Talk:H5N1 vaccine

From other user comment in Articlehttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=H5N1_vaccine&diff=538654507&oldid=497470032: This article needs to be updated with new appearances of H5N1 as of 2/15/13; along with any information from the CDC.

Zagothal (talk) 11:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on H5N1 vaccine. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=807306602 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070214052446/http://www.hhs.gov/pandemicflu/plan/appendixf.html to https://www.hhs.gov/pandemicflu/plan/appendixf.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070214052446/http://www.hhs.gov/pandemicflu/plan/appendixf.html to https://www.hhs.gov/pandemicflu/plan/appendixf.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100308121756/https://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/newsreleases/2004/flucontracts.htm to http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/newsreleases/2004/flucontracts.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060824004040/http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/guidelines/recommendationvaccine.pdf to http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/guidelines/recommendationvaccine.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The information in this article seems to date from 2006 or 2007. Its use of the word "now" is thus misleading, and the information is mostly only of historic interest.

In 2023, a new wave of bird flu is circling the globe in domestic and wildfowl, and infecting mammals such as porpoises, foxes, bears, and others, as well as huge numbers of domesticated mink.

There is a obvious danger that the new H5N1 will break out and spread in humans.

This article should cover what vaccines are currently stockpiled or approved and able to be quickly produced and provided at scale. Ocdcntx (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

The article is almost entirely concerned with developments in the USA; pandemic influenza is, by its very nature, global. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.217.15 (talk) 21:40, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

The article is almost entirely concerned with developments in the USA; pandemic influenza is, by its very nature, global.

Unfortunately, this problem is all too common in Wikipedia. US editors should realise America is not the whole world.

Hi, @Super Goku V, thanks for your comment about chronological order. I've searched WP:MOS for guidance on time series; I couldn't find anything. The nearest I could get was on WP:ITN which favours more recent entries appearing first.

My reason for using this order was simply that the H5N1 outbreak is an ongoing and evolving situation which is unlikely ever to terminate. The list of vaccine-related events is going to get longer as time passes, and could easily be extended retrospectively backwards, or laterally by geography (most of the entries relate to Europe, UK, or US). The reader coming to this page is most likely IMO to be responding to a recent news item and so will seek the newest entries in this article for relevant information.

Cheers, Bob (talk) 21:06, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

:No problem. Generally, articles are written in chronological order or some other form of framing. Reverse chronological order is a bit unusual to me, but [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&ns4=1&search=%22Reverse+chronological+order%22 it does seem to occur occasionally based on a quick search.] So long as I am the only objection, then I don't mind withdrawing it. Especially since you do have some justification for it. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

The opening paragraphs of this article may contain original research. In particular, this paragraph is quite suspect:

:The influenza virus is highly variable - the H5N1 virus infecting cattle in the USA{{Efn|As of December 2024}} is different from the viruses that showed up in poultry in 1997, and subsequently spread through wild birds in all continents except Australia. If the virus does become pandemic, the pandemic strain will likely not be the same as the strain currently infecting cows. A human vaccine developed now is unlikely to be an exact match to the pandemic strain.{{Cite web | vauthors = Fox M |title=We May Not Have Enough Bird Flu Vaccines when We Need Them |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-bird-flu-vaccine-might-come-too-late-to-save-us-from-h5n1/ |access-date=12 December 2024 |website=Scientific American }} However licensed vaccines can be updated in a process similar to that used for updating seasonal influenza vaccines.{{Cite web |date=10 October 2024 |title=FDA Briefing Document - Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting |website=Food and Drug Administration |url=https://www.fda.gov/media/182543/download |access-date=12 December 2024}}

The references given are to news articles. The contributor who has written this paragraph, who may have been acting in good faith, appears to have personal interpreted those articles, rather than referring to hard scientific studies on avian flu vaccines.

This is concerning, as it could misinform the general reader. I have added an "original research?" inline tag to the article as I think perhaps another pair of eyes on this might be appreciated. –Editor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 09:53, 25 March 2025 (UTC)