraine. 

Now, I'm not saying that it isn't causing the Ukraine phenomenon . . . Indeed, it seems entirely possible and likely that it is . . . I said just that, earlier in this thread.  But one man's analysis does not make a fact.  It must be held in perspective until proven.  I'm not the person to judge the quality of Dr. Niman's work.  But I would like to hear from his peers before proclaiming that we have the perp in the Ukraine lung crime.  And, I'd like to hear it from a source without ties to the vaccine industry.

I have no problem with speculation.  I engage in it regularly, myself.  But it is important not to take someone else's speculation as fact, no matter how authoritative they seem. 

If we were to take "credentials" of "experts" as our only criteria for analyzing what we've been seeing in the world today, then we'd all be listening to Ben Bernanke, not Chris Martenson, with regard to the economy.  But we don't, because Chris offers us fresh perspectives, some incisive speculation, and a peek into the thinking that leads him to believe as he does.  Subtlety of mind is a good trait, and one that I respect.