3 ms·
Your answer does not address the criticisms in the comment you are replying to. If the Asian bird flu epidemic was in 2005 there is no correlation to an increas
by mustacheemperor 9y ago
Your answer does not address the criticisms in the comment you are replying to. If the Asian bird flu epidemic was in 2005 there is no correlation to an increase in production in 2003. Could reduced production in the first 4 years of the drug's approved existence be explained by a challenging production process?
- austinprete 9y agoHe did actually, but he used the medical term SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) [1] in place of "Asian bird flu". However, they refer to the same thing, and SARS does appear to have only been a major problem from late-2002 to mid-2003, a timeline that is consistent with his claims. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syndr...
- mustacheemperor 9y agoAh, I understand the argument a bit better then, but I don't think that's really a valid substitute. Avian flu is H5N1, whereas as that article describes SARS is caused by SARS coronavirus. I suppose oseltamivir may be used to treat both, since it's an antiviral, but I'm not able to find much online indicating that. Regardless, I think the medically accurate term to substitute for "Asian bird flu epidemic" would be "the H5N1 epidemic in Asia."