January 9, 2009

Influenza drug Tamiflu ineffective against most U.S. infection

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Tamiflu, an antiviral used to treat the flu, doesn’t work against most of the virus circulating in the U.S. this season, federal officials say.

It's not a serious problem so far, because fewer than the usual number of people have caught the flu this year, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) authorities say. But 99 percent of cases this year are resistant to the drug, compared to 11 percent last year, The New York Times reports.

The resistance seems to stem from a spontaneous mutation in the virus, not the result of overuse of the drug, according to the Times. They've advised patients to use a Tamiflu rival, Relenza, or an older med called rimantadine, according to Bloomberg News.

For more on why viruses become resistant to medications thanks to evolution—and the prospect of performing DNA analyses of an infection to decide how best to treat it—check out this article in this month's Scientific American.

Image of Tamiflu by Moriori via Wikimedia Commons

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American