Showing posts with label viral. Show all posts
Showing posts with label viral. Show all posts

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Swine Flu H1N1 Level 4: Can business survive this after severe lay-offs

The business world is growing increasingly concerned about a quickly developing H1N1 swine flu outbreak, with cases now appearing all over the world, and hundreds more in Mexico.

This should ring loud alarm bells for IT managers and spur them on to take a close look at the dusty old influenza pandemic plans, developed several years ago in response to a potential bird flu pandemic.

The additional problem that IT managers are facing today, is that following the recent consolidations, layoffs and restructurings, they will have less staff and reduced capability to deal with events. They will also have disjointed and inadequate response plans to correct because the old ones were drafted in more favourable times. People who once took a pivotal role as part of a critical team, may now be on garden-leave, collecting unemployment money or re-assigned to another location or position.

Clearly, it is very important that managers pay close attention to what's going on; the H1N1 pandemic situation is a dynamic event and is still emerging. It has been developing quickly over a short period of time. This is something that needs to be monitored and taken very seriously.

Now, the World Health Organization has raised its threat level to Level 4 in its six-level scale because the swine flu currently has "a sustained limited human-to-human transmission."

While the business world figures out just what this means, the Contingency managers are already pushing and recommending that the business seriously reviews and updates their call lists and decision-making chains. It is essential that they close any gaps and weaknesses in plans caused by recent organisational restructuring and downsizing, in particular.

If an organisation has not developed a specific pandemic plan, then they should do so quickly. Develop one by concentrating on one key factor; making a continuity plan that is business focused and that considers a "significant absence" of employees. Give serious thought about how your business could support its clients and sustain services by the use of tele-working methods and virtual environments, from your employees homes.

The standard model used in pandemic planning is to consider what would happen to a business if 40% of the workforce was absent, for an extended period of time. In this case it would be pertinent to consider a range of options, taking into consideration absentee levels of between 25 and 40%.

The WHO is in the midst of its initial investigations of the illness, and they currently believe that it may not be anywhere near the threat envisaged, specifically if the bird flu became a human influenza pandemic.

Gartner Inc.'s response in 2006 was to suggest stringent measures to IT departments, such as storing 42 gallons of water per data centre worker, enough for a six-week quarantine. Even at the time this was felt to be excessive.

Asked if Gartner was offering any advice in response to the Mexican outbreak, analyst Ken McGee, the author of that Gartner report, said today that it will go into "full-force advisory mode" not when the virus jumps from birds or swine to people, but when it jumps from people to people. So, that will be quite soon then. Worryingly, it does show a slight lack of foresight and planning on Gartner's side, as well as a reactive rather than proactive response.

If nothing else, the Mexican situation will acts as a wake-up call for businesses and clients that need to develop meaningful infectious virus disease-related influenza plans. If you consider this as a meaningful step for you, then the next sensible thing to do would be to have your plans checked and reviewed by a risk and contingency expert. These simple measures are by far preferably to having a 'live' and potentially destructive test being inflicted upon your business by the virus itself, in whatever form it takes. Your choice or no choice.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

H1N1: The story behind the pandemic

The H1N1 influenza viruses consisting of a mixture of human, swine and bird strains (H5N1) are not new, they have been found before throughout history of mankind. However, there is a sense in which this virus could be regarded as partly man-made.

Flu viruses contain 8 strands of RNA, which code for 10 proteins. If two flu viruses infect a cell at the same time, new viruses budding from that cell can contain a mixture of RNA strands from the two original viruses, this is a phenomenon called re-assortment. This Recombination, "cutting and pasting", can also produce some evolutionary mixing within RNA strands.


It is unusual to be infected by two flu viruses at the same time, and even rarer for one of those viruses to come from another species altogether, but it does happen, especially in pigs, which are susceptible to both human and bird flu viruses. Repeated re-assortments can produce mixtures like that found in the swine flu virus now spreading worldwide.

Again it is not a new phenomenon. There was re-assortment between bird and human flu viruses in pigs in Italy during the 1980s and in the 1990s, a H1N2 swine flu circulating in pigs in the UK was found to be a mixture of swine, human and bird flu strains resulting from multiple re-assortments.

It is not yet clear exactly when and how Mexican swine flu strain evolved, but it could certainly have happened without the help of genetic engineers. Despite this, the swine flu could still be regarded as man-made.

Mounted Policeman in Mexico City sports a facemask

There are now over 6 billion people on the planet, and each year we raise more than a billion pigs and perhaps as many as 70 billion chickens. The result is a paradise for influenza viruses, which can lie dormant for long periods.

The problem is not just the sheer number of potential hosts. The conditions in which animals are kept can favour the evolution of new and deadlier strains.

Par example, in the wild, flu viruses can be self-limiting. The nasty flu strains that make animals too ill to walk or fly are unlikely to spread far. In crowded factory farms, they can spread like wildfire, helped by the global trade in animals and the distribution and transportation of animal products.


The intimate interaction of farm workers with animals, especially on small-holdings where pigs, ducks, chickens and children all happily intermingle, also provides plenty of opportunities for viruses to jump species.

Animal vaccines might seem like the answer, but vaccines e.g Tamiflu (Oseltamivir) and Relenza (Zanamivir) that do not provide 100% protection can actually make things worse. Vaccines are not totally effective against viral strains. When there is widespread vaccination, viruses can mutate and spread without any visible disease. Viruses are smart. Ineffective vaccines also create strong selective pressure driving the evolution of new strains that can dodge the immune attack provoked by the vaccine.

Already, attention is turning to the big pig farms in Mexico, and the role they may have played in creating this new strain of swine flu but all intensive pig farming is a 'risk' and 'at risk'.

The undeniable and scary fact is, that we still know so little about flu and what makes it capable of spreading from human to human. This means that analysing and reverse engineering a virus of this kind and developing an anti-virus, would be a huge challenge.


Yes, it's possible that this virus was created by a mistake at a research laboratory or a vaccine factory and it is more possible that a virulent strain has been accidentally released into the wild, as has happened many times before and the most plausible explanation is, that this monster is the long-predicted product of our farming system.