Yes, resistance issues. Most of the independent studies I've seen have shown no health benefits, but there is potential for risk. Seems to be a big marketing gimmick to me. Here's a snip from a letter in Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.

I'm really annoyed with the paint situation. I had to make a choice between low VOC paint that contained an antimicrobial, or regular VOC paint without the antimicrobial. SW doesn't have a quality low VOC antimicrobial-free paint. I had no idea they were adding biocides to paint. They've probably been doing it for awhile but just recently started to advertise it. Adding biocides to household products is a huge pet peeve of mine, so I went with the VOCs. I wish I'd had more time to research it and see if I could find the right combo. I'll know better next time. I'll ask about the water based stain/poly tomorrow. Thanks.

I called Whirlpool customer service, and her first question was "Have you been doing any staining or painting?". Well, yeah, we're replacing all the carpet with wood floors and painting almost the entire house, so it smells awful in here. Apparently the VOCs concentrate in the freezer. I was all set to throw everything out and my husband laughed at me and pointed out that we will have been breathing the stuff in for an entire week by the time we're done. Breathing it is probably worse than ingesting it. Now I want to go stay in a hotel for a week. The food doesn't taste funny. WWYD?

Hopefully the parents know if their kid has asthma, and they have to have parental permission to get vaccinated. Even if some are missed, it's very unlikely to cause a problem. Of course, I hope know one screws up.

Yes, it's possible, and since it is spreading so quickly I wouldn't be surprised if it did that. But overall, I expect more people will be infected with flu than in a typical year.

The colored bars are all lab confirmed influenza. Look at 2006-07 (because it's easy to see the line). The colored bars are all the samples that were positive for flu, broken down by subtype. The solid black line shows that at the peak of influenza season, only about 30% of all ILI samples were truly flu. During the summer, less than 5% of people with ILI had flu. So if you have a fever and runny nose/sore throat in July, it's much more likey to be adenovirus, rhinovirus, etc. than influenza. In January, it's still more likely to be something besides influenza, but the likelihood of influenza has gone up quite a bit. Like I said elsewhere, I would be surprised if those numbers don't go up this year, because this is not a typical flu season.

Not for October, no. If it were January, that would be different.

They aren't giving the mist to people with contraindications. Or they aren't supposed to be.

Huh. I'm not reading that they said they were wrong. They said it was misinterpreted by the media. Which makes much more sense to me.

I posted about this elsewhere. Here and Effect Measure If a patient has an influenza-like-illness they are assumed to have flu. Some (possibly most) patients will actually not have flu, but will have one of the other common respiratory viruses (adenovirus, rhinovirus, parainfluenza, etc.). There really isn't any treatment for those, and flu tends to be more serious, so cases of ILI are generally assumed to be flu. When cases of ILI are low, the number of cases that are caused by influenza is low. As ILI cases go up, they are more likely to be caused by influenza. Here's a summary for 2004-2008 . The black line is percent positive. You can see that as flu increases, the percent of positive samples go up. At its highest, only about 30% of samples are positive. This is a very unusual year though, and I'd be surprised if we don't see a different pattern , with higher percent positives. Currently, it's about 37 percent. Anyway, it's probably true that much of what is being diagnosed clinically in outpatients isn't influenza.

I tried to multiquote, but it's too long so I'm dividing this post up. 1. They aren't testing, because the test available in offices is so inaccurate that a negative test (when prevalence of disease is high) is meaningless. Whether the test is useful depends a lot on the prevalence of disease. If prevalence is low, a negative test is probably real. If prevalence is high, it's not so accurate. The tests were more meaningful over the summer, when there wasn't as much flu around. From CDC The tables won't copy, but they are at the link. If a patient has an influenza-like-illness they are assumed to have flu. Some (possibly most) patients will actually not have flu, but will have one of the other common respiratory viruses (adenovirus, rhinovirus, parainfluenza, etc.). There really isn't any treatment for those, and flu tends to be more serious, so cases of ILI are generally assumed to be flu. When cases of ILI are low, the number of cases that are caused by influenza is low. As ILI cases go up, they are more likely to be caused by influenza. Here's a summary for 2004-2008 . The black line is percent positive. You can see that as flu increases, the percent of positive samples go up. At its highest, only about 30% of samples are positive. This is a very unusual year though, and I'd be surprised if we don't see a different pattern , with higher percent positives. Currently, it's about 37 percent. Anyway, it's probably true that much of what is being diagnosed clinically in outpatients isn't influenza. 2. I agree that there is an enormous amount of bad information. I do not believe that the CDC is giving bad information. Well, there CAN'T be accurate numbers, but this is nothing new. We've always had to rely on estimates and surveillance data, because it would be impossible to count all cases. Most people with ILI aren't going to the doctor, and wouldn't even if it was recommended that everyone with symptoms be seen.

I don't make health decisions based on someone else's "guess". According to Mercola's website, this whole thing is totally overblown. According to a printable flyer: 1 Multi-dose vials of both seasonal and injectable H1N1 swine flu vaccines contain mercury, which is a known neurotoxin. Thimerosal in vaccines hasn't been shown to cause any neurologic problems. But if you don't want it, the single dose vials and flumist don't have thimerosal. 2 Some swine flu vaccines contain formaldehyde and exposure to it has been shown to increae the risk of developing certain cancers. Trace amounts. There's formaldehyde everywhere. Formaldehyde 3 It is unknown whether H1N1 swine flu vaccine is safe to give to all pregnant women, children and adults, especially if they are chronically ill or sick at the time of vaccination. NO, it's not been shown to be safe in ALL people. Some people will probably have an adverse reaction. 4 There was an increased risk of developing Guilain-Barre Syndrome, a sometimes fatal inflammation of the nerves, after swine flu vaccination in 1976. This vaccine is prepared differently than the 1976 vaccine, and is much more similar to the seasonal flu vaccine, which is not associated with GBS. 5 GBS and brain inflammation has been reported after seasonal influenza vaccination. But the risk of GBS associated with vaccine is LOWER than the risk of getting GBS as a complication of influenza. CDC 6 H1N1 swine flu vaccines have not been evaluated for the ability to cause cancer, damage genes or impair fertility. I don't know of any reason to suspect that it would cause those things. 7 It is not know whether H1N1 swine flu vaccines can harm the fetus if given to a pregnant woman. The safety of seasonal vaccine for pregnant women and fetuses is well established, so there isn't any reason to think it would. OTOH, the danger of influenza to pregnant women and infants is clear. 8 One H1N1 swine flu vaccine manufacturer product insert states that immune response and safety was evaluated "in 31 children between the ages of 6-26 months." That was sanofi, and that is just one of the immunogenicity studies. Safety studies were larger: 9 The live virus nasal spray H1N1 swine flu vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women, children under age two or anyone with a history of asmatha.True 10 The H1N1 swine influenza has not been associated with more serious disease or more deaths than seasonal influenza strains that have circulated in the past few decades. Numbers are sort of confusing right now. But the PATTERN of disease is clearly very different than seasonal flu. Also according to Mercola's website, the CDC claims that H1N1 is so radically different from the regular flu, Where does it say this? It's different enough that our immune system doesn't recognize it, but it's still an H1N1 virus. but then says the vaccination is safe because it's so similar to the one we use for regular flu. Everything about the vaccine is the same except the strain change. Strain changes are made every year. Sounds like a contradiction to me. .

It is true that the actual numbers are fairly low. So far at least. But from the beginning it's been clear that the pattern is different. Flu is unpredictable. No one knew, and still no one knows, how this is going to progress. As time has gone on, it is playing out to be mild for most people. I am less worried the more we see mild and uncomplicated cases. But we're still getting the vaccine, if we can find it.

My son started at 9 with close supervision. At 11, he does the whole yard, except the hill.

True, but those issues apply to nutritional supplements as well. Tryptophan

I really think I understand your point. I just disagree with it.

Effect Measure wrote about this recently: CBS News on swine flu testing: Fail! snip

:iagree::iagree::iagree: He's driving a different bus.

CDC doesn't have any control over it. I'm guessing that this type of reporting is much easier to do with a national health system like Canada's.

We're going to be painting and have a 20 foot ceiling in the foyer. I've been looking around the web for tips on how to best paint so high, and ran across several recommendations for this. I've read that you can drive it up a ramp and through the front door, but when I asked the rental guy about it he laughed and said no way, find 5 strong guys to lift it. So I'm wondering if anyone has used this and how big of a hassle it is. It sure looks better than a high ladder.

:iagree: Here's what wiki has to say

From the article: I have to disagree with this. I used 1-2-3- Magic with my very challenging son and found it extremely effective. Counting doesn't work if there aren't consequences though.

I don't believe yelling is anything new. My mom screamed at (and spanked) me ; her parents and grandparents yelled at and beat her. I don't spank, and I have worked really hard at not yelling. But it's a challenge, since the only parenting model I know involved daily screaming. History would have repeated itself here had I not made a major effort to break the cycle.

I've only primed before when I paint light over dark, but now I'm wondering if I should always use primer first. If you prime, do you notice a difference? Is it worthwhile? I'm painting SW Latte over a light beige color. TIA.

I had wood floors in my old house and I used this. You need to spray the mop lightly with something that will hold onto the hair and dust. It's been years and I can't remember what I used, but it's similar to this. (Some of these sprays aren't good for wood, so I'd ask someone knowledgeable.) We have animal hair issues, and the mop was great. It was much faster than the vacuum.