Avian Influenza in Cattle – Inconsistencies and Questions (Part 1)

Similarities to the COVID-19 pandemic and new concerns

Recent weeks have seen increasingly worrisome reports of the widespread emergence of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A (H5N1) clade 2.3.4.4b Virus. Until March 2024, no outbreaks of this virus clade had occurred in domestic cattle. Then, on March 25, U.S. federal officials announced that the highly pathogenic bird-flu strain had been detected in dairy cows. By April 27, 2024, the USDA confirmed “infections” with this strain in 34 dairy herds in nine U.S. states.

The press keeps warning that the virus could further evolve, and gain virulence and adaptions to humans. Despite officials and MSM consistently using terms such as “infected,” “virus,” and “confirmed,” it is unclear, what has been detected. Was it mere genetic fragments or was it a real virus that had jumped species and learned to infect and sicken mammals such as cattle?  

Naturally, HPAI viruses can be transmitted by wild birds to domestic poultry and other bird and animal species. The FDA concedes that even though bird flu viruses do not normally infect humans, sporadic human infections have occurred. What they did not admit was that neither of these has ever led to a pandemic despite the ongoing fear-mongering that this is imminent.

Notably, USDA and China have been doing gain-of-function work on H5N1 bird flu since 2021 – the time when the current outbreak seemingly began. John S. Leake and Nicolas Hulscher point out that shockingly this work was done via serial passaging through mallard ducks - “the most abundant, wide-ranging duck on earth and can crossbreed with 63 other species.” If escaped from a lab, it would likely infect the wild migratory ducks that fly all over North America and Eurasia and literally contaminate “EVERYTHING.”

Ignoring obvious gaps in the current storyline of how the virus arrived in North America, and once again blaming nature rather than artificial lab work, the WHO warns,

“Scientists worry that as the H5N1 virus spends more time in mammals, it could evolve to more easily infect people and spread among them through the air. ”

As I have taken a closer look at the emerging narrative, this revealed numerous analogs to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as additional inconsistencies and serious problems.

The focus of the last few weeks

A unique aspect of the new narrative is that of food and feed. On April 23, 2024, Politico reported “Bird Flu Virus Fragments Detected in Retail Milk in U.S.”

The article is immediately contradicting itself (some may think it is deliberately misleading).

Politico admits that “It’s still unclear whether the detected virus was active.” But they again and again stress that “the virus” has been detected.

Meanwhile, numerous media outlets have reported the presence of the virus. Yet, when it comes to specifics of how the virus has been isolated and whether or not a live virus has been found, we encounter gaps and inconsistencies. For example, on April 25, 2024, the FDA announced that for milk,

“about 1 in 5 of the retail samples tested are quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)-positive for HPAI viral fragments...”

Notably, the FDA goes on to say that this does not indicate we have a live virus, emphasizing that

“As previously noted and outlined in our summary below, qPCR-positive results do not necessarily represent actual virus that may be a risk to consumers. Additional testing is required to determine whether the intact pathogen is still present and if it remains infectious, which would help inform a determination of whether there is any risk of illness associated with consuming the product. The FDA is further assessing any positive findings through egg inoculation tests, a gold-standard for determining if infectious virus is present.”

The main point they are making is that at present there is no infectious virus in retail milk. But the press paints a different picture.

“The ‘milk supply is safe’: Biden administration scrambles to reassure Americans as bird flu spreads,” we are told. These and many other media outlets stress the presence of the pathogen – as if it had been confirmed and the live virus had been detected.

What are we dealing with – viral fragments or a whole live virus?

I have not seen any clear independent confirmation that a viable virus has been found. The way it is broadcast by MSM seems convincing. For example, on 4/25/24, we were told that

“bird flu has been detected in 33 dairy herds across eight states, according to the latest USDA data.”

Then, Nature magazine, in their 4/27/24 edition, writes that RNA tests revealed that the bird flu virus has been spreading for months already, much longer than previously thought. We are informed that the FDA had

“confirmed infections with the strain, named H5N1, in 34 dairy herds in nine states as of 30 April.”

I cannot comment on why this reported date is 3 days after the publication of the article. The important point is that meanwhile, officials not merely talk about a real virus (rather than fragments), but also that they now purport to have a clear understanding of the emergence of said “virus.”

“The outbreak likely began when the virus jumped from an infected bird to a cow, probably around late last December or early January.”

Note the similarity to the alleged zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2 – an undetected jump across species. For the bird flu virus, such a “single spillover” is believed to have happened around late December or early January. Since then, there has been a

“protracted, undetected spread of the virus — suggesting that more cattle than currently reported, across the United States and even in neighbouring regions, could have been infected with avian influenza.”

As before, there is the fear about the virus spreading “beyond symptomatic dairy herds.” While I do not want to suggest that COVID-19 was only asymptomatic, we do know that for the vast majority, the disease was mild. With SARS-CoV-2  being similar to seasonal influenza, the infection fatality rate (IFR) ended up being orders of magnitude lower than the alarming 3.4% that the WHO had predicted.

Ironically, with the bird flu, even though the alleged spread had started asymptomatically, the USDA is now emphasizing that their agency, along with the CDC, state veterinary, and public health officials, are now investigating the “illness among dairy cows.”

So, what does this illness look like?

Clinical signs

Cattle allegedly infected with the bird flu virus are mostly asymptomatic. Even though the USDA also lists some clinical signs, they are all extremely mild (figure below)

Source: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/hpai-livestock-case-definition.pdf

I find it ironic that here the focus is not entirely on the purportedly affected animal. Rather, it shifts to the milk – and thereby to the consumer. The information comes across as “The milk looks abnormal. It may be dangerous.”

Diagnostic Criteria

The definition of a “case” is detailed by the USDA. One criterion is how the alleged agent causes sickness to the animals. Yet, as just described, there are no clear clinical signs. Yet, the USDA makes sure to highlight that ‘The virus has been characterized as highly pathogenic per cleavage site analysis and bioassay testing.” This will certainly help to instill fear, even if the attribute “highly pathogenic” refers to severe impact in birds, not in humans.

The second diagnostic criterion specifies the selection of the samples. These are taken from milk and mammary tissue  - but only for lactating animals; for non-lactating animals, they say that deep nasal swabs should be used instead (why does this sound familiar?).

(Note: the extensive focus on milk – where the virus allegedly is found in surprisingly high concentrations – makes it appear as if the greatest danger of the virus may be to the consumer  - and sure enough, on April 15, Colombia restricted the import of U.S.  beef and beef products coming due to bird flu in dairy cows. Yet, the “diagnosis” is shifted to nasal discharge. I have never analyzed such a discharge but I have seen where those animals are sticking their nose into! Naturally, cattle will pick up and inhale all sorts of environmental agents which will get filtered through their mucosal immune system. It should not be a surprise that environmentally derived genetic material can be identified from nasal swabs. This does not mean that the animal is infected by a pathogen, meaning that these viruses can get into animal cells, replicate, cause sickness, or that somehow this pathogen could be transmitted and adversely affect other cows or those consuming their products).

The final “diagnostic” step rests on real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays. Details are given by the USDA who write that a “lineage-specific pathotyping PCR assay is available for H5 clade 2.3.4.4b at NVSL.”

I don’t think I need to reiterate the details of the “diagnostic” disaster we had about “detecting” SARS-CoV-2. Numerous flaws in how the PCR test was misused have been clearly exposed (many of them I summarized in my book).

Likewise, with the bird flu virus, we don’t know if the “test” wrongfully picks up contaminants, real viral fragments, or a whole virus. Is there evidence of a live virus infecting cattle, and if so, what is its load? Or are consequent to insane Ct values, most positive cases merely false positives?

Case Definition

The USDA distinguishes between a “Suspect Case,” a “Presumptive Positive Case,” and a “Confirmed Positive Case.” Importantly, for the former two, illness is not a crucial key parameter. The animal does not need to show unique clinical signs. For example, a  Presumptive Positive Case is determined by “rRT-PCR with or without the presence of compatible illness.”

Here we go again! Mullis, the original inventor of the PCR test explicitly stated that this powerful routine must not be used for diagnostic purposes. It has numerous important applications, but not to diagnose disease, especially when the animal does not even show any characteristic clinical signs - or none, for that matter!

Based on a positive PCR test, the USDA promises to establish a “Confirmed Positive Case” via

“Identification of HPAI H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b NVSL by molecular assay; whole genome sequencing will be conducted to determine genotype.”

However, despite much reduced costs and improved technologies for whole genome sequencing, it is still a huge commitment and truly cannot be done at a large scale. Certainly, during a feared, staged, or real pandemic, it will be impossible to do WGS for all the many animals in question.

Genetic tests

On April 21, 2024, the “USDA Publishes H5N1 Influenza A Virus Genetic Sequences on publicly available site.” It said it made 239 genetic sequences from the U.S. H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b influenza virus publicly available. It is important to realize what these are.

There is no evidence these are from “proven isolates” from “infected” cattle only.

To me, it seems questionable if this establishes that WGS was explicitly and solely obtained from a virus isolated from cattle alone. Cattle are exposed to viral genetic contaminants in numerous ways. There is no indicator that such exogenous genetic matter was separated from genetic information derived from a virus that purportedly had managed to live and replicate in cows.

Although the USDA data dump includes some 10 gigabytes of sequencing information from 239 animals, including cows, chickens, and cats, to the dismay of many, the publicly released data do not include certain critical information. According to Nature, “[s]cientists lack information about each sample’s precise collection date and the state where it was collected,” describing such gaps as “very abnormal.”

Outlook

The current storyline that the bird virus has been able to infect and replicate in cattle is now being used to push the development and deployment of vaccines. Part 2 will dive deeper into inconsistencies and contradictions surrounding the current narrative.