THE Department of Health recently reported the case of a patient who was severely ill with a new strain of A(H1N1) influenza (swine flu) and died despite being promptly treated with the antiviral drug oseltamivir, which is sold under the trade name Tamiflu.
The case will be investigated to determine if the patient died because the virus was resistant to the drug. One way or another, however, the patient’s death should serve as a reminder that Tamiflu is not a panacea.
On Aug. 21, the WHO issued guidelines for the use of antivirals in the treatment of patients infected with the A(H1N1) pandemic virus. The document stated that most patients infected with the virus experienced typical influenza symptoms and recovered fully within a week, even without medical treatment. That being the case, healthy patients who fall ill but do not suffer complications need not be treated with antiviral drugs.
For severely ill patients and those whose condition begins to deteriorate, the WHO recommends treatment with oseltamivir as soon as possible, preferably within 48 hours after serious symptoms appear.
Dangerous symptoms listed include shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, turning blue, bloody sputum, chest pain, high fever persisting beyond three days and low blood pressure.
Among A(H1N1) patients, treatment with oseltamivir can alleviate symptoms and speed up recovery, just as with seasonal influenza patients. While some experts consider it best to administer the medicine to all confirmed A(H1N1) patients within 48 hours, the WHO guidelines recommend that antivirals only be given if patients exhibit severe symptoms. This recommendation is probably based on concern that overuse of the drug will greatly increase the possibility of drug-resistant virus strains appearing.
The WHO’s Aug. 21 update on this year’s H1N1 pandemic says that the health body had been notified of 12 cases of oseltamivir-resistant strains worldwide. These were all isolated cases arising from mutations in the virus, and there were no apparent epidemiological links between them, nor is there any evidence of onward transmission from these cases.
Even so, several oseltamivir-resistant strains of seasonal H1N1 influenza have appeared over the past few years. Since none of the drug-resistant strains that have been isolated are highly infectious, they do not pose a significant risk to public health security. Since the new, pandemic influenza strain is an H1N1 variant, it would not be surprising if drug-resistant strains were to arise as a result of nonessential use of oseltamivir.
In Taiwan, regulations on the use of oseltamivir have been relaxed, making it likely that cases of resistance to the drug will occur. The danger is that a highly infectious, drug-resistant strain of the pandemic virus may appear and spread rapidly. In that case, it would be necessary to treat patients with the other known effective antiviral drug, zanamivir (trade name Relenza), instead.
Liou Pei-pai is a former director of the Taiwan Animal Health Research Institute.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS