Re: "Flu viruses described as sloppy, capricious, and promiscuous" [March 30-April 6]

Your thoughtful piece on avian flu fails to mention the role of intensive poultry farming in the global spread of the virus. Despite Dr. Danuta Skowronski's assertion that wild waterfowl are "a constant source of new viruses", considerable evidence is emerging to show that large-scale, commercial poultry operations are at the root of the problem.

Virologist Dr. Earl Brown, whom you also quote, has stated: "High-intensity chicken rearing is a perfect environment for generating virulent avian-flu virus." When tens of thousands of chickens are kept in overcrowded, cramped conditions, viruses spread like wildfire and have a greater opportunity to mutate.

A recent report by GRAIN, an international organization dealing with agricultural issues, confirms this view. It found little evidence of migratory birds carrying and transmitting the highly pathogenic H5N1 subtype of avian influenza. On the contrary, GRAIN's research concluded that the main vector is the transnational poultry industry, which sends the products and waste of its farms around the world through a multitude of channels.

Wild birds and back-yard, free-range poultry have been repeatedly blamed for spreading avian flu, yet it is more likely they are victims, not vectors, of the disease.

> Peter Fricker / Projects and Communications Director, Vancouver Humane Society

With interest I read your cover article, "Are we ready for bird flu?" [March 30-April 6], on the avian-flu situation. I found it informative and even encouraging to read a quote by Dr. John Blatherwick stating: "That's one of the solutions. Besides washing your hands, get happy." I also wanted to point out another rather simple, kinder solution, which would be for us to change our commercial poultry-farming practices.

The increase in avian-influenza hysteria is bothersome to me, as more radical measures-such as keeping domestic birds indoors, culling flocks at the first sign of even a harmless strain of flu, culling wild populations of birds-are being considered.

As I understand it, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency charged in, killed more than 67,000 ducks and geese in 2005, only to conclude that the virus was not the deadly Asian strain of avian flu but its much milder North American cousin. This doesn't even address their senseless and inhuman cull of 2004.

Instead of crazy suggestions being implemented, why don't we spend more time considering the effects of our continued desire for meat and animal products? The intensive poultry- and egg-production methods and the alarmingly slack regulations seem to me to be the real problem.

> Keith Edwards / Vancouver

Just a general comment on "Are we ready for bird flu?" [March 30-April 6]. There is a very simple answer to this: no one in the world is. The big issue that hasn't been addressed is this: will the virus mutate? If so, to what? And if it is a mutated virus, that is, another strain entirely than what has been "predicted", then will any cure or vaccination be ready in any satisfactory amount of time? No, most definitely, no. Logically, how could it be if it is not known what strain will affect what population base?

Who will suffer the most? Children and the elderly. What base of the population will die first? The children and the elderly. Who needs the most attention and care in our society? The children and the elderly. So, back to the same issue: are we prepared? No, most definitely, no.

But back to the issue: until the virus is understood and tracked, only then could any type of cure or vaccination be found. This sheds light on another issue: how many pharmaceutical companies really care? If a person can afford the drugs they make for a vaccination or preventive cure or treatment, which countries could afford them first? Even if stockpiled drugs exist in Canada, the U.S., Europe, and other major centres, won't these just be useless drugs because of virus mutation?

> Reno Dikaios / Vancouver