Search

The H5N1 virus (H5N1/97) that caused the bird flu incident in Hong Kong in 1997 has not been isolated since the poultry slaughter in late 1997. But the donor of its H5 hemagglutinin gene, Goose/Guangdong/1/96-like (Gs/Gd/96-like) virus, established a distinct lineage and continued to circulate in geese in the area. In 2000, a virus from the Goose/Guangdong/1/96 lineage was isolated for the first time from domestic ducks. Subsequently, it has undergone reassortment, and these novel reassortants now appear to have replaced Gs/Gd/96-like viruses from its reservoir in geese and from ducks. The internal gene constellation is also different from H5N1/97, but these variants have the potential for further reassortment events that may allow the interspecies transmission of the virus.

Retail live poultry markets (LPMs) may act as a reservoir of avian influenza viruses (AIV). In this study we test the hypothesis that a rest day in the LPMs where the stalls are completely emptied of poultry, cleansed, and restocked will reduce the isolation rates of avian influenza viruses. The isolation rate of H9N2 subtype viruses from chicken was significantly lower after the rest day than prior to it, indicating its impact in reducing transmission. In contrast, Newcastle disease virus (NDV) isolation rates appear unaffected by this intervention, possibly reflecting differences in herd immunity or virus transmission dynamics.

In 1997, outbreaks of highly pathogenic influenza A (H5N1) among poultry coincided with 18 documented human cases of H5N1 illness. Although exposure to live poultry was associated with human illness, no cases were documented among poultry workers (PWs). To evaluate the potential for avian-to-human transmission of H5N1, a cohort study was conducted among 293 Hong Kong government workers (GWs) who participated in a poultry culling operation and among 1525 PWs. Paired serum samples collected from GWs and single serum samples collected from PWs were considered to be anti-H5 antibody positive if they were positive by both microneutralization and Western blot testing. Among GWs, 3% were seropositive, and 1 seroconversion was documented. Among PWs, approximately 10% had anti-H5 antibody. More-intensive poultry exposure, such as butchering and exposure to ill poultry, was associated with having anti-H5 antibody. These findings suggest an increased risk for avian influenza infection from occupational exposure.

Outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza caused by HSN1 viruses were reported almost simultaneously in eight neighbouring Asian countries between December 2003 and January 2004, with a ninth reporting in August 2004, suggesting that the viruses had spread recently and rapidly. However, they had been detected widely in the region in domestic waterfowl and terrestrial poultry for several years before this, and the absence of widespread disease in the region before 2003, apart from localised outbreaks in the Hong Kong Special Autonomous Region (SAR), is perplexing. Possible explanations include limited virus excretion by domestic waterfowl infected with HSNI, the confusion of avian influenza with other serious endemic diseases, the unsanctioned use of vaccines, and the under-reporting of disease as a result of limited surveillance. There is some evidence that the excretion of the viruses by domestic ducks had increased by early 2004, and there is circumstantial evidence that they can be transmitted by wild birds. The migratory birds from which viruses have been isolated were usually sick or dead, suggesting that they would have had limited potential for carrying the viruses over long distances unless subclinical infections were prevalent. However, there is strong circumstantial evidence that wild birds can become infected from domestic poultry and potentially can exchange viruses when they share the same environment. Nevertheless, there is little reason to believe that wild birds have played a more significant role in spreading disease than trade through live bird markets and movement of domestic waterfowl Asian HSN1 viruses were first detected in domestic geese in southern China in 1996. By 2000, their host range had extended to domestic ducks, which played a key role in the genesis of the 2003/04 outbreaks. The epidemic was not dun to the introduction and spread of a single virus but was caused by multiple viruses which were genotypically linked to the Goose/GD/96 lineage via the haemagglutinin gene. The HSN1 viruses isolated from China, including the Hong Kong SAR, between 1999 and 2004 had u range of genotypes and considerable variability within genotypes. The rising incidence and widespread reporting of disease in 2003/04 can probably be attributed to the increasing spread of the viruses from existing reservoirs of infection in domestic waterfowl and live bird markets leading to greater environmental contamination. When countries in the region started to report disease in December 2003, others were alerted to the risk and disease surveillance and reporting improved. The H5N1 viruses have reportedly been eliminated from three of the nine countries that reported disease in 2003/04, hut they could be extremely difficult to eradicate from the remaining counties, owing to the existence of populations and, possibly, production and marketing sectors, in which apparently normal birds harbour the viruses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]