On the Chessbase database (chessbase.com), I found 26 games with this line.  In the first game listed, I was suprised to see that Shirazi beat Larsen with this line.  (Larsen played 3.h4.)  Browsing through the games, a few others caught my eye:

Vaulin-Afinogenov 1997 seemed like a sensible way handling 3.h4 for white, when black plays a closed system with d6.  White obtained an advantage by preparing a d4 break, which brought about a position where black's h5 seemed disadvantageous.

Manolov-Rause 1989 is a nice miniature for black after 3.h3 f5.  At first glance, this looks dangerous for white.

Dzindzikhashvilli-Shirazi 1992 was a disaster for black in the line 3.Nc3 h4 4. g4 h3, though I think Qh4 was a waste of time and the pawn sacrifice seems suspect.  3.Nc3 seems like an interesting idea in that it prevents an immediate d5, but it seems to be a little risky.   

I found a number of games in the 3.h4 line that became a reverse Dragon with h4 and h5 thrown in.  I think this addition is worse for black, since black usually wants to move the f-pawn, but in this case it often leaves a glaring weakness on g6.  Maybe this isn't a problem with black castled queenside, but often white can take measures against this.

I think lines with an early ...d5 against 3.h4 seem to be most in the spirit of 2...h5, but I don't see anything that suggests that the inclusion of h4 and h5 improves on other reversed Dragon lines in the English.  One of the common tries is 3.h4 d5 4. cxd5 Qxd5 (Webster-Dunworth), but white looks better to me.  Any ideas?