[HenryN]

Originally Posted by theforeigner

Hi Niman

I´m danish, and I have now read several of the Tamiflu resistant patient reports in danish, and I belive fully that this is the correct info due to what has been reported on Statens Serum Institut website and elsewere.
http://www.ssi.dk/sw174.asp?PAGE=1&ArtNo=3651423

It was only the report from "Ekstrabladet" which was written in a way that could be misunderstod in regards to were "A" had been infected, but it turn out that it was aimed to the location were "B" was infected; abroad.

So, here is the correct info:

The tamiflu resistent person "A" (a woman, according to newsreport) had NOT been abroad.
"A" had been in contact with a person, we name him/her "B"
"B" had recently been abroad and had gotten infected with H1N1
Therefore "A " was given Tamiflu as a precausionn treatment
After "A" had been taking Tamiflu for 5 days she devloped flu symptoms
A test showed that "A" was infected with H1N1
Additional tests at Statens Serum Institut showed that the virus in question, H1N1, had mutated. It (the H1N1) is resistent to tamiflu but is still sensetive to Relenza.

If I find additional info I´ll post it in this thread.


By the way the machin translation is VERY bad, belive me

Thanks for the clarification. That would narrow down the source of the woman's infection, and the 5 day delay included the time to get infected by the traveler contact, who was in Denmark (the classic 5 day gap in disease onset). However, even though the source was in Denmark, it still sounds like there was no data for the H1N1 from the source to show that the source was wild type. This is infered because the source recovered and was probably treated with Tamiflu, but many recover without Tamiflu treatment, so the recovery of the source does not signal wild type. However, the failure of the contact to recover in spite of treatment does signal resistance, so that sample was sequenced and was resistant (almost certainly H274Y). Thus, without the sequence from the traveler, there is still no evidence that the traveler didn't also have resistant H1N1 (or that the travel was the actual source of H1N1, since the only sequence described was from the patient who failed to respond to tamiflu).