Pandemic

[NikolaiI]

The only problem thus far has been the over-reaction by media.

I thought it was an over-reaction and over-hype too, and... Yesterday I thought of a reason for it, but I can't discuss it here as it is political.

I've come to the conclusion that humanity has an apocalyptic mentality engrained in it. This is a bunch of nonsense, blown way out of proportion by the fear mongering class.

As well as the reason I thought of, my dad also mentioned that often, news media has to cover what other news media does, really sort of competition.

[Delta40]

is it possible there is a pandemic amongst the media rather than the illness itself? I'm not very good at expressing myself but the reporting of swine-flue has reached out of control proportions - does that make sense? It is this strain of virus which may have a greater infectious nature and is causing untold harm which requires the development of an anti-viral remedy to cure it.

[Stargazer86]

I've come to the conclusion that humanity has an apocalyptic mentality engrained in it. This is a bunch of nonsense, blown way out of proportion by the fear mongering class.

Yes but better blown up to be larger before it gets to that point than for it to be treated as no big deal and it ending up more widespread than it already is.
From the perspective of the mother who lost that little toddler to this, it is not blown out of proportion. This is probably the most tragic thing she will ever go through in her life.

[motherhubbard]

I thought it was an over-reaction and over-hype too, and... Yesterday I thought of a reason for it, but I can't discuss it here as it is political.


As well as the reason I thought of, my dad also mentioned that often, news media has to cover what other news media does, really sort of competition.

I guess I live under a rock. I didn't even know about it until a day or two ago and I've had to look for information. I wonder what else is going on that I don't know about. I really quit watching the news when that blond lady with the little girl died, Nichole or Jessica maybe Simpson- I don't know. It's all tabloid news anymore.

[NikolaiI]

Yes but better blown up to be larger before it gets to that point than for it to be treated as no big deal and it ending up more widespread than it already is.
From the perspective of the mother who lost that little toddler to this, it is not blown out of proportion. This is probably the most tragic thing she will ever go through in her life.

I don't know enough about it perhaps. All I am saying is that here in America, if 150 people have gotten sick, 1 hospitalized, and none have died, I think it is over-hype to broadcast it everywhere and raise this huge alarm. In a city of 50,000, 150 people getting sick from it would be... umh, maybe a very small concern. In a country of 300,000,000, it is nearly nothing.

[Dori]

Hey, I just blogged about this!
Check it out: "That Piggish Pandemic"

[Taliesin]

An excerpt from an article on New Scientist:

So far there seem to have been around 159 fatalities among perhaps 2000 cases in Mexico, although only a small number of these have been confirmed in the laboratory as influenza infections. Although this suggests a scary fatality rate of around 10%, there has so far been just one death outside of Mexico – of a 23-month-old Mexican child in Texas, who had recently been in Mexico. The "case fatality" of the virus is not yet known.

This is the key point that scientists are now investigating. Travellers returning to their home countries after acquiring the virus in Mexico have experienced mild influenza-like illness. What might explain this apparent discrepancy in disease outcome?
A matter of numbers

One simple answer is that there have been many more mild cases in Mexico than counted so far and that the true case fatality rate is more like 1 to 2%. This would be akin to that seen during previous pandemics such as the 1957 (H2N2) Asian influenza or the 1968 (H3N2) Hong Kong flu. Even with the 1918 Spanish influenza, which killed tens of millions, the case fatality rate is estimated at between only 2.5 and 5%.

In other words, as cases outside of Mexico increase, we may expect a small number of fatalities from what is otherwise a rather mild virus. Increased epidemiology – for example, monitoring the spread of the virus and the strain type in the affected areas in Mexico – will shed light on this issue.

Another possibility is that the Mexican fatal cases have been due to co-infections with other pathogens that together lead to a worse outcome, or that somehow the indigenous population of Mexico is genetically predisposed to fare badly with this particular influenza strain. There is no evidence to support either of these possibilities, but then so far we have few clinical details of any of the cases.

Read the full article at:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ry-so-far.html

[The Atheist]

It is this strain of virus which may have a greater infectious nature and is causing untold harm which requires the development of an anti-viral remedy to cure it.

Nope. It's just a brand new virus, for which nobody has immunity.

Last time this exact thing happened was 1967/8 with Hong Kong flu, which seems to have been a magnitude worse than the Mexican one. (We have to stop calling it swine 'flu!)

From the perspective of the mother who lost that little toddler to this, it is not blown out of proportion. This is probably the most tragic thing she will ever go through in her life.

I see that the dead child had several existing health problems, so it may be a red herring.

That doesn't make it less tragic for the family.

I don't know enough about it perhaps. All I am saying is that here in America, if 150 people have gotten sick, 1 hospitalized, and none have died, I think it is over-hype to broadcast it everywhere and raise this huge alarm. In a city of 50,000, 150 people getting sick from it would be... umh, maybe a very small concern. In a country of 300,000,000, it is nearly nothing.

Yes, this is important, the numbers don't stack up, as explained:

An excerpt from an article on New Scientist:

Read the full article at:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ry-so-far.html

Good pick - there hasn't been anywhere near enough publicity given to the numbers.

If 2000 people in Mexico had it, there is no way on earth so many people would have contracted it while holidaying there.

It seems to be a rare mild influenza, although as has been repeatedly stated by expert virologists, it could mutate again tomorrow. Let's just hope it doesn't! A-type 'flu is pretty common.

[Delta40]

I'm confident that media is the virus that I need to fear more so than any flu

[Zee.]

^

That whole flu bull**** is just a scare tactic once again used by people to cause mass panic among weak minded people.

People die EVERY DAY of contagious diseases. Starvation too. Murder too.
People die of regular flu EVERY DAMN DAY
and everyone is panicking over this swine flu crap?

The world has gone so far backward, it's insane

Yes but better blown up to be larger before it gets to that point than for it to be treated as no big deal and it ending up more widespread than it already is.
From the perspective of the mother who lost that little toddler to this, it is not blown out of proportion. This is probably the most tragic thing she will ever go through in her life.

^
Yeah well people are murderer daily. Children, adults. People are raped. People are starving. People are dying of cancer. People are dying of aids.
Is that blown across the font paper constantly? No. It's not because of the "tragedy" that is those who are dying and are dead from this "flu"
the only reason this thing has even been made public is because it has been successful in creating fear. Our world is fearful. Pretty stupid to me.

[Virgil]

I'm confident that media is the virus that I need to fear more so than any flu

Very well said. I like that.

[The Atheist]

^

That whole flu bull**** is just a scare tactic once again used by people to cause mass panic among weak minded people.

No.

While I'd be the first to agree that the current media frenzy is over the top, it isn't BS and being concerned is not a sign of weak-mindedness.

Claiming it's nothing on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, however, isn't necessarily a good thing.

People die EVERY DAY of contagious diseases. Starvation too. Murder too.

So, because people die, we shouldn't be concerned that more might die preventable deaths?

Are you an anarchist?

Should we care that climate change might wipe out our entire species? Where do we draw the line at what matters and what doesn't? 1,000,000 deaths? a billion?

^People die of regular flu EVERY DAMN DAY
and everyone is panicking over this swine flu crap?

Couple of points here:

Firstly, despite the mass media's best attempts, I haven't seen any sign of panic anywhere. Yesterday, Tamiflu went on sale here and while there were a few enquiries, there was no mass demand for it, and we have 4 confirmed cases here.

Yeah well people are murderer daily. Children, adults. People are raped. People are starving. People are dying of cancer. People are dying of aids.
Is that blown across the font paper constantly? No. It's not because of the "tragedy" that is those who are dying and are dead from this "flu"
the only reason this thing has even been made public is because it has been successful in creating fear. Our world is fearful. Pretty stupid to me.

You've chosen to ignore a huge number of relevant points to arrive at your position, and I think maybe it's you who needs to calm down.

Even if this H1N1 influenza A is no more deadly than annual influenza, 5-10 times more deaths will occur.

That is simply because a lot more people will catch this one than usually get influenza, and people who are most at risk won't have any protection against it, where they normally have a vaccination.

There is clearly no need to panic, but taking prudent steps to limit the spread of the disease is.... prudent!

There are some easy ways to check the likelihood of overload on your local health system. Does your local area have more than 10% spare bed capaicty? If not, they will struggle to cope with widespread H1N1-A even if it is somewhat less severe than annual influenza.

You've seen how quickly the virus mutated from an influenza virus - as of 1st of March this year, the virus did not exist. In the ensuing two months, it has killed a confirmed dozen or so people. The virus could just as easily mutate - especially when it gets to Asia, where we have extensive evidence of influenza mutation - H5N1 and SARS, in particular. Given that it appears that close human-animal contact is partly or wholly responsible for influenza virus mutation, the potential for disaster is impossible to gauge.

As you'll see from all my posts so far, I'm not recommending any degree of panic, but I don't believe we should ignore this either.

I had Hong Kong 'flu in 1968 and I was one very, very sick nine-year old, and I was a very healthy and well-nourished boy. Influenza is no joke at the best of times, and when it's one which could potentially be an international health disaster, it's worth keeping an eye on.

At this stage, I don't expect the outbreak to be too serious, but it will certainly kill a number of people who otherwise would not die. Anything which helps keep that number low is a good thing, in my opinion.

(We need to change the name of the damn virus - I've never made as many typos in my life as I do when typing "ifnleuzna".)

[Stargazer86]

^^
Yeah well people are murderer daily. Children, adults. People are raped. People are starving. People are dying of cancer. People are dying of aids.
Is that blown across the font paper constantly? No. It's not because of the "tragedy" that is those who are dying and are dead from this "flu"
the only reason this thing has even been made public is because it has been successful in creating fear. Our world is fearful. Pretty stupid to me.

I definately see your point as it is a very valid one. I think the big issue here was instructing about infection control tactics etc to prevent it from becoming something worse than it had to be.

[Delta40]

There are approx 65 million people in the world with HIV/AIDS. We are not paralysed with fear over this. Does anyone remember the 80's and the propaganda that went down about HIV? What I'm saying is that HIV/AIDS is spreading throughout the world at a steady rate - like wildfire if you will but people are not alarmed to the point that we are paralysed by that pandemic. We are desensitised and we go about our daily lives without giving it a second thought.

[librarius_qui]

Have you discussed already about the name of the illness?

lq~