Last Stand in Bird Flu Ostrich Land
The BC ostrich convoy enters the "find out" stage of FAFO and so have we all
Note from Angie: This is VERY long. I can’t believe how much time I’ve spent on these ostriches, so I’ve added anchor links for people who want answers to specific questions and not the entire encyclopedic account of the most absurd threat to Canadian national security of all time.
Ostrich Situation Report
Am I Even a Real Virologist or Just a Fake, Evil One?
Why Should the Ostriches Be Culled?
What is the Basis for the Stamping Out Policy?
What Risk Do the Ostriches Present?
Why Can’t the Ostriches be Tested?
Do the Ostriches Have Antibodies?
Are the Ostriches Immune?
Does it Matter if the Ostriches are Immune?
Why Don’t we Study the Ostriches?
Is There an Alternative to Stamping Out?
Would you Euthanize your Own Pets?
Are Ostriches Poultry?
I rue May 13, 2025, because that was the day a tweet piqued my interest and I said to myself, “hey, I wonder what H5N1 pathogenesis looks like in ostriches…?” So I did a literature search for articles in journals like Avian Pathology and Poultry Science and unwittingly entered the most ridiculous virus-related cockfight I’ve ever been drawn into. Five months later, I have used the term “cloacal swab” in televised interviews, targeted by the medical freedom mob because I declined to waste my time on a failed parliamentary candidate’s far-right anti-globalist Rumble conspiracy theory hour, and accused of “ostrich genocide.”
The last two weeks have been quite eventful for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Universal Ostrich Farms (UOF), the entire convoy-supporting fringe media ecosystem, and what has seemed to me like every medical disinformation bot on social media. UOF owns a flock of commercial egg-producing ostriches hit by an outbreak of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus. CFIA ordered a cull and UOF fought it in court. They lost and the cull was about to go down when the Supreme Court of Canada issued a temporary stay of execution for the ostriches. They will soon decide whether to take the case.
The more I dig, the more labyrinthine this seemingly infinite ostrich hole becomes. What started as curiosity is actually consequential: this is about a lot more than what the Ostrich Lives Matter movement claims at every opportunity (evil CFIA is unjustifiably killing innocent ostriches for no reason). Both the ostriches and the anti-public health, anti-government disinformation the UOF and their supporters have spread like bird flu are very real threats to Canadian human and animal health, the economy, food security, and the rule of law. I sympathize with the ostriches. Still, the cull must proceed. Here is a very, very long read about why that is the case.
What is the current ostrich situation?
In fair West Kootenay where we lay our scene, CFIA issued a Notice to Dispose (cull) to UOF after confirming they had a H5N1 outbreak that killed 69 ostriches last December, in accordance with the Canadian Health of Animals Act and Canada’s international trade agreements to implement “stamping out” avian flu control methods (mandatory culling of entire poultry flocks with a confirmed H5N1 outbreak). Universal Ostrich Farms (UOF) took CFIA to court and invited Canada’s entire cadre of separatist, anti-government, anti-vax, anti-public health, ultra right-wing influencers and media outlets to camp out on their property to present the dispute as a family’s fight for ostrich lives against the tyranny of woke government regulators. The ostriches are supposedly valuable research subjects that are unlocking the deepest secrets of immunology, although they are actually a commercial layer flock producing eggs used to make unproven treatments for hair loss and weight loss. They are also raising a considerable amount of money through their website, GoFundMe, and GiveSendGo. You can also e-transfer funds or mail them a cheque.
The Federal Appeals court ruled against UOF and affirmed CFIA should proceed with depopulating the flock. Last week, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) accompanied CFIA to the property to serve UOF with warrants to seize the ostriches and the property to carry out the cull. Rebel News sent a helicopter to monitor the “massive government operation” from the skies. Somehow the hay bales the CFIA had placed within the ostrich pens caught fire. UOF supporters attributed this to “spontaneous combustion” and God’s vengeance against avicidal regulatory overreach. The RCMP arrested and later released UOF owner Karen Espersen and her daughter, UOF spokesperson Katie Pasitney. UOF appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada and was granted a stay of the depopulation order. CFIA now has custody of the ostriches, but the ostrich convoy continues to attract itinerant anti-government bumpkins to the property. Last weekend, UOF hosted a fundraiser concert featuring the musical stylings of Neil Young convicted convoy criminal Tamara Lich. Irrelevant American rock musician, far-right gun nut, and accused pedophile Ted Nugent weighed in that the freedom ostriches are among the few animals he isn’t lusting to take out with his compound bow. UOF is circulating a petition demanding an investigation by the House of Commons.
Yesterday, an ostrich died. The convoy squatters accused CFIA of neglect. They also implied that the late ostrich was a Christian and has ascended to heaven.
Despite the ostrich flock’s supposed religious devotion to the teachings of Christ, the convoyers themselves do not appear to adhere to their Lord and Saviour’s message of peace. Tensions continue to escalate. RCMP is investigating multiple violent threats, particularly threats of arson. Last week, a 72-year-old neighbour was attacked by a masked assailant who threw gasoline on her, punched her in the face, and tried to burn her house down. Her attacker was later arrested by RCMP at the ostrich farm. Some hunters were seen in the area and Rebel News reported they were a SWAT team. Pasitney suggested they were government assassins.
The Ostrich Resistance is framing the cull as scientifically unjustifiable on their fundraising page. They demand that their ostriches be tested and exempted if they test negative for virus and/or show that they have antibodies.
The problem with this framing is that it’s untrue. The ostriches may be “happy, healthy, and thriving” and are not raised for meat production (although that’s not really true), but the risk they pose to public health is unknown. Their neighbours, many of whom also have animals, certainly feel as though they pose a risk to the local community. UOF is a commercial egg production farm. They do not operate as a research facility and none of the people involved are qualified to conduct immunology or avian flu research. They are making or plan to make antibodies with no proven therapeutic or scientific value to sell as supplements for profit. They are focused on “natural immunity” since that is their unsupported argument for ignoring avian flu control policies put in place for the health and safety of all Canadians.
This dishonest representation of the situation is yet another example of how UOF has misled the public from the beginning. They did not report the H5N1 outbreak to CFIA as required by law. They repeatedly failed to follow CFIA orders regarding quarantine or biosecurity. They were denied an exemption to culling for failing to meet the criteria set by CFIA as part of their avian flu control plan. Since they have failed so profoundly to make the case that the law shouldn’t apply to them because it interferes with their ability to profit from selling unproven antibody supplements and various ostrich products, they resorted to a time-honoured tactic for getting their way: bullying. As UOF’s neighbour can attest, that bullying can escalate into violence.
I don’t like bullies. I don’t like people who use violence to get their way. I really don’t like it when people use bullying and violence as part of a larger effort to subvert democracy and national security. And I hate it when people do this by weaponizing scientific disinformation, especially about viruses, vaccines, and public health, which is exactly what is happening here.
Am I even a real virologist or just a fake, evil one?
At Pasitney’s direction, UOF’s merry band of extremist supporters proceeded to harass the hell out of any company or person they believed was aiding CFIA in any way. Unfortunately, that includes me. In my professional opinion, CFIA must be empowered to carry out the cull as a matter of national security, in order to protect Canada’s $2B poultry export market, honour international trade agreements, apply avian flu control measures that are the only sure way to protect Canadians and their animals and food supply, and uphold the law. For that I was informed that I am EVIL (emphasis theirs), an ostrich murderer, a monster, and various epithets for women, trans people, genitalia, and people with intellectual disabilities. Perhaps my most disqualifying attribute is the fact that I have my pronouns in my Twitter bio, although they should be thanking me for that, considering how many of them expressed confusion about my gender and even created polls to resolve the issue. For the record, I’m a cisgender woman married to a cisgender man, but whether I am a withered old unlovable hag with Terminator arms is in the eye of the beholder, at least in Canadian hellsite ostrich circles.
In the past, I’ve been the target of various social media dogpiles. It goes like this: someone with a large following disagrees with me, so they exhort their troll mob to ignite their torches, sharpen their pitchforks, and vomit a ceaseless torrent of repulsive bigotry, misogyny, and abuse into my mentions, inbox, and to various deans, directors, and colleagues at my workplace. That’s how I became aware of Viva Frei, also known as David Freiheit, former commercial litigator and failed People’s Party of Canada (PPC) candidate for the Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount riding in 2021. The PPC is an anti-public health, anti-vax, pro-conspiracy theory political party that consistently gets their asses handed to them in every federal election, and Frei’s candidacy was no exception. He came in 6th, despite the support his campaign received from Russian disinformation agents. The only candidates who fared worse were the communist from the Marxist-Leninist party and the white nationalist theocrat from the Christian Heritage party. Ouch!
Frei has a lot of X, YouTube, and Rumble followers, and he took issue with the ostrich interview I did a month ago with Ian Hanomansing. He demanded I go on his show to answer the tough questions that the craven globalist lackeys at CBC wouldn’t dare to ask. I rejected the offer, since I have no desire to waste irreplaceable minutes of my life allowing a professional far-right medical conspiracy theorist with zero relevant expertise to performatively gish gallop and harangue me for spectacle. He accused me of cowardice, psychopathy and sociopathy, lying, lack of professionalism, and homophobia (I got fed up and told one of his followers to eat a dick) and sent his legions forth to burn the science witch.
Since I’ve already had my ticket to Nuremberg 2.0 punched on account of being a virologist and vaccine researcher who studies pandemic origins, works in a high containment lab, and is Editor-in-Chief of a peer-reviewed scientific journal about vaccines that is literally called Vaccine, I have some experience with this. I base both my personal and professional opinions on evidence, which can be inconvenient for scientifically illiterate propagandists like Frei who profit from advancing an ideological agenda. I believe in enacting evidence-based health policies for the good of all society, not just a minority of medical freedom zealots. Scofflaws and extremists seeking to impose the will of the few on the entire nation generally dislike me. The feeling is mutual. Our respective sides are at an impasse, so I’ll just have to put up with my inbox and notifications being filled with their outrageously incoherent and abusive fan mail.
But it’s not lost on me that many of the bad faith arguments and specious claims come in the form of a question. I actually can provide evidence-based answers for them. I am female, I swear sometimes, I emote, and I am as demonstrably flawed as the next imperfect human being, but I actually am a real virologist who studies how emerging viruses like H5N1 infect and cause disease in different host species.
Some have questioned my specific subject matter expertise. Here are my qualifications:
Authored a review on the clade 2.3.4.4.b H5N1 outbreak earlier this year
Performed rapid analyses to trace the cattle outbreak in the US in 2024
Tested milk across Canada with a nationwide network of colleagues and found no evidence of current or prior infection in Canadian cows (consistent with CFIA’s findings)
Briefed the House of Commons AGRI Committee on the US dairy cattle outbreak
Gave witness testimony on biosecurity measures for avian flu control to the Senate AGFO Committee (I pop in at 19:36:30-ish in the video)
Provided expert input on Canada’s Chief Science Advisor’s roadmap for Managing Avian Flu
Presented data to the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) Expert Group on avian flu
Gave multiple invited lectures on H5N1 pathogenesis in birds and mammals including some attended by my colleagues from CFIA and PHAC
Studied bird flu pathogenesis since 2013
Wrote for popular press outlets like Foreign Policy and Zeteo about H5N1 in a political context
Talked about bird flu pandemic risk on 60 Minutes
Wrote extensively about bird flu including about these very ostriches
I have more than a decade of experience with the technical and practical aspects of doing different types of tests and experimental procedures with highly pathogenic avian flu viruses. I also know a lot about how flu outbreaks are managed and regulated from a policy and a pandemic preparedness point of view. I’m sure I’ll never be qualified enough to satisfy all the critics, but I feel pretty confident that I have a longer avian flu section of my CV than they do. And that’s why, despite the attempts to bully and harass me out of the ostrich discourse, I stand behind my evidence-based opinion that the ostriches must be depopulated.
Why should the ostriches be culled?
There are three reasons why I think depopulation should proceed and they are all matters of Canada’s national security:
Economic security: Canada’s $2 billion poultry export market depends on it
If the stamping-out policy that Canada has agreed to with our international trading partners is not carried out, we violate those agreements. We are obligated to implement stamping out as defined by the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) Terrestrial Animal Health Code. If CFIA does not, it puts the entire country’s poultry export market at risk due to trade agreements like CUSMA (US/Mexico), CPTPP (Asia), and CETA (EU). Breaching these agreements would cause our trading partners to hit Canada with national poultry import bans. Poultry exports are worth $2 billion per year. Having this market shut down would devastate Canadian farmers and the economy. Culling allows Canada to stay in compliance with these critical trade agreements.Health security: Risk to other animals and humans is impossible to assess
It’s possible for birds to be cryptically or persistently infected with H5N1. We can’t rule out with testing that they are not infected, particularly if the virus is persisting in a niche tissue that is difficult to sample or replicating at very low levels. The ostriches appear healthy, but H5N1 can be subclinical in some ostriches. The risk they present is unknown and impossible to accurately quantify. Culling is the only way to be certain they do not present a risk to other farms, animals, and people.
Sovereign government security: This is the law in Canada
The Health of Animals Act authorizes CFIA to enact policies that protect Canadian human and animal health, agriculture, economic activity, and food safety and security. CFIA is obligated to apply the stamping out policy, because it is part of legally binding agreements that Canada has made regarding agricultural trade. Compliance with CFIA depopulation orders is the law. It is not optional. If the law is not upheld, this undermines CFIA’s authority and ability to perform its regulatory function. It sends a message that anyone can choose whether they want to follow essential laws that protect Canada’s health, agriculture, and food supply. In the US, the slippery slope to the imminent collapse of American public health began with the politicization and rejection of health regulations and laws, as well as the demonization of government officials implementing them. Culling is what the law requires.
What is the basis for the stamping out policy?
A lot of people really disliked the suggestion that depopulation is demonstrably the most effective way to control avian influenza outbreaks. However, for decades, it’s been considered to be critical for preventing spread of highly pathogenic avian flu to other birds or people. This is because when one or two birds in a flock test positive for avian flu, the rest of the flock usually follows. “Highly pathogenic avian influenza” describes what this virus does in chickens: it rages through the entire flock and kills all the birds horribly. Flu is gastrointestinal as well as respiratory in birds, so they die exploding with bloody vomit and diarrhea, as well as severe neurological symptoms. If you have a couple chickens pop positive, your flock will be dead in 72 hours after terrible suffering. This also presents a huge infectious risk to other animals and humans on the premises and creates a massive risk for spread to other farms or populations of animals or people. Culling is more humane and safer for everyone involved.
That’s why it’s also applied to other poultry species that don’t get as sick as chickens or turkeys do, like ducks and ostriches. They might appear healthy, but could still be infected and spread the infection to other host animals or people that can get very sick and die. Testing is not completely reliable to rule out that individual birds may or may not be infected, so unless you completely depopulate, you can’t be sure you have eliminated the risk of onward spread. Hence CFIA only tested 2 bird carcasses and not the entire flock. Once these ostriches from this herd tested positive, the rest of them didn’t need to be tested. The outbreak needed to be stamped out, in accordance with WOAH and CFIA’s evidence-based practices for controlling avian flu.
There is one intervention that would dramatically reduce the need for stamping out, which I’ll discuss further on, but I doubt the medical freedom crowd will like it very much: vaccination.
What risk do the ostriches present?
The ostriches actually present a significant risk to Canadian trade, as well as Canadian health and welfare. They were infected with a clade 2.3.4.4.b genotype D1.3 H5N1 virus, which had recently reassorted (swapped genes with another virus in a co-infected host). Reassortment of their genome segments allows flu viruses to make massive evolutionary leaps forward in a very short period of time, which means it may change how pathogenic or transmissible they are or what hosts they can productively infect. CFIA did some tests on this ostrich virus and shared results in their recent situation update.
CFIA sequenced the virus at the National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease (NCFAD), which is their national lab in Winnipeg. NCFAD is the national reference lab for confirming H5N1 in animals, which is done by sequencing the virus genome. When you have the full genome sequence, you can learn all sorts of things about the virus by comparing it with other viruses collected from different species at different times and places. CFIA determined that the ostrich virus made its way down south (probably through wild birds) to Missouri and Ohio, where it put a patient in the hospital. The ostrich outbreak was caused by a virus that can cause severe disease in humans.
When the virus was sequenced, another feature immediately marked it as a highly pathogenic avian influenza virus: a furin cleavage site in the hemagglutinin (HA) gene.
Furin cleavage sites have long been a hot topic in pandemic origin discussions focused on the “lab leak” hypothesis, or the idea that COVID came from a lab. There is a furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 spike and many people—including many ostrich truthers, judging by my replies—think a virologist put it there. However, the reality is that a lot of viruses have furin cleavage sites in envelope glycoproteins like flu HA or SARS-CoV-2 spike. Furin cleavage sites usually increase infectivity by making receptor binding and cell entry more efficient. Lots of viruses naturally acquire them independently through evolution, including flu. Outbreaks of low pathogenicity avian flu can become highly pathogenic because furin cleavage sites will emerge with enough replication and opportunity to evolve. For flu, the presence of a furin cleavage site in HA is enough to identify this as a dangerous virus that presents a serious health risk to birds and humans.
Finally, while I haven’t seen the data, CFIA also infected mice with the ostrich virus, and it killed them faster than the genotype B3.13 isolate from American dairy cows. Mice don’t always reflect what happens in humans for a variety of reasons, but comparative pathogenicity studies like this often can help you assess if one virus is more of a risk than another. According to these results, the ostrich virus is more pathogenic than moo flu.
There are multiple lines of evidence suggesting this virus presents a serious threat to animal and human health and that is why the cull should proceed. While I think it’s unlikely the ostriches are still infected, it can’t be ruled out. Viruses can establish persistent infections or they can be maintained in a population through cryptic spread. Testing will not be able to conclusively determine that they are not infected. The risk of onward spread of this virus is too great. Culling is the only way to eliminate this risk.
Why can’t the ostriches be tested?
Testing will not be able to conclusively determine that the ostriches aren’t infected. You’d have to take a lot of samples from each ostrich to make sure you were exhausting every option to detect virus, which means both oral and cloacal swabs and blood samples. You’d have to collect these repeatedly to make sure the results were reproducible over time. The PCR tests used for detection are very sensitive and specific, but they may not detect a low level infection if the animal isn’t shedding much or if the virus is persisting somewhere that’s harder to sample, like in the eyes, testes, or brain. Even collecting samples would be difficult. Ostriches are large, cantankerous beasts that can disembowel a person with a single kick. Imagine attempting this from hundreds of stressed out ostriches beset by drones and shrieking protestors. The costs and resource requirements would be enormous for sample collection alone. UOF has also demanded that the tests be conducted independently due to baseless concerns that CFIA would rig the test results, but they haven’t offered to pay for it. As a Canadian taxpayer, I disagree that letting some opportunistic anti-vaxxer with a thermal cycler profit on demand from extremist ostrich grifters is a good use of taxpayer funds.
Enter University of British Columbia Professor Steven Pelech, a neurologist, antibody testing entrepreneur, vaccine skeptic, and UOF expert witness. Pelech presents himself as a testing expert since his business offers convenient testing services, but I have my doubts as to his credibility. This expertise includes a conspiracy theory that has been going strong since it was first floated in 2020: what I call the “too many cycles” theory.
Pelech does not appear to understand how RT-PCR works. RT-PCR uses specific DNA primers to amplify a piece of the virus genome. The viral RNA is converted to DNA using an enzyme called reverse transcriptase, and this DNA copy is used as a template for the PCR reaction. The double-stranded DNA template is denatured by heating it up, which breaks the hydrogen bonds between the A/T and C/G base pairs that hold both strands of DNA together. Then the temperature is lowered so that the primers anneal (bind) to the cDNA genome at specific sequences, then an enzyme called DNA polymerase copies the DNA. Then the reaction is heated up to denature the newly made copies and another cycle begins. The different steps of this process are determined by temperature changes, so it’s called a thermal cycle. Typical RT-PCR reactions use about 30-50 thermal cycles.
Quantitative RT-PCR, like what is described here, also uses a DNA probe that marked with a fluorescent dye that anneals to the newly made DNA copies based on sequence, just like the primers do. The probe only fluoresces when bound to the DNA copy, so this further increases specificity, because it will only bind to the specific complementary sequence in the template DNA. The fluorescent signal gets stronger as more fluorescent copies accumulate, and the cycle where it exceeds a predetermined threshold is called the Ct (cycle threshold). More starting virus means the reaction will pass this threshold sooner, so the Ct value is lower. A low level of starting virus means that more cycles are required to hit the threshold, so the Ct value is higher. Often clinical samples have very high Ct values because swabs don’t have that much material to begin with, there’s variation in collection technique and sample recovery, and shedding can vary a lot during an infection across many different hosts. But the Ct value will be N/A if there’s no virus template present to begin with.
PCR is an extremely well-validated and universally used molecular diagnostic testing method because it is extremely sensitive and extremely specific. That’s why it is used by CFIA’s national reference lab at NCFAD. However, Pelech thinks otherwise and has perhaps the most mechanistically detailed yet spectacularly inept explanation of “too many cycles” theory I’ve ever read.
They’re doing very high cycle threshold numbers. And so what that means is the more cycle threshold numbers you have to do in the PCR test, the more you amplify the amount of original starting material. And so when you’re doing something in the order of 36 cycles, that’s 2 to the 36th power. You’re doubling the amount of material each cycle, but it’s an enzymatic reaction done by an enzyme that can induce errors into the structure of the RNA. Ultimately it starts with RNA, but it’s converted to a DNA copy, and then that’s what’s amplified. So you actually get... each cycle introduces mutations in the sequence of what you’re trying to amplify. And so you get, essentially, not only amplifying what would be active virus, but you’re amplifying more often, when you’re getting to those high threshold numbers, the remnants and pieces of the RNA that’s left over. And so you get a, like, a 90% false positive rate.
-Steven Pelech, demonstrating to listeners of The Lavigne Show that he needs a refresher in basic molecular biology
Some of what Pelech says is true. 36 cycles of doubling is indeed 2 to the 36th power. That’s why PCR is so sensitive. RT-PCR also does start with RNA that’s converted to a DNA copy. PCR is an enzymatic reaction that amplifies a DNA template over a series of cycles. But who the hell refers to mutations as “errors in the structure of the RNA?” Does he think RT is making DNA at every cycle? You only use RT once and then PCR amplification proceeds from there, which is why it’s called RT-PCR. They are separate parts of the procedure. The RT part comes before the PCR part. But this is just the beginning of Pelech’s technical lack of comprehension.
Pelech implies an absurdly high error rate for DNA polymerase. Although DNA polymerases do make errors that cause mutations, they have proofreading capabilities, meaning they can self-correct mistakes when copying the DNA. They are high fidelity enzymes, which makes them very reliable for molecular diagnostics. CFIA uses this protocol, which has been around since 2002 and is used by most WOAH Reference Labs. It uses a standard QIAGEN One-Step RT-PCR kit, which uses a high-fidelity hot-start Taq DNA polymerase with an error rate around 1 in 20,000 nucleotides copied. The entire H5N1 genome is only ~13,500 nucleotides, and the PCR products being made are only around 100-200 nucleotides long. There is no way that more cycles would magically transform a negative sample into a positive one due to mutation. There is also no way that any DNA polymerase’s error rate would be so high that it would mutate random template into H5N1.
Pelech also doesn’t seem aware that this assay uses a probe, which increases specificity, or the fact that CFIA actually conducts three different RT-PCR tests on every sample: one for influenza A matrix and two subtyping tests for H5 and H7 HA. The ostrich carcasses that were tested would have come back positive for matrix and H5 and negative for H7, regardless of whether the Ct value was low or high, because they died from infection with H5N1. If they were negative, then they would not have a Ct value at all because of their exquisite sensitivity.
“Too many cycles” theory suggests that excessive cycling creates false positive results, as evidenced by patients testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 even after recovering from COVID. In a different expert witness statement from January 2024, Pelech claimed that COVID PCR tests with high cycle numbers showed “90% inaccuracy.” He also claimed that vaccines are dangerous and ineffective (they aren’t), they cause cancer (they don’t), and ivermectin works (it doesn’t), because “too many cycles” invariably leads to other pseudoscientific quackery. “Too many cycles”-ists always allege that PCR tests are not diagnostic tools, but part of an insidious Plandemic conspiracy to fake virus outbreaks and control the populace with draconian public health tyranny.
But RT-PCR amplifies the virus genome based on sequence. It’s very specific. You could do thousands of cycles and wouldn’t get false positives, because the primers won’t bind in the first place if the virus sequence isn’t there for them to bind to. The reason people test positive after recovering from COVID is that they still have low levels of viral RNA from the infection despite resolving the disease. It’s not because there are too many cycles in the RT-PCR reaction. If the ostriches were tested and came back positive with a high Ct value, it would indeed indicate that they have a low-level H5N1 infection. If they came back negative, it would not indicate that they are not infected, but that this particular sample did not contain H5N1 RNA.
Do the ostriches have antibodies?
Pelech wasn’t done flexing his test-based conspiracy theory expertise. He told Z-list Viva Frei copycat podcaster and failed PPC House of Commons candidate Jason Lavigne that he tested 18 eggs from UOF in the summer of 2024, months before the outbreak happened. He claims that this shows that the ostriches had pre-existing immunity to H5N1 when the outbreak occurred, and therefore they are immune. That is not the case, because Pelech used a test that is unreliable for flu serology because it is extremely prone to false positives.
You can do two types of tests for antibodies against flu: tests that measure antibody binding to its antigen (the protein the antibody targets) or tests that measure the antibody’s ability to neutralize the specific influenza virus you are investigating. Pelech did antibody binding tests called SPOT peptide arrays. He founded a company called Kinexus, “The Systems Proteomics Company”, which provides this service. This test works by putting a bunch of peptides (pieces of protein) on a membrane or slide and then seeing which peptides your antibodies bind to. These tests are fine for discovery work, but you need to confirm your results with another method because they are notorious for false-positives due to cross-reactivity. Antibodies are very specific, but they can sometimes bind to somewhat similar peptides that they aren’t specific for. Cross-reactivity is even more of a problem for flu, because there are many flu viruses that circulate in birds (low pathogenicity avian subtypes including viruses that have either H5 or N1). Ostriches are especially long-lived, so older birds from a farm with lots of wild bird exposure and no evident biosecurity protocols in place can have a broad repertoire of antibodies against all the flu infections they’ve had in their lifetimes.
For this reason, a SPOT peptide array showing H5N1 antibody positivity must be confirmed with another test to ensure specificity. Kinexus recommends something called Kinetworks™ Multi-Immunoblotting, which is how you say “pay us to do several western blots” in corporate marketing-speak. Western blotting is a method of detecting a specific protein by probing for it with antibodies. They could probe a western of H5 HA or N1 NA with the egg antibodies, but that wouldn’t eliminate the problem of cross-reactivity since that also occurs in westerns. So western blots (or other antibody-binding assays like ELISA) are not an option to confirm these results.
This is why flu virologists and immunologists test the antibodies’ ability to neutralize the specific flu virus of interest. Hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assays and microneutralization tests measure specific antibody neutralization by mixing antibodies and virus and titrating the virus that remains infectious. Non-specific cross-reactive antibodies usually don’t neutralize the virus, so these tests are much less likely to produce false positives.
However, there is no way Pelech could conduct HAI or microneutralization tests because they require infectious H5N1 virus. All work with live virus needs to be performed in an enhanced containment level 3 (CL3) lab and he does not have one. Furthermore, H5N1 is a Security Sensitive Biological Agent (SSBA), so anyone working with it has to obtain a security clearance under the Human Pathogens and Toxins Act. This process requires an extremely thorough government background check that takes months to complete. This is to ensure that essential research on dangerous viruses like H5N1 is carried out by properly trained personnel who do not present a security risk to Canada and who will comply with rigorous biosafety and biosecurity standards. SSBAs are subject to strict regulatory oversight. It is a federal crime to handle H5N1 without HPTA clearance or at a substandard level of biocontainment.
While I am sure Pelech would love to be paid to do more serology testing as UOF and their supporters have demanded, he is not technically or legally capable of carrying out reliable or conclusive tests. His claim that the ostriches had antibodies to H5N1 prior to the outbreak is unsupported.
However, let’s say that it is true that the ostriches had H5N1 antibodies before the outbreak. What does that imply? According to Pelech, they had a prior infection with a H5 and N1 subtype virus. If true, that means there was another outbreak at the farm that was unreported, which is further evidence that UOF has never met a government public health regulation they were willing to follow.
It does not imply that the ostriches have protective immunity, since we don’t know whether they were infected or not during the outbreak. In fact, the mere presence of antibodies does not indicate protective immunity. This is a key point that is frequently overlooked by UOF supporters.
Are the ostriches immune?
We don’t know whether or not the ostriches have anti-H5N1 antibodies because they have never been tested with a reliable assay. Even if we had more accurate serological measurements for these ostriches and could say that they had some level of neutralizing antibodies, you wouldn’t know what levels were protective. As anti-vaxxers love to point out, many vaccines don’t produce sterilizing immunity and don’t completely prevent infection, even if they reduce disease. But infection-acquired immunity isn’t necessarily superior or completely protective, even though it can last a long time.
As ever, Pelech’s expert witness report contains opinions that are based on factually incorrect premises advanced by the anti-vax movement: here, it’s the idea that “natural immunity” is the best immunity because it lasts a really long time.
It’s true that a 2008 study found that survivors of 1918 still produced antibodies more than 8 decades after their infection. However, characterizing these experiments as “reinfection with the same influenza pathogen” is not accurate. This study tested for antibodies and isolated B cells, but then used them to make monoclonal antibodies for therapeutic use. The authors challenged mice with a lethal dose of reconstructed 1918 and treated with the antibodies, and showed that they were protective. They did not reinfect nonagenarian and centenarian 1918 survivors with 1918. We have no data showing that infection-acquired immunity from an infection decades prior is protective.
Furthermore, viruses don’t become “endemic in the environment.” They are obligate parasites that require a host to reproduce and they do not infect the environment. This is why we are able to eradicate viruses with vaccination. If there are no susceptible hosts to infect, the virus dies. Enveloped viruses like influenza have a membrane (called an envelope) on the exterior of the virion (virus particle) that is derived from the host cell it came from. The envelope cannot withstand harsh environmental conditions, like big changes in temperature or pH, for very long. If a pathogen becomes a “source of antigen for natural boosting” in a population, that means it is circulating in that population. Suggesting that these ostriches have the potential to support repeated infections with H5N1 and sustain circulation and risk of spread to other animals or people who do not have prior immunity is not a strong argument for exempting them from depopulation.
Very little is known about antibody responses in ostriches to avian flu, but ostriches did not mount strong serological responses to a high-dose challenge with H5N1. They produced antibodies, but their titers determined by HAI were quite low.
Because we don’t know what levels of antibodies confer protection against H5N1, we cannot say if the UOF ostriches would be protected even if we did know their antibody levels. Thus we have no idea if the ostriches have achieved “herd immunity.”
But you would never know that listening to the ostrich convoy, who relentlessly claim that the ostrich immune system is the undisputed champion of immune systems. There is simply no evidence that this is true, other than it is convenient for marketing the ostrich antibody supplement products that UOF aspires to sell.
The overhyping of ostrich immunity is so rampant and hyperbolic that UOF owner Bilinski even claimed that the all-powerful ostrich immune system helped them survive the meteor strike that took out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.
Aside from the fact that immunity will not protect any species from a catastrophic planetary mass extinction event, the ostrich branch of the evolutionary tree of life emerged about 20 million years ago, so he’s off by about 45 million years.
Ostriches lay bigger eggs, so they might be better at producing antibodies for some applications than smaller species like chickens, but there is nothing that indicates ostrich immunity is superior to other animals. In fact, because ostriches are a different species, their antibodies’ value may be limited for human therapeutics since our immune systems will recognize that they are foreign. It’s not known how likely they would be to trigger allergic reactions or what the side effects would be. This can be tested in controlled experiments in animal models or clinical trials, but there is very little data on this currently.
Does it matter if the ostriches are immune?
No, it doesn’t really matter if the ostriches are immune or not. The issue is not whether they will get H5N1 again, it’s whether they will spread H5N1 to other birds. Because this risk can’t be fully ruled out, many of Canada’s trading partners consider this to be a risk too great to take because of the threat H5N1 presents to health and safety. Culling is the only way to guarantee that this risk is eliminated.
The main importer of Canadian poultry products is the US (they buy Canadian eggs). The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has explicitly banned poultry imports from the region around UOF ever since the outbreak. This could be expanded, especially given that US-Canadian trade relations are not exactly a lovefest these days. Violating Canada’s agreement under CUSMA about managing avian flu provides a very valid pretext for the US government to further escalate the ongoing trade war. It does not matter if the ostriches are immune, because there is no way to prove it and no evidence to support that this would reduce the risk to other farms or other countries that buy Canadian poultry products.
Why don’t we study the ostriches?
We would not learn much from studying these ostriches. US Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Mehmet Oz has claimed otherwise, including repeatedly asserting that the ostriches are an immunological treasure trove and demanding they be exported to his Floridian estate for further study. He even wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney pleading for their export to the US.
The problem with this is that these ostriches have not been kept under controlled conditions that would make them useful for a study. We don’t know if the ostriches previously were infected with H5N1 or not. Even if we did, we would not know what dose they were infected with or by what route. There’s no indication that anyone at UOF recorded symptoms of individual ostriches during the outbreak, so we have no information about their clinical course of disease. Studying immune durability in ostriches would only be applicable to ostriches and not humans, since many aspects of their immune systems and biology are different than ours. We might learn some things about ostriches, but very little would be conclusive or have value for human medicine.
UOF attempted to get an exemption to culling by claiming that the ostriches have “rare genetics” from being immunized to produce antibody supplements in their eggs. Although it is true that genetic background can determine disease severity (my lab has shown this for Ebola virus using a panel of genetically diverse mice), this is not due to acquired immunity as UOF implies. Here Pelech suggests that these ostriches could be selectively bred to be resistant to H5N1 viral infections and argues that replacing them with new, younger, genetically inferior ostriches would lead to more sickness and death.
There is no evidence that these ostriches had prior exposure or immunity as discussed above, nor is there evidence that they have the “right genetics” to limit infection or disease severity. Even if that evidence did exist, how would UOF plan to execute selective breeding scheme? They were unable to provide CFIA with any breeding records or pedigrees at all to support their exemption appeal, so I have serious doubts about their competence to carry out a complicated multi-generation selective breeding scheme. To identify offspring that would be more resistant to future H5N1 outbreaks, you would need to infect them with H5N1 to assess how seriously ill they got. Deliberately infecting birds that live outdoors, in close proximity to people and other animals, would create a massive risk to public health, Canadian agriculture, and food security. It would also be illegal due to H5N1’s status as a SSBA under the HPTA in addition to being incredibly dangerous.
Besides, there is a much easier and more broadly applicable way to make birds in general more resistant to disease with no specialized breeding required: vaccination.
Is there an alternative to stamping out?
Yes. Vaccination is the alternative. Currently Canada does not vaccinate poultry for H5N1. Historically, very few countries did this because of concerns that the vaccines could select for vaccine-resistant mutants. However, this H5N1 panzootic has changed everything. As it has swept the globe, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of millions of poultry birds, more countries are opening up to the idea.
Mexico has been vaccinating chickens against a low pathogenicity strain of H5N2 endemic in their flocks since the 1990s and this has successfully prevented the emergence of highly pathogenic variants. China began vaccinating against both H5 and H7 viruses in 2017, compelled by huge H7N9 outbreaks that caused a number of fatal human cases. Although the vaccine didn’t prevent vaccine-evasive variants from emerging, it ended these outbreaks and completely eliminated zoonotic transmission to poultry workers. The pilot study in Guangzhou was so successful that China began using it nationally. The results in this panzootic were striking, based on this 2023 presentation from Hualan Chen, the scientist at the Harbin Veterinary Research Institute who developed the H5-H7 vaccine. In a 2 year period, mainland China lost fewer than 10,000 birds compared to the rest of the world, where deaths by disease or culling approached 200 million. Vaccines work.
The losses became so extreme for poultry farmers around the world, and the success in China has been so striking, that governments began to consider implementing vaccination as an avian flu control strategy. Several countries in Europe and Egypt have conducted pilot poultry vaccination studies. The USDA has conditionally approved a H5N1 vaccine for chickens, although to my knowledge it is not yet in widespread use. Canada has assembled a task force to assess the risks and benefits of poultry vaccination.
There are still some barriers to implementing poultry vaccination more broadly. Because the vaccines are not sterilizing and vaccinated birds can still become infected, vaccination would need to occur very broadly and there would need to be widespread uptake. Additionally, it still would impact poultry exports, because many countries will not accept poultry products from animals vaccinated against avian flu due to the risk of a residual infection. We also need to improve our capability to differentiate infected and vaccinated animals (DIVA). Reliable DIVA tests will be crucial to address concerns regarding trade of vaccinated poultry products.
Vaccination will not do anything to change the situation with UOF’s ostriches. However, it is a viable way to reduce culling by reducing outbreaks. Bird flu outbreaks are usually identified when birds start dying. These vaccines work very well to prevent disease in birds, so they prevent outbreaks even though they don’t completely prevent infection. Farms will still need to practice rigourous biosecurity and workers will need to take precautions to prevent exposure, but if China’s experience is any indication, vaccination significantly reduces zoonotic risk. DIVA tests will need to be validated and trade agreements will need to be amended or renegotiated. National poultry vaccination cannot and should not be implemented overnight, but over the long term, immunization is an option that Canada should strongly consider for the sake of both our domestic poultry industry and our international trade.
Would you euthanize your own pets?
Yes, I would, if they presented a risk to public health and safety and/or it was required by law. We have two dogs in our family named Ripley and Boney. Ripley is a Husky mix from Texas named after one of my idols (Sigourney Weaver’s character in the Alien movies). Boney is a German Shepherd-Pug-Husky-Pit Bull-Doberman-a bunch of other things mix (I genotyped them) from Saskatchewan who we named after Canada’s favourite Christmas disco band, Boney M. They are both rescues who started off with difficult lives (Ripley was neglected, Boney was dumped in a snowbank on the side of the highway with her siblings as a puppy), so we resolved to make their lives with us as happy, healthy, and comfortable as possible. They are both sweet, funny girls with unique personalities. We love them very much and are responsible for their health and well-being. That includes proactively protecting them, because like all other dogs, they are at risk for rabies virus infection from infected wildlife.
Rabies virus is terrifying. Once rabies hits the central nervous system in humans and dogs, it’s a death sentence. It causes a truly horrifying encephalitis, which causes such tremendous suffering that most humans are put into a medically-induced coma in late-stage disease. Euthanizing rabid dogs is much more humane than allowing them to succumb to the disease naturally and possibly infect many more people or dogs with a virus that kills everything it infects with no intervention. In Canada, rabies is also a reportable disease under the Health of Animals Act. Reporting rabies means certain death for the dog, as the method for confirming rabies requires euthanizing and decapitating them to test the brain for virus.
Fortunately, I will never have to report my dogs for rabies because their rabies vaccines are up to date, so they are protected from it. Unlike bird flu in ostriches, we do know a lot about protective immunity against rabies virus in dogs. Most provinces and municipalities mandate vaccination in pet dogs, which is why Canada does not have rabies virus circulating in dogs. I vaccinate my dogs against everything including other dog viruses like distemper and parvovirus. But I am especially relieved they are vaccinated against rabies, because it protects them from certain death.
I am also vaccinated against rabies, since I am at a higher risk than most other people as I have traveled to places with rabies outbreaks and work with wild bats. I just had a booster last year to make sure my antibodies remain in the established protective range. I don’t mess with rabies. If my dogs weren’t vaccinated and they were bitten by a rabid animal, I would be heartbroken and grieve terribly, but I would report it to CFIA, knowing that they would be euthanized. It is the most humane thing to do, it’s necessary to protect other animals and people, and I abide by the law.
Are ostriches poultry?
Yes, ostriches are considered poultry by CFIA and WOAH. It does not matter that they are big. It does not matter that they are flightless. It does not matter that they produce red meat. It does not matter that UOF claims to regard them as beloved family members. They are birds that are used to produce meat, eggs, and other animal products, so they are classified as poultry.
Apparently UOF considers them to be poultry too, despite their claims that they got out of the ostrich meat business in 2020 to become antibody grifters, because they were evidently still selling ostrich meat and oil.
In 2021, Espersen and Bilinski were featured in an article entitled “Are Ostriches the New Beef?” extolling the many virtues of raising ostriches for meat, oil, skin, and feathers, as well as discussing their plans to expand their commercial poultry business. As recently as April 2025, their website advertised that they were operating a suite of businesses devoted to raising ostriches for slaughter and processing them into various products. They were selling breeder stock, producing meat and oil, and making other products like skin cream and pet food. They bragged about their “full vertical integration” of their ostrich business, from incubator to abattoir.
There is nothing wrong with raising ostriches for agricultural production, including meat. From a business perspective, it makes sense to slaughter roosters for meat production, since they are don’t lay eggs and aren’t useful to UOF’s antibody business and don’t otherwise have production value apart from breeding. However, it speaks to the motives and integrity of UOF that they have rallied their supporters with cries of “CFIA is coming to kill our beloved pets and research subjects.” In reality they were actively promoting a business that requires killing those same animals to butcher them and render their fat pads into oil. It’s a lot harder to take Pasitney’s tears about the recently deceased Spirit seriously when she and her mother were taking orders for Spirit steaks on the side.
This may seem like a minor point, but it’s actually really important. UOF and their supporters argue that CFIA’s depopulation order is a cruel and pointless example of government overreach that threatens their livelihoods, animal welfare, property rights, and freedom. But what makes UOF special compared to the many chicken and turkey producers that have had to cull their flocks after avian flu outbreaks? The only thing that distinguishes them from other law-abiding poultry producers is the political media circus that they have convened and the mob they have rallied against CFIA and the entire Canadian government. They lied about the true nature of their business and engaged in inflammatory anti-government rhetoric that has already inspired violence. They continue to raise money off their efforts to undermine Canadian trade, health, and national security in order to get their way.
Canada cannot afford to bend to the will of a mob of goat-bearded anti-vax bullies who are motivated by extremist politics and profiteering. I’ve been asked many times why I care so much about this entire stupid situation, and it goes far beyond my professional expertise and scientific curiosity. This is personal because I am American. My home country is rapidly becoming an authoritarian dictatorship. It is about to experience a massive public health crisis as a result of anti-vax policies and the widespread gutting of the federal government, as preventable disease epidemics explode and the government is unable to effectively respond. America is in terrible danger and millions will get sick and die as a result. I am devastated by what has happened to my homeland, but grateful to live in Canada, a country that still lives by its democratic principles and values. I will do everything I can to prevent what happened in the US from happening here.
This happened in America in part because of far-right radicals turning public health discussions into a toxic, partisan minefield and mainstreaming unscientific, fringe views. Relentless anti-science, anti-public health propaganda and MAHA nonsense all undermine the government’s ability to serve the people. As absurd and clownish as some of the ostrich antics have been, it is, at its insidious core, a movement to undermine Canada’s government. The trucker convoy was Canada’s January 6th. The PPC is the MAHA movement. The ostrich truthers all promote the same ideas that led to the destruction of American science and public health: government regulation is part of a globalist plan for oppression, vaccines are unsafe, it’s all the Democrats’/Liberals’ fault, immigrants are replacing white Americans/Canadians, fundamentalist Christianity is the only true religion, Big Pharma has corrupted medicine and is intentionally harming our health, it’s not hate speech if it’s directed at political opponents or minorities, individual “rights” supersede the well-being of all, equity, diversity, and inclusion are discriminatory and evil, and so on.
There is much more at stake than just the fate of these ostriches. Canada’s leaders must not abdicate their duty to protect the Canadian economy, human and animal health, and the rule of law. Canada must recognize the threat that this presents to our national security and take action. Canada must cull the ostriches.
thanks for the update, Angie. Yes, indeed, you are a bona fide virologist, providing detailed critical analysis of this sordid ostrich saga.
Yes long but so necessary. Thank you. And when I thought it couldn’t get any weirder.. antibodies to meteorite strikes!!