[Ibon]

I moved some Zika posts over here from another thread. They can be found up thread. I think the interesting topic discussed is how difficult it is to eradicate a species of mosquito that is adapted to dirty stagnant water and how many hidden niches of such habitat one can find in a typical urban setting.

[Ibon]

Before we get all excited that the Zika virus can act as a long awaited for agent in the Overshoot Predators arsenal to cut back on the plague of Kudzu Apes, let's consider an answer from the CDC

Can a previous Zika virus infection cause someone who later becomes pregnant to have an infant with microcephaly?
We do not know the risk to the baby if a woman is infected with Zika virus while she is pregnant. However, Zika virus infection does not pose a risk of birth defects for future pregnancies. Zika virus usually remains in the blood of an infected person for about a week. The virus will not cause infections in a baby that is conceived after the virus is cleared from the blood.

http://www.cdc.gov/zika/pregnancy/question-answers.html

It appears from all available evidence and information to date that the risk of microcephaly is on those women pregnant already when being bitten. Future pregnancies of females infected with the virus are not affected.

This is a minor threat in my opinion and not a significant disease to affect human populations... from current information.

I was frightened and torn between being heartbroken and morbidly hopeful back when the ebola outbreak started reaching urban areas that we perhaps were going to see a disease really having the punch to put a dent in our problem of over population. This Zika virus in my opinion is an impotent lesser cousin.

[Timo]

Thanks, Ibon. That does help my understanding of the virus.

Of course, there's also the requisite fear of the virus' mutation into some other form where it remains in the bloodstream for much longer periods of time. We must always cling the the fear factor and worship the OP.

[Tanada]

The thing is Zika is not actually a new virus, it is just new to the American continents. It came to the attention of western trained doctors in the 1950's and was undoubtedly present long before anyone wrote anything down about it. Humans in Africa and Asia have been dealing with it for many generations, the idea that suddenly the mixed European/African/Asian populations of North and South America will suffer some huge catastrophe is just media hype, with little reflection in reality.

[Timo]

T-What you said is very true. My only question, or concern, however, is that from media reports, anyway, the virus in Brazil seems to be spreading much faster than we've witnessed in other countries. This may or may not be true. Maybe the fact that it is new to the America's has caused us commoners to over exaggerate the threat and the manifestations of that threat. Or maybe the virus is actually spreading faster in the Americas due to some environmental utopia for that specific species of mosquito. I find that hard to believe, but it's a question, nonetheless. Perhaps the perception of a rapid spread of the virus over here (Americas) is that no one here has yet developed the antibodies to the virus, unlike in African countries where this first originated. Yes, this virus has been around for decades, and during those decades, those who have been exposed to it have developed (presumably) a natural resistance to its infection. Over here, it's brand-spakin' new, and no one has any resistance to it at all, ergo, we succumb to it much more easily than people in Africa. If that is true, then a vaccine should be relatively easy to produce. Just isolate that resistant antibody from people who've successfully survived, or not succumbed at all, and reproduce that antibody for the rest of the world.

I know. I know. Always easier said than done. I'm a victim of public education. I never studied chemistry.That was my choice, and as they say, ignorance is bliss.

La-la-la-la-la-la!

[Tanada]

T-What you said is very true. My only question, or concern, however, is that from media reports, anyway, the virus in Brazil seems to be spreading much faster than we've witnessed in other countries. This may or may not be true. Maybe the fact that it is new to the America's has caused us commoners to over exaggerate the threat and the manifestations of that threat. Or maybe the virus is actually spreading faster in the Americas due to some environmental utopia for that specific species of mosquito. I find that hard to believe, but it's a question, nonetheless. Perhaps the perception of a rapid spread of the virus over here (Americas) is that no one here has yet developed the antibodies to the virus, unlike in African countries where this first originated. Yes, this virus has been around for decades, and during those decades, those who have been exposed to it have developed (presumably) a natural resistance to its infection. Over here, it's brand-spakin' new, and no one has any resistance to it at all, ergo, we succumb to it much more easily than people in Africa. If that is true, then a vaccine should be relatively easy to produce. Just isolate that resistant antibody from people who've successfully survived, or not succumbed at all, and reproduce that antibody for the rest of the world.

I know. I know. Always easier said than done. I'm a victim of public education. I never studied chemistry.That was my choice, and as they say, ignorance is bliss.

La-la-la-la-la-la!

There is a phenomenon called a 'virgin field epidemic' where a never before exposed population catches a new contagious disease. The most common example used are the native Americans who when exposed to Small Pox suffered up to 80 percent fatality rate from catching the disease while Europeans who have been exposed for hundreds of years had a 12-20 percent fatality rate. Some historians believe that the first exposure of Europe to Small Pox during the Roman Empire lead to a 40 percent or greater depopulation paving the way for the Barbarians getting invited in as military auxiliaries. Small Pox looks to have originated in the middle east possibly Persia(Iran) or Iraq where cattle were first domesticated. Other diseases like Measles also had a high mortality rate when first introduced. Zika however has a influenza like effect, fever, headache, body aches, low mortality rate.

US Centers for Disease Control now placing the virus at alert level two. Zika spreads through mosquito bites in affected regions, producing mild flu-like symptoms that rarely require hospitalisation and a negligible mortality rate. The virus can be readily controlled through effective mosquito control procedures, such as destroying the infected insects and larvae, or insecticide use.

Also the microencephally effect is disputed, there has been no concrete data gathered showing that Zika is the cause of the spike in cases. The problem is there have always been a certain number of cases every year, and Zika symptoms can be so mild that the woman in question might never have even known they were sick, or they could have an extreme case and end up hospitalized themselves. That detail alone is a confounding factor, and testing a woman who has a microencephalitic baby for antibodies is not effective because she might have had the illness long before she got pregnant or right before she delivers the baby, and in either case the disease would not have effected the pregnancy.
The unfortunate fact is many drugs come with pregnancy and nursing warning because they can alter development of the baby both before and after birth during early progression. There is even a remote chance the women could be impacted by mosquito repellents applied during pregnancy in an attempt to prevent Zika. In other words, we just do not know enough yet to reach conclusions.

[Timo]

Thank, T. I was thinking about Native Americans just as you were mentioning them in your reply.

But, how does your understanding of Zika, or lack thereof, jive with Ibon's report that the CDC has determined that the virus is very short-lived inside any infected person? As you said, there's a lot we simply do not know. Your understanding seems to differ with Ibon's. Or maybe it's me, and i'm not fully understanding either of you. That, btw, is a valid possibility.

[dohboi]

I hadn't heard that there is some doubt about the connection between Zika virus and microencephaly, though I haven't really focused really hard on this. Can you give us a link or reference about it, T?

There are two important differences between this and the seemingly much more scary Ebola:

1) The very fact that it is often mostly asymptomatic to the carrier (unlike Ebola's usually fairly sudden onset of pretty disturbing symptoms and death) means that it can migrate much faster and farther than Ebola ever did and establish itself in new areas were ever the right insect vectors are common (and those areas are, of course, spreading with GW)

2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember Ebola (or really pretty much any other disease threat) prompting entire countries to warn their citizens not to have any kids.

The disease itself doesn't have to directly affect many people or babies to have a pretty big impact (at least in the short term) on (at least local/national/regional) birth rates.

It may be that it won't end up putting 'much of a dent' in population numbers, but--depending on how fast it spreads, how countries react, and how fast it is effectively controlled--it seems to me that it certainly does have a potential to effect population numbers. Particularly since it could spread to much of South Asia, Africa and MENA where many of the highest birth rates in the world are.

[dohboi]

And then there's:

Potential Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus

(See the Whole CDC Report Here)

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/21/2/14-1363_article

Yikes!

[vox_mundi]

Genetically Modified Mosquito May Become Weapon Against Zika

Genetically modified mosquitoes that would help fight the Zika virus are getting urgent attention from U.S. regulators as global health officials raise alarms about the pathogen’s spread.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is in the final stages of reviewing an application from Intrexon Corp.’s Oxitec unit to conduct a field trial in the Florida Keys, Oxitec Chief Executive Officer Hadyn Parry said in a phone interview. Parry wasn’t able to provide further details on the timing of an FDA decision.

Oxitec genetically modifies the males in a breed of mosquito known as Aedes aegypti -- responsible for transmitting Zika, Dengue, Chikungunya and Yellow Fever -- so that their offspring die young.

Maybe they'll start genetically modifying humans next.

[dohboi]

My thoughts, exactly, vox.

And now, Canada:

http://www.cknw.com/2016/01/29/four-con ... in-canada/

Four confirmed cases of Zika virus in Canada

[Tanada]

Thank, T. I was thinking about Native Americans just as you were mentioning them in your reply.

But, how does your understanding of Zika, or lack thereof, jive with Ibon's report that the CDC has determined that the virus is very short-lived inside any infected person? As you said, there's a lot we simply do not know. Your understanding seems to differ with Ibon's. Or maybe it's me, and i'm not fully understanding either of you. That, btw, is a valid possibility.

The two are in complete harmony, when your body fights off a virus it does so by creating antibodies that actively kill or bind with the virus making it harmless. After the body does that you carry the antibodies in your blood, but all that tells doctors is that you were exposed at some time. It doesn't tell them if the exposure was a year before a woman got pregnant or the day after, just that at some time in the past she was infected with Zika.

[dohboi]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/opini ... .html?_r=0

Now we’ve got an outbreak on our hands, and although the symptoms of Zika itself are absent to mild for most, for some there can be devastating consequences to infection. An increasing number of infected women have given birth to babies with microcephaly, which causes small heads and brain damage. We’re learning that Zika can lead to Guillain-Barré syndrome, a dangerous autoimmune disorder that can cause paralysis. Some believe we need more scientific data to confirm these more severe manifestations. I don’t agree; I believe the evidence is already compelling.

We shouldn’t have needed thousands of babies born with severe birth defects or people of all ages developing life-threatening autoimmune paralysis to remind us that mosquitoes pose a serious health threat.

Dengue viruses, which are also transmitted by these two mosquito species, caused 2.3 million cases of dengue fever and far more serious dengue hemorrhagic fever in 2013 in the same countries in the Americas that have been, or will be, affected by Zika.

These included more than 37,000 severe illnesses and 1,300 deaths. And yet these numbers hardly raised an eyebrow in the United States. If we had paid more attention then, we might be more prepared now.

Zika is here to stay in the Western Hemisphere; it will be part of life for many years to come

[Tanada]

I hadn't heard that there is some doubt about the connection between Zika virus and microencephaly, though I haven't really focused really hard on this. Can you give us a link or reference about it, T?

Here is the quote from the CDC report,
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6503e2.htm

In early 2015, an outbreak of Zika virus, a flavivirus transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes, was identified in northeast Brazil, an area where dengue virus was also circulating. By September, reports of an increase in the number of infants born with microcephaly in Zika virus-affected areas began to emerge, and Zika virus RNA was identified in the amniotic fluid of two women whose fetuses had been found to have microcephaly by prenatal ultrasound. The Brazil Ministry of Health (MoH) established a task force to investigate the possible association of microcephaly with Zika virus infection during pregnancy and a registry for incident microcephaly cases (head circumference ≥2 standard deviations [SD] below the mean for sex and gestational age at birth) and pregnancy outcomes among women suspected to have had Zika virus infection during pregnancy. Among a cohort of 35 infants with microcephaly born during August–October 2015 in eight of Brazil’s 26 states and reported to the registry, the mothers of all 35 had lived in or visited Zika virus-affected areas during pregnancy, 25 (71%) infants had severe microcephaly (head circumference >3 SD below the mean for sex and gestational age), 17 (49%) had at least one neurologic abnormality, and among 27 infants who had neuroimaging studies, all had abnormalities. Tests for other congenital infections were negative. All infants had a lumbar puncture as part of the evaluation and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were sent to a reference laboratory in Brazil for Zika virus testing; results are not yet available. Further studies are needed to confirm the association of microcephaly with Zika virus infection during pregnancy and to understand any other adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with Zika virus infection. Pregnant women in Zika virus-affected areas should protect themselves from mosquito bites by using air conditioning, screens, or nets when indoors, wearing long sleeves and pants, using permethrin treated clothing and gear, and using insect repellents when outdoors. Pregnant and lactating women can use all U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-registered insect repellents according to the product label.

Note that Zika virus fragments were found in the amniotic fluid of 2 babies who were diagnosed with microcephaly via ultrasound. This was considered a strong enough link that 35 additional children with microcephaly were given spinal taps after birth and those samples were sent to a lab for testing. Unfortunately the test results have not yet come in or been released. Infants developing in utero have no disease resistance, they count on their mothers immune system to prevent anything from getting through to them. Viruses are tiny little pieces of DNA and RNA that can pass through the placental system much more easily than bacteria or parasites.

It is possible but not confirmed that Zika infection, probably in the first few weeks of development, can cause some infants to develop microcephaly. Because the virus is only infective for about a week after the mother gets it from whatever source it is also likely that the only infants afflicted with microcephaly are those undergoing a specific phase of development. Viruses work by hijacking the DNA of the host, ordering it to build duplicate viruses instead of doing whatever work it is supposed to be doing. For a fertilized egg to develop into a healthy newborn it has to go through a very long, very complex set of changes changing from a single small cell into about a Trillion very specialized cells. By interrupting the progression of skull/brain/nervous system a virus can cause birth defects.

You may remember that certain drugs also cause birth defects, most recently in the USA was the Thalidomide disaster when thousands of babies were born without limbs or with partial limbs because the drug interfered with that part of the development process. Ultimately 10,000 children world wide were poisoned by Thalidomide that was given to their mothers as a sedative and anti nausea medication to counteract morning sickness. 40 percent of them were so malformed they did not survive infancy.

That is what I was thinking of when I wrote that some other factor like a mosquito repellent used in Brazil could turn out to be the cause instead of the virus.

[dohboi]

Thanks, T. It looks like they have a pretty strong correlation (which is, of course, never by itself sufficient) and some hints at causation, but no real proof till those spinal tap samples come in, if even then. Still, that seems to have been enough to cause multiple countries to warn people not to have kids. That seems like a pretty extreme precaution to take if the evidence is so slim.

I do remember the Thalidomide thing. Are you just posing it as a general example of how a chemical can disrupt development of the fetus, or are you suggesting that there is some chemical relationship between Thalidomide and common mosquito repellents? Are the repellents radically different in Brazil and some of these other countries than elsewhere? If not, wouldn't we expect to see a much more widespread occurrence of these conditions wherever repellents were used? All of these need careful epidemiological studies, of course, rather than just our wag's, to get to anything certain.

But as long as international organizations, governments and the media are linking this virus with these birth defects, and issuing warnings accordingly, I would expect quite a bit of suppression of births in the areas affected, just from the fear bearing a deformed child. Wouldn't you?

[Ulenspiegel]

As I understood the high "infection rate" in Brasil is a result changed methodology. They now count everything that may be an actual infection. In most cases it is false alarm. The actual infection rate is probably more than one order of magnitude lower and not that much higher than in the last years IIRC.

[vox_mundi]

As I understood the high "infection rate" in Brasil is a result changed methodology. They now count everything that may be an actual infection. In most cases it is false alarm. The actual infection rate is probably more than one order of magnitude lower and not that much higher than in the last years IIRC.

Most cases implies a majority.

More than an order of magnitude lower implies greater than ten-fold reduction.

The question remains - how come

Microcephaly cases in all of 2014 = 140
Microcephaly cases in last 3 months = 4180

Did Brazil, global health agencies fumble Zika response?

The sketchy numbers behind Brazil’s Zika crisis

On Friday, the journal Nature published extracts from an eye-opening report by the medical body responsible for monitoring birth defects in Latin America. The report concluded that the apparent spike in babies with small heads “is probably due to active search and over-diagnosis.” This over-diagnosis is being spurred by intense media interest in the story, the report says, and the data so far collected is inconclusive on any connection between Zika and microcephaly.

... Lavinia Schüler-Faccini, a researcher at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, and president of the Brazilian Society of Genetic Medicine, says that she is certain that there has been a substantial increase in microcephaly cases. She notes that physicians began reporting a rise before the increased attention by health authorities, and the media began reporting a spike last November.

... None of the above discounts the fact that doctors acknowledge something strange is probably going on in northeastern Brazil.

Is the medical body responsible for monitoring birth defects in Latin America trying to cover their ass?

[dissident]

I just love this endless hair splitting BS. Reminds me of the climate change "debate". It is rather conclusive that Zika is responsible for the microcephaly in Brazil. What other explanation is there for the surge? Let's see the evidence.

Also, Zika cases were very intermittent in Africa. This is the first large scale outbreak since it was identified in 1947. It is quite possible that we are seeing the effect of a mutation.

[C8]

A couple of curve balls:

1. Won't the creation of thousands of microcephaly children strain social resources, medical budgets, and possibly national debt?

2. In a culture where rape is very common and abortion is seen as a sin (and hard to get) won't the number of these children explode?

3. Don't the odds of this thing mutating go up the more it spreads?

4. Aren't more diseases commingle resistant to treatment?

[dohboi]

Good question, C8. Who knows?