relenza not required for bird flu fight

Yeah right....read this. *lol*

Friday 09 December 2005

Bradford Frank, of the University of Buffalo School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, is not confident that we could cope with a pandemic, even with microbial assistance. He suggests that the infection rate could be as high as 50% of the global population — 3.2 billion people. Half of those people would have inapparent or asymptomatic infections — as is often the case with viral diseases — but the other 1.6 billion people could become seriously ill. Jeff Levi at the Trust for America's Health adds, “It is correct that many are now saying that a severe pandemic, along the lines of 1918, would result in a 2% fatality rate among those who become ill.” Frank explains that even if only half of those needed treatment with Tamiflu, this would still require around 30 billion capsules.

The sad truth is that all of these efforts will prove to be academic if a pandemic strikes within months. Even if we wait a year before a breakout of the virus, which should give manufacturers enough time to make reasonable supplies of Tamiflu, our ability to cope with a putative bird flu pandemic shouldn't hinge on small molecules, says Frank. “Within the next few years, no matter what is done, there won't be enough Tamiflu to use as we like for everyone who needs it,” says Frank.

Frank suggests that the inhaled drug Relenza (zanamivir; GlaxoSmithKline), which is manufactured from a readily available starting material, N-acetyl-neuraminic-acid, should be included in pandemic contingency plans. It is, he says, “just as good as Tamiflu, but not too many people even have this on their radar screen.”

http://www.nature.com/drugdisc/news/articles/nrd1917.html