Breaking News

Experiments Show How Difficult It Is to Infect Others with Influenza-Like Illnesses

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Professor Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson highlighted how difficult it is for someone to transmit an influenza-like illness (“ILI”) to another person.  They highlight experiments, or challenge studies, done long before Covid with rhinoviridae which causes common colds.

“If you have followed these experiments and paid attention, just like the authors, you might conclude how difficult it is to transmit ILI experimentally, even in everyday work that includes close contact and touching.

“These famous experiments are relevant to coronaviridae transmission. Although rhinoviridae and coronaviridae lock on cell membranes using different receptors … the only difference … seems to be the length of incubation and shedding,” Prof. Heneghan and Jefferson wrote.

SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus of the coronaviridae family of viruses.  A human challenge study for SARS-CoV-2 funded by the UK Vaccine Taskforce was published in March 2022. Unvaccinated participants were given an infectious dose of a “wild-type” of SARS-CoV-2 virus intranasally – with nose drops. Only 18 out of 34 (53%) participants developed PCR-confirmed infection – all symptoms were mild to moderate.

Why were human challenge studies not conducted earlier in the “pandemic”? And if it was known that it is so difficult to transmit ILIs, it begs the question: why did governments move so quickly to shut down businesses, hospitals and schools to “slow the spread”?


Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…


By Prof Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson

Respiratory viruses have been the source of investigation for at least a century. Shope, the discoverer of swine influenza and Smith, Laidlaw and Andrewes, discoverers of the human variety, could not visualise the agent, although they could filter it from human washouts. They knew the agent was there, but visualisation had to wait until the advent of the electron microscope a few years later. 

However, through several studies and serendipity, researchers soon realised that the influenza virus was not the only “kid on the block”. Various other viral respiratory agents were discovered after influenza, each with a different shape and structure but all more or less causing the same signs and symptoms: those of influenza-like illness (“ILI”).

For each of these newly discovered agents, the questions posed by researchers could be categorised broadly into three themes: 

  1. What is the portal of entry into the human body, and how does it transmit? 
  2. What is the incubation period, and how serious is the clinical picture the agent can cause?
  3. Can we reproduce the clinical picture experimentally, and what interventions prevent or ameliorate influenza-like illness?

Apart from the UK Common Cold Unit in Salisbury, two other distinct and distinguished scientists carried out vital respiratory viruses research, both based in the USA: the University of Wisconsin at Madison group and the University of Virginia (“UVA”) at Charlottesville group. 

Both groups studied the many causative agents of ILI with particular attention to the most common: rhinoviridae (“rhin” means “nose” and infections cause the common cold) – RV – and coronavirdae (named for their appearance: “corona” means “crown”). 

Like the Common Cold Unit, they studied the transmission of the agents using challenge studies. A technique we described in Riddle 6

Here we will concentrate on the Wisconsin group and leave the work of UVA to the next instalment.

Several studies made the headlines. In 1984, the Wisconsin group summarised some of their most famous experiments on rhinovirus.

D. J. D’Alessio, C. K. Meschievitz, J. A. Peterson, C. R. Dick, E. C. Dick, Short-Duration Exposure and the Transmission of Rhinoviral Colds, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Volume 150, Issue 2, August 1984,
Pages 189–194, https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/150.2.189

In the small room experiment of 14 volunteers, 5 were “donors” (symptomatic volunteers who had been infected with a rhinovirus challenge and were shedding the agent, as identified by culture), and 9 were “recipients” (uninfected volunteers). Although there was no ventilation and the participants mingled, sang and played cards, none of the “recipients” was infected.

For the next experiment, the Wisconsin group used 11 donors and 11 recipients who shared a sealed dormitory for 12 hours for three days but did not use the same washing facilities and had no physical contact with each other, minimising the risk of transmission by fomites (i.e., surfaces). This time three recipients developed colds, but only one shed the specific RV 55 strain used in the challenge.

In another famous experiment, 11 infected donors kissed 11 recipients for under a minute. The researchers recorded 16 episodes of oral contact but only one infected recipient.

No airborne transmission experiments were possible because the researchers could not isolate any rhinovirus from the air.

In nine of the colds which developed in the experiments, the Wisconsin researchers could not isolate RV55, the strain used in the challenge. These were likely to be episodes of ILI originating outside the experimental conditions. 

If you have followed these experiments and paid attention, just like the authors, you might conclude how difficult it is to transmit ILI experimentally, even in everyday work that includes close contact and touching.

These famous experiments are relevant to coronaviridae transmission. Although rhinoviridae and coronaviridae lock on cell membranes using different receptors – with complicated names, think of them as docking stations spread throughout our bodies – the only difference between clinical pictures associated with these agents seems to be the length of incubation and shedding.

Once again, it seems difficult to reproduce challenge study infections in everyday settings such as dormitories, rooms, and communal areas. 

But Wisconsin apart, has anyone tried anything similar with SARS-CoV-2? Yes, in a human challenge study, 18 of 34 young unvaccinated recipients became infected.

There are three central issues. First, why did we abandon the human challenge approach; second, why have we deferred to poor-quality observational studies and models? Finally, what can we learn from the past to inform the future? 

If we can’t address these three issues, how can we reproduce the clinical picture experimentally and test the interventions to prevent or lessen influenza-like illness?

About the Authors

Carl Heneghan is a professor of Evidence-based Medicine at the University of Oxford, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (“CEBM”) and NHS Urgent Care general practitioner (“GP”) who regularly appears in the media. Tom Jefferson is a clinical epidemiologist and a Senior Associate Tutor at the University of Oxford.  Together they write articles on a Substack profile titled ‘Trust the Evidence’.

The above article is the seventh in a series titled ‘The SARS-CoV-2 transmission riddle’.  In the first five parts of the “Riddle” series, they discussed how poor quality and superficial science has led to research waste and misled the globe as to the number of active covid cases, the incidence of hospital-acquired covid and the number of deaths directly attributable to SARS-CoV-2.  In Part 6 and the following chapters, Prof. Heneghan and Jefferson briefly examine what was known about human coronoviridae and other main respiratory viruses, their characteristics and transmission. You can find the articles in the series below:

  • Part 1 – By our reckoning, 6.6 billion SARs-CoV-2 tests have been done. worldwide. Such use, on an industrial scale, is unprecedented and helped distort perceptions.
  • Part 2 – We need clarity in the evidentiary rules about how viruses spread.
  • Part 3 – Binary PCR positivity is a meaningless test result on its own
  • Part 4 – Poor methods lead to waste, misleading research and failure to address uncertainties.
  • Part 5 – Model methods are black boxes, their limits are not explained, the data they are based on are highly suspect, and their predictions do not translate into everyday life – but all the rest is fine.
  • Part 6 – The contribution of the Common Cold Unit to the study of coronaviridae.
  • Part 7 (above) – The contribution of the University of Wisconsin to the study of coronaviridae and rhinoviridae.
Share this page to Telegram

Categories: Breaking News, World News

Tagged as:

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

30 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Freeman2
Freeman2
1 month ago

Recommended reading for virus-theory believers:
https://drsambailey.com/a-farewell-to-virology-expert-edition/

Ministry of Truth
Ministry of Truth
1 month ago

Is anyone really surprised by this research? The whole pandemic was a farce.

coda
coda
Reply to  Ministry of Truth
1 month ago

Anyone can create research that says what they created it to say, Does it not occur to you that before the j jab came along you’d have been called a loon for suggesting that someone with the common cold couldn’t give it to someone else. Does it not also occur to you that the common cold would die out if it couldn’t be passed on. How would you get it to begin with? This site is so full of lies that even the “government” would blush.

sbptlivecouk
sbptlivecouk
Reply to  coda
1 month ago

A cold or ‘ILIs’ have not unequivocally been proven to exist or be the cause of cold-like symptoms. To believe otherwise is to solely rely on germ theory, ignoring others. This is both illogical and anti-scientific. Indeed, anyone can create research conclusions to order, as historically demonstrated by the NIH, FDA, CDC and the pharmaceutical industry over the last 100+ years. Rather than accuse this site of being ‘full of lies’, point one out and discuss it.

Merv
Merv
Reply to  sbptlivecouk
1 month ago

Careful, my friend. There are consequences for stating the unequivocal truth. Hope you ran that through the ministry of “truth” before typing.
Agree with everything stated by you.
Long shot-(my opinion) proper research will eventually accept the main cause of illness/disease as being electro magnetic in nature, closely followed by other environmentaal factors. Illness/disease would appear to me to be re-actionary in nature, and be a re-action to the causal factor. Just not from invisible enemies from inside the cell. Not alive, but are able to self replicate and travel to other animals/persons and cause the same illness? Fairy tales?
“they” be coming for us, the re-education people, to take us by force to the re-education camp. Thou shalt be careful to not deviate from the path.

Islander
Islander
Reply to  coda
1 month ago

If “this site is so full of lies”, why are they screaming from the rooftops telling all who would listen, not to get jabbed?
Think, please?

Bob - Enough
Bob - Enough
Reply to  Islander
1 month ago

You can hit me later, but: 1. People have the right to comment and ask questions, 2. I am actually unsure what the article is trying to state, 3. If you trust “Carl Heneghan and Tom Jeffersonfrom the University of Oxford” …. OKEY DOKEY, because I do not. 4. Unless we understand that NO VIRUS HAS EVER BEEN ISOLATED NOR PROVED TO BE TRANSMITTABLE … the globalist parasites will continue to brainwash the masses, get them jabbed with poisons and kill us off.

I did not understand the comment from Coda, but WE MUST STAND TOGETHER.

OK – you can hit me now.

Merv
Merv
Reply to  Rhoda Wilson
1 month ago

I hit ‘im for you. Hard left click on his + button.

Buzz
Buzz
Reply to  Bob - Enough
1 month ago

I like the way you think Bob!

Bob - Enough
Bob - Enough
Reply to  coda
1 month ago

Please forgive me here as it has been a long day; but what are you saying exactly ?.

trackback
1 month ago

[…] Go to Source Follow altnews.org on Telegram […]

trackback
1 month ago

[…] 4:46 pm +00:00, 5 Oct 2022   posted by danceaway BY RHODA WILSON ON OCTOBER 5, 2022 • […]

trackback
1 month ago

[…] SARS-CoV-2 este un coronavirus din familia de viruși coronaviridae. un om studiu de provocare pentru SARS-CoV-2 finanțat de UK Vaccine Taskforce a fost publicat în martie 2022. Participanților nevaccinați li s-a administrat intranazal o doză infecțioasă dintr-un virus SARS-CoV-2 „de tip sălbatic” – cu picături pe nas. Doar 18 din 34 (53%) participanți au dezvoltat o infecție confirmată prin PCR – toate simptomele au fost ușoare până la moderate. […]

Mike
Mike
1 month ago

Who wants to tell Carl and Tom that viruses don’t exist?

Merv
Merv
Reply to  Mike
1 month ago

I would say never proven to exist, leave the gate open. Just not in the last couple of hundred years or more.

Chris
Chris
1 month ago

In my experiance being in a room with someone with a cold definitely passes on to others namely me???

Sam
Sam
Reply to  Chris
1 month ago

Often when groups of women live together their menstrual cycles synchronise. Is that caused by a virus too?

Merv
Merv
Reply to  Sam
1 month ago

See my comment in this thread. “electro-magnetic in nature” closely followed by other “environmental factors” eg-poisons, toxic chemichals, et-cetera.
We have been hoodwinked into our myopia.

Merv
Merv
Reply to  Merv
1 month ago

edit;chemicals, not chemichals. duh.

Merv
Merv
1 month ago

Sorry, stopped reading at “only 18 out of 34” and “PCR-confirmed infection”. How many cycles? Question is moot anyway. The gentleman who invented the PCR test, Dr. Kary Mullis, famously confirmed how the test can show anything in any-one given enough cycles of amplification, and was NOT to be used to confirm any type of infectious disease.
But don’t let that stand in the way of the tyranny making big corporations billions of $ profit, but mainly the control over the population through mass formation psychosis. Their (?) plan to enlist vulnerable people including through targeting children has worked well given that most affected will argue to the death (Stockholm Syndrome type of illness) absolute lies and absurdities that defy any kind of logic. Which kind of evil is this? Anyone who has spoken with any of these people will immediately know. Ameliorating circumstance-it’s power fades with time. But damage has been done.
So hard watching peole I Love getting more ill by the day. And knowing that despite best efforts at the time, they made a bad choice along the way. Or two or three bad choices. Young people with their whole lives ahead of them.
Nothing can change what is coming, and the people in general have to realise, rise from their slumber, identify with what has been perpretrated upon us, stay united as Humans, and have this whole thing properly investigated, offenders (Nuremberg Code just to begin with) identified and punished. This at least, must be done for those that come after us, for the Human Race.
Thanks for the article, Expose’. And the therapy.

trackback
1 month ago

[…] Experiments Show How Difficult It Is to Infect Others with Influenza-Like Illnesses […]

trackback
1 month ago

[…] viruses like rhinoviridae (the common cold) and coronaviridae (coronaviruses such as covid) do not transmit from person to person as is commonly […]

Jayna Dinnyes
Jayna Dinnyes
1 month ago

Well, years ago I DID CATCH the flu from others.
IT WAS REAL and it was going around! Natural meds
prevent it. I post publicly and freely on MeWe,
ETERNAL LIFE BLESSINGS FOR YAHWEH’S SAINTS!

About COVID Vaccines.png
trackback
1 month ago

[…] viruses like rhinoviridae (the common cold) and coronaviridae (coronaviruses such as covid) do not transmit from person to person as is commonly […]

trackback
1 month ago

[…] viruses like rhinoviridae (the common cold) and coronaviridae (coronaviruses such as covid) do not transmit from person to person as is commonly […]

trackback
1 month ago

[…] WILSON ON OCTOBER 5th, 2022. Find Article […]