Swine Flu: Potential Threat to Human Species?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_Absolute
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on concerns regarding a new strain of swine flu emerging in Mexico and the U.S., with fears about its potential to cause widespread fatalities. Experts note that while the virus has shown resistance to some antiviral drugs, it primarily affects young, healthy adults, which is atypical for flu viruses that usually target the very young and elderly. The CDC does not recommend extreme measures, indicating that the situation is being monitored and cases reported have been mild. Historical patterns suggest that flu pandemics occur roughly every 20 years, raising questions about the current strain's severity compared to past outbreaks. Overall, while there is concern about the virus's spread, current evidence suggests it may not escalate to the catastrophic levels feared.
  • #151
Evo said:
I think it's time to put the gloom and doom to bed, it's just not happening.

It looks like we have been taken-in, for the most part, by the hype from Mexican government officials et al, and the media who stands to gain by taking them at face value.

I should have known better. Mexico is a country mired in poverty by institutions that encourage corruption and fraud (more so than others).

Ignoring the Mexican numbers, having no objective scientific value, the WHO's April 30th update places fatalities vs. confirmed cases at 1 to 160. Gestation could up the ratio somewhat. More attention to a sick toddler (the one fatality) could reduce it.
 
Last edited:
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #152
Evo said:
I think it's time to put the gloom and doom to bed, it's just not happening.

The medical care available to the public in 1918 is like the dark ages in comparison to what we have now.

It's very likely that other widespread diseases such as TB played an important role in deaths back then.

The flu doesn't kill, it's secondary infections such as pneumonia that kill, and treated early, the prognosis is very good.

What was SARS?
 
  • #153
Count Iblis said:
Black Death killed 10 to 20 percent of the World's population, so if that were to happen again we are looking at more than a billion deaths.

What a relief to the overcrowded Earth.
 
  • #154
I think it's time to put the gloom and doom to bed, it's just not happening

The smart thing to do would be to make a list of potential threats that could do serious damage to our civilization. Then look at the probabilities of these threats. If there are threats with a reasonable high probability we should look at how we could best pre-emt such a threat.


Instead, what we have been doing in the last few years is to use play the "disaster card" to settle disputes we have been involved with. Example: We didn't like Saddam (for good reasons) but we played the "potential disaster card" by exaggerating the WMD threat to moblize support for a military invasion and ended up spending something of the order of a trillion dollars on Iraq.


I think also that the problems now in Afghanistan should be solved, but we shouldn't pretend that terrorists from there could somehow deal a blow to our civilization. Nevertheless spending many billions there is something that has broad consensus.


A flu pandemic is different in that it could be a real threat to our civilization. If we were to make a list of disasters that are theoretically capable of killing billions, then things like asteroid impacts, supervolcano eruptions, nearby gamma ray bursts etc. etc. would be on that list as well as a pandemic. But a pandemic has a far larger probability of happening than these other disasters.


So, it seems to me that we should have spend a few bilions to expand the production capacity we have to make vaccines. We should have aimed for the capacity to produce 6.5 billion vaccines in one or two month's time.
 
  • #155
Count Iblis said:
So, it seems to me that we should have spend a few bilions to expand the production capacity we have to make vaccines. We should have aimed for the capacity to produce 6.5 billion vaccines in one or two month's time.
Because of how the virus mutates, you cannot make large batches of vaccine ahead of time because we don't know what will be needed. And then you've got nuts out there telling people that vaccinations and immunizations should be abolished.
 
  • #156
Evo said:
Because of how the virus mutates, you cannot make large batches of vaccine ahead of time because we don't know what will be needed. And then you've got nuts out there telling people that vaccinations and immunizations should be abolished.
Also, because the mutation rate out-paces vaccine production, any vaccine that is produced and stockpiled for the upcoming flu season has a good chance of being partially or totally ineffective against next winters' strains.
 
  • #157
The new influenza virus A(H1N1)

I've been reading the latest study (May 1, 2009) published in PLoS Medicine:Hedging against Antiviral Resistance during the Next Influenza Pandemic Using Small Stockpiles of an Alternative Chemotherapy by Joseph T. Wu, Gabriel M. Leung, Marc Lipsitch, Ben S. Cooper, and Steven Riley.

Has anyone else read it?
 
  • #158
It is not just secondary infections that kill people who have been infected by influenza; the influenza can cause an uncontrolled immune response that damages the body, causing organ failure and the like (cytokine storm). This is thought to be a factor in the demographics of casualties in the 1918 pandemic as well as with the H5N1 strain.

http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2009/04/swine_flu_and_deaths_in_health.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...4/26/AR2009042602827.html?sid=ST2009042602901
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #159
Evo said:
Because of how the virus mutates, you cannot make large batches of vaccine ahead of time because we don't know what will be needed. And then you've got nuts out there telling people that vaccinations and immunizations should be abolished.


He didn't say make batches ahead of time. What he is talking about is increasing the ability to make vaccines in huge batches quickly.
 
  • #160
ibnsos said:
He didn't say make batches ahead of time. What he is talking about is increasing the ability to make vaccines in huge batches quickly.
It takes time to develop a vaccine that is effective against a new strain. It's not as easy as it sounds to just have vast resources lying idle in case you have a once a century epidemic.
 
  • #161
Moridin said:
It is not just secondary infections that kill people who have been infected by influenza; the influenza can cause an uncontrolled immune response that damages the body, causing organ failure and the like (cytokine storm). This is thought to be a factor in the demographics of casualties in the 1918 pandemic as well as with the H5N1 strain.

http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2009/04/swine_flu_and_deaths_in_health.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...4/26/AR2009042602827.html?sid=ST2009042602901
Actually, your link to the blog seems to say no to the anecdotal "cytokine storm" from the Washington Post. Are you sure you posted to the right thing?

So, are we seeing this with the reassortant swine H1N1 virus, or should we expect to find that it causes this? Is this why reportedly many of the deaths to date are in the "young and healthy"? Right now, we simply don't know. As I mentioned yesterday, the data from Mexico (from media reports, at least) are sparse, and only a handful of cases have been confirmed to be caused by the novel swine flu virus. This makes attempts to extrapolate to any larger trends a risky and imprecise endeavor, and the old adage certainly applies: garbage in, garbage out. So right now (again, from media-reported data), we don't know for sure that there really is a higher number of "young and healthy" dying from this virus than we would expect to see--so whether this trend even exists is a big question mark.

However, even if we do see an excess of deaths in that middle age group, there could be other reasons besides the "cytokine storm." Perhaps this group has exposures that have made them more likely to contract the virus than other age groups, so the greater number of deaths is simply a result of a greater number of exposed individuals. Perhaps they were less likely to have been vaccinated in recent years, meaning they had no cross-protective immunity. (This also is a big question mark, as we don't know, even in vaccinated individuals, that any immunity to human H1N1 viruses would confer any protection). Perhaps they've simply been more likely to be noticed in this outbreak, and thus their cases have received more attention and were more likely to have been worked up (as far as obtaining a culture, etc.) than those in the typical influenza risk groups. There are just too many unknowns right now to address these questions, but certainly they will be investigated as more surveillance data is collected.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #162
"1976 U.S. outbreak
Main article: 1976 swine flu outbreak
On February 5, 1976, in the United States an army recruit at Fort Dix said he felt tired and weak. He died the next day and four of his fellow soldiers were later hospitalized. Two weeks after his death, health officials announced that the cause of death was a new strain of swine flu. The strain, a variant of H1N1, is known as A/New Jersey/1976 (H1N1). It was detected only from January 19 to February 9 and did not spread beyond Fort Dix.[52]President Ford receives swine flu vaccination
This new strain appeared to be closely related to the strain involved in the 1918 flu pandemic. Moreover, the ensuing increased surveillance uncovered another strain in circulation in the U.S.: A/Victoria/75 (H3N2) spread simultaneously, also caused illness, and persisted until March.[52] Alarmed public-health officials decided action must be taken to head off another major pandemic, and urged President Gerald Ford that every person in the U.S. be vaccinated for the disease.[53]
The vaccination program was plagued by delays and public relations problems.[54] On October 1, 1976, the immunization program began and by October 11, approximately 40 million people, or about 24% of the population, had received swine flu immunizations. That same day, three senior citizens died soon after receiving their swine flu shots and there was a media outcry linking the deaths to the immunizations, despite the lack of positive proof. According to science writer Patrick Di Justo, however, by the time the truth was known — that the deaths were not proven to be related to the vaccine — it was too late. "The government had long feared mass panic about swine flu — now they feared mass panic about the swine flu vaccinations." This became a strong setback to the program.[21]
There were reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome, a paralyzing neuromuscular disorder, affecting some people who had received swine flu immunizations. This syndrome is a rare side-effect of modern influenza vaccines, with an incidence of about one case per million vaccinations.[55] As a result, Di Justo writes that "the public refused to trust a government-operated health program that killed old people and crippled young people." In total, less than 33 percent of the population had been immunized by the end of 1976. The National Influenza Immunization Program was effectively halted on Dec. 16.
Overall, about 500 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), resulting in death from severe pulmonary complications for 25 people, which, according to Dr. P. Haber, were probably caused by an immunopathological reaction to the 1976 vaccine. Other influenza vaccines have not been linked to GBS, though caution is advised for certain individuals, particularly those with a history of GBS.[56][57] Still, as observed by a participant in the immunization program, the vaccine killed more Americans than the disease did.[58]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swine_influenza#1976_U.S._outbreak

What is the point in a vaccine if the virus isn't likely to kill you. How many American deaths so far? Besides being infected by the virus naturally is almost the same thing as getting the vaccine isn't it?

The worst and widest spread H1N1 virus, spanish flu, only effected an estimated 28% of the U.S. population. So that means that someone taking a vaccine would likely not even have ever been infected. On top of that, by the time the vaccines were ready, many people out of the potential 28% or so would have already been infected. And, even in 76 where a huge effort was made to vaccinate the public, only 24% of the population were vaccinated. How many of the 24% vaccinated do you think would have been otherwise infected?
 
Last edited:
  • #163
The new influenza virus A(H1N1) - Swine Flu

As of today (May 1, 2009) you can review the GenBank sequences for the *new* 2009 A(H1N1) influenza outbreak that has been taken from the NIAID Influenza Genome Sequencing Project! Yippee! :biggrin: The National Center for Biotechnology Information is definitely a great resource for researchers, whereas in past decades we didn't have the technology.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/FLU/SwineFlu.html

I hope someone will be able to respond to my last question on the previous page. I would enjoy discussing it with a professional.

Thanks you.

p.s. I'll be back on Monday. Have a great weekend everyone.
Keep a smile on your face. Never give up on hoping for the best in life.
 
  • #164
I'm not a professional, but to me it sounds like they are worried that the virus will mutate and become resistant to antivirals at some point. The basic idea is to start using one drug, and save the other for later. The two effective drugs are relenza and tamiflu.
 
Last edited:
  • #165
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=av4wgnUyWfhI&refer=uk"

New York health officials will test for swine flu only in patients with a severe illness or where there may be a cluster of cases, said the New York City health commissioner, Thomas Frieden, at a news conference today. All of the 49 confirmed cases and more than 1,000 likely infected New Yorkers have had mild symptoms similar to those of seasonal flu, he said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #166
Does exposure to this strain of the virus provide protection against variants of the strain that we can expect to see in the future; and others that may already exist?
 
  • #167
Ivan Seeking said:
Does exposure to this strain of the virus provide protection against variants of the strain that we can expect to see in the future; and others that may already exist?
It's an interesting dynamic. If you are exposed to a flu virus at the beginning of the next flu season, and suffer a mild case of the flu (as most people have experienced so far), your protection will be far more up-to-date than anybody who receives a vaccine at about that time that was developed starting today. It can take 3-4 months to work up a vaccine, and another 3-4 months or more before enough of the vaccine can be produced to get enough doses to treat the at-risk population in the US. By the time next fall comes around, if the flu has not gotten deadly, you might be better off to contract it and suffer a mild case of it than to get vaccinated.
 
  • #168
Did anyone here of this?

"2009 avian flu contamination
The Austrian pharmaceutical firm, Baxter International, sent a flu vaccine, which it had accidentally contaminated with the deadly H5N1 bird flu virus, for testing in the Czech Republic, a report said Tuesday [3/3/2009]. The Austrian firm Baxter said it contaminated the vaccine with the dangerous virus by accident, likely during packaging in Austria, the Mlada Fronta Dnes daily reported, citing Baxter's representative. Baxter shipped the infected vaccine to the Czech biomedical firm Biotest for testing on ferrets in late January. None of Biotest's employees, who had been exposed to the highly pathogenic virus for a week, contracted the disease. According to the World Health Organization figures, the bird flu has killed 254 people, mostly in Asia and Africa, including four deaths reported in Turkey. The Czech Republic's chief epidemiologist Michael Vit said that it was unclear whether the Biotest workers had been under a high risk of infection as the Czech authorities did not know how much virus the vaccine contained. Officials, however, hinted that the situation could have been serious. "Thank God it did not spread," Vit said. The Czech company managed to prevent the virus from spreading outside the lab to poultry breeds, which would have had to be culled in such an event. "If it were to spread to poultry farms it would have caused serious problems," said Josef Duben, a spokesman for the Czech State Veterinary Administration. The exposed employees were given Tamiflu medicine and have been regularly tested, Vit said. The infected ferrets had to be culled and the laboratory, which is located 70 kilometres east of the Czech capital Prague, was disinfected. [6][7] [8]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baxter_International

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&refer=science&sid=aTo3LbhcA75I

This just goes to show how easy vaccine makers can screw up and risk a pandemic. That sounds like a pretty boneheaded mistake.

And this is the corporation who is going to manufacture the worlds swine bird man flu vaccine.

"...Still, around 60% of humans known to have been infected with the current Asian strain of HPAI A(H5N1) have died from it, and H5N1 may mutate or reassort into a strain capable of efficient human-to-human transmission. In 2003, world-renowned virologist Robert Webster published an article titled "The world is teetering on the edge of a pandemic that could kill a large fraction of the human population" in American Scientist. He called for adequate resources to fight what he sees as a major world threat to possibly billions of lives.[6] On September 29, 2005, David Nabarro, the newly-appointed Senior United Nations System Coordinator for Avian and Human Influenza, warned the world that an outbreak of avian influenza could kill anywhere between 5 million and 150 million people.[7] Experts have identified key events (creating new clades, infecting new species, spreading to new areas) marking the progression of an avian flu virus towards becoming pandemic, and many of those key events have occurred more rapidly than expected."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H5N1#Overview
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #169
"At least one U.S. company has jumped in early to start evaluating the strain, potentially in order to develop a vaccine. Illinois-based Baxter International Inc. requested virus samples from the World Health Organization and expects to obtain them in the next few days, company spokesman Chris Bona said." :eek:

"He said Baxter has a special system to "rapidly produce" flu vaccines and potentially could develop one in half the time it normally takes -- about 26 weeks."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/30/demand-new-flu-vaccine-overwhelm-manufacturers/

Hopefully they don't accidentally contaminate it with h5n1!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #170
The CDC has about 6 billion dollars in its annual budget. The annual budget for the military is about 600 billion or so. Gives some perspective, I think.
 
  • #171
There is a swirl of partial information out there in the blogosphere.

Evolution of Infectious Disease by Paul W. Ewald (1996)

presents a good model for understanding what the CDC and epidemiologists fear can happen/not happen with H1N5. Influenza can change virulence, change mode or rapidity of infection as it infects new hosts (and so on) - primarily as it moves from host to host individuals in a population.

Modern populations are very mobile, so it may be reasonable to infer that some changes in the virus' "pattern of behavior" will surface quickly. It is completely impossible to predict what the changes will be. The only sure thing is that if spread of the disease is restricted, the probability of these changes occurring is reduced.
 
  • #172
Lord God, I can't believe the hysteria this is causing. Evo has made the very good point that n 1918, levels of medical care and understanding of viral infections were both poor. Most people died not from the flu but from complications resulting from secondary bacterial infections, this was in the days before antibiotics were available. Get a grip!
 
  • #173
Amen
 
  • #174
Red Rum said:
Lord God, I can't believe the hysteria this is causing. Evo has made the very good point that n 1918, levels of medical care and understanding of viral infections were both poor. Most people died not from the flu but from complications resulting from secondary bacterial infections, this was in the days before antibiotics were available. Get a grip!

Then why does H5N1 kill 50% of the people it infects in this day and age? And how come SARS was so dangerous?
 
  • #175
Red Rum said:
Lord God, I can't believe the hysteria this is causing. Evo has made the very good point that n 1918, levels of medical care and understanding of viral infections were both poor. Most people died not from the flu but from complications resulting from secondary bacterial infections, this was in the days before antibiotics were available. Get a grip!

This faith is deeply misplaced. Most people from seasonal influenza may die from secondary infections, but this is not necessary the case for pandemic influenza. We are facing things like antibiotic resistant bacteria and pandemic influenza that we cannot at this point in time, handle.
 
  • #176
The director of the state health department indicated that most recent infections with flu like symptoms were not H1N1, the apparent transmissibility of the H1N1 is not significantly greater than the annual seasonal flu, and it apparently it does not appear to be more severe than normal flu, and the majority of those (in the US) with H1N1 seem to be recovering. However, he pointed out that its early in the cycle, so the current trends are preliminary and they'll have a better idea in a month or so. Nevertheless, health officials are treating it as serious.

CDC and other health officials are puzzled why so many in Mexico died.
 
  • #177
Count Iblis said:
Then why does H5N1 kill 50% of the people it infects in this day and age? And how come SARS was so dangerous?

It's not a matter of when...that is - today.

It is a matter of where.

http://cme.medscape.com/viewarticle/518006
"4. Understanding the Current Threat of Avian Influenza A (H5N1)
Over the past 3 years, there has been an unprecedented outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus, subgroup H5N1. While this infection has been almost entirely restricted to live-stock poultry in Southeast Asia, the disease has spread into Europe with outbreaks reported in wild birds and nonavian mammals. While few cases of human influenza from H5N1 have occurred, outbreaks among birds typically predict subsequent human outbreaks.

Human infection with avian influenza virus H5N1 was first described in Hong Kong in 1997. As of November 1, 2005, the World Health Organization (WHO) has reported 122 confirmed cases with 62 deaths (case fatality rate 51%).[10] This is likely an underestimation, with concerns of failed reporting or failure to recognize and confirm cases. All reported human cases have occurred in Southeast Asia, primarily among poultry workers. These individuals have the highest exposure and the greatest risk for avian-to-human transmission. However, clustering of cases has been identified with spread to nonpoultry workers, suggesting sporadic human-to-human spread.[11] Although not currently suspected, a genetic mutation resulting in sustained human-to-human transmission could lead to a pandemic.

Unlike previous human influenza infections, most deaths have occurred in young, otherwise healthy individuals (median age 20 years, range 4 months - 81 years).[10] Whether this reflects the demographics of poultry workers with the highest exposure or a predilection for worse cases in this population remains to be seen and cannot be confirmed until more cases develop. However, this raises concerns over the population at risk for worse outcomes."
 
  • #178
WhoWee said:
Human infection with avian influenza virus H5N1 was first described in Hong Kong in 1997. As of November 1, 2005, the World Health Organization (WHO) has reported 122 confirmed cases with 62 deaths (case fatality rate 51%).[10] This is likely an underestimation, with concerns of failed reporting or failure to recognize and confirm cases. All reported human cases have occurred in Southeast Asia, primarily among poultry workers.

Question is what 122 confirmed cases mean. It wouldn't be surprising if these are just cases where the flu was so severe that it ended with medical intervention, while others that contracted the flu never contacted the doctors and survived without any problems.

I am not telling that the avian flu is not dangerous, I am just telling we really don't know.
 
  • #179
Astronuc said:
CDC and other health officials are puzzled why so many in Mexico died.
The most likely explanation is bad reporting. WHO as of 600 GMT, 3 May 2009, places the number of deaths due to H1N1 at 20, 19 in Mexico and one in the US, not the 150+ number virulently reported by the media (http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_05_03/en/index.html). Plain old vanilla influenza appears to be more deadly than H1N1. The reaction now appears to be overblown. The problem with overblown reactions is that when the real thing strikes we will have become inured and will not react appropriately. On the other hand, the problem with underblown(?) reactions is that this let's a particularly nasty mutation become pandemic.
 
  • #180
At this point, I would not encourage loved-ones to quarantine themselves. H1N1 is pretty mild so far, and getting exposed to it now and developing antibodies in a mild reaction might be the best protection against any more virulent form that could evolve. When I was a kid, I got the measles, German measles, chicken pox - you name it. The only thing that came close to killing me was garden-variety flu and a secondary bronchial infection when I was about 6 or so. The vomiting and diarrhea (and general inability to keep anything down for a few days) was enough to dehydrate me past the point at which the doctor felt that intravenous re-hydration would help. He had my mother keep feeding me warm flat ginger ale and toast until I could hold down better food.
 
  • #182
Is it possible to survive this virus?
 
  • #183
In the US, http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/" . Yes, it is survivable. It is apparently no more virulent than the garden variety flus that hit every year. There is no reason to be any more worried about this particular strain of flu than any other influenza strain. (But note well: Plain old vanilla influenza kills 36,000 Americans every year).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #184
D H said:
In the US, http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/" . Yes, it is survivable. It is apparently no more virulent than the garden variety flus that hit every year. There is no reason to be any more worried about this particular strain of flu than any other influenza strain. (But note well: Plain old vanilla influenza kills 36,000 Americans every year).

That's one death in Huston; a toddler from Mexico. Will the Huston attorney general investigate the need to level charges of negligent manslaughter?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #185
I was watching the CNN couple of days ago and a spokesman was arguing that the epidemic is actually way to over-blown by the media and that even though it helps to keep everyone on such a high alert, it is really unnecessary as it is far from being really dangerous.
 
  • #186
rekshaw said:
I was watching the CNN couple of days ago and a spokesman was arguing that the epidemic is actually way to over-blown by the media and that even though it helps to keep everyone on such a high alert, it is really unnecessary as it is far from being really dangerous.
The most dangerous thing about this disease was our collective overblown reaction to it. This reaction caused significant harm to the economy, raised some old racist feelings on the part of some against Mexicans, and worst of all, inured us to calls for high alert. This last item is particularly troublesome. The downside of too many false alarms is an under-reaction when some true killer disease does strike in the future.

The initial reaction was appropriate given the number of purported deaths in Mexico City and the types of people purportedly killed by the disease. However, by the middle of last week the WHO had already reported that the number of deaths in Mexico City was off by an order of magnitude. That should have made public health officials completely re-evaluate their response strategy. By the end of last week, the CDC was still recommending closing schools for even one suspect case of the flu.

I suspect the media are the biggest culprits. On the Sunday talk shows, the main thrust of the discussiones was whether the government had done too little, not too much.
 
  • #187
rekshaw said:
I was watching the CNN couple of days ago and a spokesman was arguing that the epidemic is actually way to over-blown by the media and that even though it helps to keep everyone on such a high alert, it is really unnecessary as it is far from being really dangerous.

I think that without this media attention, you would have many young, healthy Americans dying by now. So, I think it explains why swine flu appears to be less lethal outside of Mexico.

Compared to other flu epidemics, swine flu is more dangerous. In Mexico ordinary flu outbreaks did not typically kill young relatively healthy people. When a month ago people were falling it with swine flu, no one suspected it was anything else than ordinary flu. Only when people started to die who would not be expected to die, were detailed investigations started.

In Mexico, people became more cautious, people with severe flu symptoms went to the hospital instead of thinking that they will recover without medical attention. Also, people may have been used to going to work even if they have a fever. They stopped doing that now.

By the time swine flu spread to the US and other places in the world, everyone was warned. Then we cannot look at the death tolls now and compare that to ordinary flu. In case of ordinary flu it is very rare for young people to die and it is not very rare for young people who have a fever to take stupid risks by going to work as if nothing happened.

Then what may happen is that a young person can end up getting a pneumonia and end up in hospital, but that in itself is quite rare. If that happens the person will typically recover.

This time around, people are not taking any risks, some young people who get high fever are treated in hospital. They get tamiflu right away and they then recover quite rapidly.

So, perhaps one can make the case that this wine flu epidemic is not as bad as the 1918 flu epidemic, as such an epidemic may have killed people despite rapid treatment of severe cases. But it is clearly worse than an ordinary flu epidemic. And you have to also consider that people in risk groups who get the flu shot are now at risk as the flu shot does not protect against swine flu.
 
  • #188
Count Iblis said:
I think that without this media attention, you would have many young, healthy Americans dying by now. So, I think it explains why swine flu appears to be less lethal outside of Mexico.
I don't think so. This particular strain of influenza is apparently no more fatal, and possibly less fatal, that the seasonal flu. This disease is not attacking healthy young adults. The number of deaths attributable to this disease in Mexico is only 19. The problem with the disease is the reporting of it, not the disease itself. The original reports of 159 deaths were, simply put, incorrect.
 
  • #189
The 19 cases are the cases where you can rigorously prove that people died from swine flu. There are many cases of young people in Mexico who died after more than a week of illness. They may have died from a secondary infection, so technically this then doesn't count as a swine flu death. However, the number of such deaths greatly exceeds what you would expect from ordinary flu.


To compare swine flu to ordinary flu one would have consider a population who would treat swine flu as ordinary flu. Then, even in the developed world, a large fraction of the populaton do not visit the doctor, even if they have a high fever. Medical attention in hospital is only considered in case of pneumonia. It is not clear if this sort of hands down treatment for swine flu would not have lead to deaths.

Also, CNN interviewed a father and her daughter (about 16 years old) in Texas a week ago. She got swine flu, got 40 °C fever visited the hospital immediately, got tamiflu and recovered quite fast. How do we know that she would not have died if people were not aware of potantiall dangerous swine flu?

The father may not have sought medical attention until days later if it became clear that she had breading difficulties, as 40 °C fever is not unusual for ordinary flu. Then if she had contracted a secondary infection and died from that in hospital, her death would not even have qualified as a swine flu death.
 
  • #190
A lot of people in this topic seem to be unaware about the differences between seasonal and pandemic influenza.
 
  • #191
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aSw7zjyBgq_k&refer=us

Data so far suggest the virus is striking younger patients than is typical for influenza, and younger patients than usual are entering hospitals, said Anne Schuchat, a scientist at the CDC. “Very few” patients with swine flu are older than 50, and the median age is 17. It’s possible that older people have greater immunity, she said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #192
I don't know what strain of swine flu passed through here in the mid 70's but it is possible that people who either were immunized at the time and/or went through a mild infection are resistant. They set up large teams of medical technicians and nurses in the local armories and vaccinated us with pneumatic "guns" assembly-line style instead of using needles and vials of vaccine. This alone could have created an age disparity such that anybody who was an infant or older in the mid-70's (maybe in their early thirties or older now) would be under-represented as victims today. Such a disparity does not in and of itself prove that that the new flu is more virulent or that it targets younger people selectively.
 
  • #193
“Very few” patients with swine flu are older than 50, and the median age is 17. It’s possible that older people have greater immunity, she said.
It's also possible that it isn't very person-person infectious.
There are a lot more 17 year old poultry/pig workers than 50 year old ones.
 
  • #194
mgb_phys said:
It's also possible that it isn't very person-person infectious.
There are a lot more 17 year old poultry/pig workers than 50 year old ones.


I think this is also the pattern they see in the US.
 
  • #195
http://www.upi.com/news/issueofthed...uld-devastate-human-race/UPI-43071241461493/"

The four strands of the swine flu virus come from pigs, humans and birds. Experts believe that the virus mutated into its current form in the bodies of pigs. Health authorities are particularly worried that the capability to mutate already exhibited by the virus could eventually let it combine with the human immunodeficiency virus, which causes AIDS.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #198
Evo said:
Oh good grief. How desparate are these people to come up with things?

"The Swine Flu? Pah, just Media Hype!"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #200
W.H.O. Raises Alert Level as Flu Spreads to 74 Countries

GENEVA — The World Health Organization has told its member nations it is declaring a swine flu pandemic — the first global flu epidemic in 41 years, news services reported.

The move came after an emergency meeting with flu experts here that was convened after a sharp rise in cases in Australia, which reported 1,263 cases on Thursday, and rising numbers in Britain, Japan, Chile and elsewhere.

In a statement sent to member countries, the W.H.O. said it decided to raise the pandemic alert level from phase 5 to 6, indicating a global pandemic outbreak, The Associated Press said, attributing the information to health officials from Scotland, Indonesia and Thailand. An official announcement of the change was due at 6 p.m. Geneva time on Thursday (noon in New York).

Where are the "it is just a media hype" people now? :wink:
 
Back
Top