Pensito Flu Update: Role of Bacterial Infection
You know what we’re not getting from the mainstream media coverage of the H1N1 flu? Insights like this one from ProMed:
I have been following the ProMed “swine flu” updates and noticed an interesting omission. I am a virologist who works on RNA viruses
(including flu), and I feel that the reports are “viro-centric,” i.e., heavily biased towards blaming everything on influenza and not enough speculation about co-infections. I certainly agree that there should be more funding for basic respiratory disease research and am pleased that President Obama asked for an additional USD 1.5 billion to help out, but I do not think spending it all on influenza vaccine trials is wise.Three observations make it highly likely that the “flu” fatalities are due to bacterial co-infections. First, a study from Baylor (Ramilio et al, Blood, 2007) profiling humans with flu symptoms found that greater than 30 percent of the fatalities were in people with bacterial-influenza co-infections. Knowing the inadequacy of the diagnostics, I would assume the number of co-infections is much higher than 30 percent, possibly even 90 percent in fatalities.
Second, the index case in Mexico was a small boy who got severely sick, but his doctor gave him an antibiotic (usually for bacterial infections) and he survived. The fact that he got better two days after an antibiotic may indicate that he had a bacterial infection in addition to a flu infection.
Third, one of the earliest Mexican deaths was a diabetic woman in her 40s. A lung biopsy contained influenza. Several people around her had respiratory diseases, but none of them were positive for influenza! This means that it was possible she too had both flu and bacterial infections that led to her death.
