Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

medicalxpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 161 posts

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#131

Post by TeMPOraL »

torben-friis wrote: post #115
TeMPOraL wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of people go overboard with this, though, like taking flu reduction medicine with every single cold or using medication to go to work sick. American media seems especially accepting of people taking "flu medicine" over rest and recovery. This is not specific to America; it's a thing in the entire Western world, and probably beyond. Because it's not like we have any other choice. There is no slack in the system…

>Most people can't afford to have more than a few sick days in a year Sick days are unlimited in my country (and of course don’t count as vacation or similar). I think this is relatively standard for European countries, though not 100% sure.

They may be on paper, but I can't imagine taking one every time you have a runny nose or a sore throat. Everyone from your employer to social insurance[0] will start looking at you funny. It's just unexpected, even though it's how you're supposed to be handling infectious diseases to prevent spread.

--

[0] - Or whoever is backing the free healthcare in your country.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#132

Post by sph »

xorcist wrote: post #121
nikolay wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't take any antipyretics, nor have I given to my kids, unless the fever is 39-39.5°C and climbing. Otherwise, you're sabotaging your own innate immune system!

Sabotaging is much too strong a word. The fever is not essential to the immune system. If taking down the fever makes it easier to cook food or do something else that is important to you, go ahead. We have had fever suppressors for so long now that we know they are not harmful to the immune system in any meaningful way. A fever should be temporary. If you go several days with 39 C then something is wrong and you shou…

> The fever is not essential to the immune system

Nonsense. From Wikipedia:

Fever is thought to contribute to host defense, as the reproduction of pathogens with strict temperature requirements can be hindered, and the rates of some important immunological reactions are increased by temperature. Fever has been described in teaching texts as assisting the healing process in various ways, including:

- increased mobility of leukocytes

- enhanced leukocyte phagocytosis

- decreased endotoxin effects

- increased proliferation of T cells

[...]

Studies using warm-blooded vertebrates suggest that they recover more rapidly from infections or critical illness due to fever.

---

Fever makes your immune system work better, and many pathogens don't like the higher temps.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#133

Post by qcnguy »

0dayz wrote: post #107
qcnguy wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason they said it wasn't possible wasn't that making a vaccine was physically impossible. They said a vaccine might never arrive because vaccines have such a poor track record against respiratory viruses. The assumption the (cough) experts were making was that nobody would roll out a useless vaccine. But they would! The COVID vaccine was advertised as 95% effective after two shots and done, and within months it…

Any source on these claims?

Research any history of the flu vaccines, Hoskins effect, why there's no vaccine against the common cold etc.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#134

Post by andor »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #130
m4rtink wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention it is an infectious disease that they will spread to other people if they go to work.

By the time they can tell it's "the flu" and not just "a cold", they've been infecting everyone for days already. Not to mention, cold is an infectious disease too (it's literally the same disease , just a weaker variant caused by strains that evolved their potency away), it too will spread to other people if they go to work.

Some people colloquially call a cold "the flu", but the common cold is very different to influenza. Please don't spread misinformation.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#135

Post by xorcist »

sph wrote: post #132
xorcist wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sabotaging is much too strong a word. The fever is not essential to the immune system. If taking down the fever makes it easier to cook food or do something else that is important to you, go ahead. We have had fever suppressors for so long now that we know they are not harmful to the immune system in any meaningful way. A fever should be temporary. If you go several days with 39 C then something is wrong and you shou…

> The fever is not essential to the immune system Nonsense. From Wikipedia: Fever is thought to contribute to host defense, as the reproduction of pathogens with strict temperature requirements can be hindered, and the rates of some important immunological reactions are increased by temperature. Fever has been described in teaching texts as assisting the healing process in various ways, including: - increased mobilit…

> Fever makes your immune system work better,

Right. But it's not essential to the immune system. The immune system doesn't shut down completely just because you temporarily bring the fever down.

It's one thing to avoid overusing painkillers, and while I personally can appreciate that sentiment, over the counter painkillers are pretty well tested and you should not be afraid to use them, without reasonable limits. Denying children painkillers when they ask for them sounds dangerously close to going a step too far!

There are no studies that indicate you can "harden" your immune system by denying pain killers in the long run. You shouldn't be afraid of painkillers, just as you shouldn't be afraid of having fever.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#136

Post by dragonwriter »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #130
m4rtink wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention it is an infectious disease that they will spread to other people if they go to work.

By the time they can tell it's "the flu" and not just "a cold", they've been infecting everyone for days already. Not to mention, cold is an infectious disease too (it's literally the same disease , just a weaker variant caused by strains that evolved their potency away), it too will spread to other people if they go to work.

> Not to mention, cold is an infectious disease too (it's literally the same disease, just a weaker variant caused by strains that evolved their potency away)

“The cold” is actually any of a wide variety of different viral diseases (caused by various forms of rhinovirus, coronavirus [0], and, I think, a few other kinds of viruses), none of which are flu (influenza virus). It is not a less potent flu.

[0] so calling COVID-19 “a bad cold” is correct from a certain point of view, despite being substantively misleading.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#137

Post by basisword »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #128
benterix wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people can't afford to have more than a few sick days in a year I believe it's true in the USA, but not necessarily in Europe. It's quite normal that you have two infections a year, plus sometimes your kid catches something at a completely different time, so the law protects you in these situations.

Yes, but there's what the law says, and there's process, and there's expectations. You can't just take a legal sick day each time you have a runny nose (good luck finding a doctor that fast), and even if you could, you'd quickly stand out. "Two infections a year" is an average for adults who power through remaining ones with painkillers and cough meds; if they didn't, we'd be talking 5+, probably closer to 10 if they…

It sounds like you just have a terrible employer. If I get the flu, I'm taking a few days off. If I feel poorly, I'm not working. Never been a problem with any employer. 5-10 sicks days a year is completely normal. You cannot be fired for this.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#138

Post by helij »

tarsinge wrote: post #120
TeMPOraL wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of people go overboard with this, though, like taking flu reduction medicine with every single cold or using medication to go to work sick. American media seems especially accepting of people taking "flu medicine" over rest and recovery. This is not specific to America; it's a thing in the entire Western world, and probably beyond. Because it's not like we have any other choice. There is no slack in the system…

But flu isn’t just a cold, it’s a serious disease. If they are sick to the point they have fever then they can’t really afford to not rest as it has a cost in the form of longer health debt. And even short term, by letting the fever run and resting and being 100% operational can be more productive than being a zombie on medications for weeks.

People mix common cold with flu all the time. If you have the flu you usually can't even go out of bed, even with medication.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#139

Post by TeMPOraL »

dragonwriter wrote: post #136
TeMPOraL wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the time they can tell it's "the flu" and not just "a cold", they've been infecting everyone for days already. Not to mention, cold is an infectious disease too (it's literally the same disease , just a weaker variant caused by strains that evolved their potency away), it too will spread to other people if they go to work.

> Not to mention, cold is an infectious disease too (it's literally the same disease, just a weaker variant caused by strains that evolved their potency away) “The cold” is actually any of a wide variety of different viral diseases (caused by various forms of rhinovirus, coronavirus [0], and, I think, a few other kinds of viruses), none of which are flu (influenza virus). It is not a less potent flu. [0] so calling C…

Fair, I was under the impression that some strains of influenza viruses are in the mix too, but apparently they're distinct and not part of the cocktail (surprising, given how the other viruses found themselves bucketed like this - they evolved to lose potency over time; I'd expect influenza strains would be on the same trajectory).

Still, my main point holds - you usually can't tell by symptoms alone, whether it's a common cold or a flu. In case you get severe symptoms, by the time you can, you've already been infectious for some time. So either way, the right time to call in sick is when you first notice the early symptoms - stuffy/runny nose, cough, headache, elevated body temperature. But obviously nobody does that, because it would mean calling in sick at random a dozen or more times per year.

Post-lockdown COVID was the only time I know of in the last few decades, and a brief time indeed, when it was socially acceptable to react to potential symptoms at the right time.

Re: Bird flu viruses are resistant to fever, making them a major threat to humans

#140

Post by TeMPOraL »

basisword wrote: post #137
TeMPOraL wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but there's what the law says, and there's process, and there's expectations. You can't just take a legal sick day each time you have a runny nose (good luck finding a doctor that fast), and even if you could, you'd quickly stand out. "Two infections a year" is an average for adults who power through remaining ones with painkillers and cough meds; if they didn't, we'd be talking 5+, probably closer to 10 if they…

It sounds like you just have a terrible employer. If I get the flu, I'm taking a few days off. If I feel poorly, I'm not working. Never been a problem with any employer. 5-10 sicks days a year is completely normal. You cannot be fired for this.

If you get the flu, and know it's a flu, you're a few days too late to take sick leave for it to be useful at preventing infecting your co-workers.

5-10 days of sick leave a year is perfectly normal, because that's how much people need to cover serious infections that cannot be easily powered through with meds.

Post reply on HN