In an article earlier in the week, I managed to call the virus responsible for the expected UK epidemic of “swine flu” H5N1, whereas it is actually H1N1 (error since corrected). But my error was somewhat forgiveable. The current system for naming flu viruses is just hopeless. The “current seasonal flu” – which people got last year and are already getting this year – is also called H1N1, despite being different. The “deadly” 1918 virus was also called H1N1. In fact most types of flu virus are called H1N1.
A virus has two components, an outer package and some genetic material (DNA or RNA) inside. In the case of the flu virus, the package contains (amongst other things) two proteins on its outer surface: haemagglutinin (=H) and neuraminidase (=N). Birds seem to have more varieties of flu virus than any other creature. There are 16 variants of H, and 9 variants of N.
When I was at Cambridge in the late 1960s it was believed that flu originated in China where peasants often kept ducks and other birds and pigs in close proximity. It was thought that viruses would jump between birds, pigs and man and periodically new and virulent strains would emerge. No one had any understanding of the process and there was much speculation that the next new strain could have rapid spread and high mortality. But it was possible to create vaccines, so the game was to wait until a new strain started to emerge and then go flat out to create and manufacture vaccine.
In any case, the nomenclature was designed as a crude classification for distinguishing between the many types of bird virus. It is not so useful for people, because only three H variants and two N variants seem to work in man, but there are many more than six (= 3 x 2) different strains. So we are stuck with a stupid naming system.
The matter seems to have been made worse by political correctness. The World Health Organization explained last month:
Dr Fukuda: As you know, since the emergence of the pandemic, the name of the virus has been a difficult issue for many reasons. In the past, we have seen how the naming of viruses by location can stigmatize those locations and we have also seen in this and in other episodes where associating the virus with one animal species or another, can really cause both anxiety and then fears about food and in this particular instance, about pork. So, in recognition of those issues, what WHO, FAO and OIE did, actually some weeks ago, was to get together several of the experts who work in these organizations and with many of the laboratory experts who work with these organizations, and then we had a meeting – a virtual meeting – in which these issues were discussed and one of the things that we wanted to do was make sure that any naming of the virus was scientifically accurate but also would avoid any kind of adverse reactions to the name or to minimize those as much as possible. Based on those discussions, what the experts decided – calling this a pandemic H1N1/09 virus – was a good way to distinguish it from the current seasonal H1N1 viruses and to do so, in a way which was scientifically sound, but also would avoid some of the stigma associated with other options.
The idea of a virtual press conference to report a virtual meeting to find a name sufficiently virtuous that it doesn’t upset pig farmers or governments seems somewhat surreal. Unsurprisingly, it was wasted effort since the H1N1/09 name has been virtually invisible, journalists have found it easier to remember “swine flu”.
If you want more detail on the genetics, Wikipedia does use H1N1/09. It also appears that the ideas that I learnt at Cambridge forty years ago have not changed much. Research often moves exceedingly slowly.
[Oddly enough I did not learn them from a course. A medical student, Raul Pereira, on a nearby staircase in New Court, Trinity, used to enjoy talking about the work his father did at the World Health Organization.]
Post a Comment