Perry Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) As someone mentioned, the other swine flu thread is long, and I know the board has had problems when threads get too big. I know there were some questions I wanted to respond to, but now I can't find the original posts. Maybe we should continue the thread here. I apologize to anyone whose questions weren't answered; please repost. Old Thread Edited April 30, 2009 by Perry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OHGrandma Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Here's something I've been wondering about: NY has 51 confirmed cases according to CDC. Reports indicated many family members of those 51 are also sick, but it appears no testing is done to confirm all those sick with flu symptoms are sick with H1N1. Is there any thing to indicate how much this illness is being underreported? Are there 5 cases of H1N1 for every 1 confirmed case? Or are there 50 or 500? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matryoshka Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Here's something that occurred to me this morning, and made me wonder if it might at least partially explain the difference in mortality between Mexico City and elsewhere in the world - since most influenza deaths are from complications of pneumonia (is that right??), could the fact that Mexico City has perhaps the worst air quality in the world raise the mortality rate?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aubrey Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Does this [the possible immunity of people over 51] have any implications for being around people born pre-1957? I mean, I guess we can't suck up their immunity, but I'd imagine they could be asymptomatic carriers? And if they're asymptomatic, they might take it less seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie in Austin Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 OK, I have a question for you: I know some pandemic flus hit "healthy young people" i.e., 25-45. I get that they wouldn't hit older people who have left-over immunity from previous flus, but why would the <25 crowd be spared? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in Neverland Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I just found out that they have closed my local school district for a few days because of a suspected case there! This is starting to get too close to home for me. I think I'll be keeping the boys home from karate today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krista in LA Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 My dh is traveling a lot for work which leaves him flying through Atlanta, Dallas, or Houston. How worried should we be about this? What precautions should we be taking? Not flying isn't an option and I'm nervous about him bringing the flu home with him. Let me just say that I really appreciate your input on all of this, Perry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenn in Mo Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I must be missing something. Seriously - can someone tell me why we should be so worried about being exposed to what sounds like glorified sniffles? edited because I realized too late the tone sounds bad. I don't mean this in a snarky way. I am just. not. understanding. and I'm usually the one jumping on the fear-wagon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snickerdoodle Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I must be missing something. Seriously - can someone tell me why we should be so worried about being exposed to what sounds like glorified sniffles? I don't know. We live in a city with many confirmed cases and everyone (including us) is out and about with regularly scheduled activities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fivetails Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 BUMP just trying to move this up so people will see it & quit posting in the other thread. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamturner Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I'd like to hear what others think about air travel right now. My inlaws are coming via airplane next weekend from Miami airport to DFW. Should we cancel the trip? Or should they wear masks?? :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only me Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I understand what you are saying and I have thought about that myself. I think the problem is that they are trying to keep it from getting much worse. It seems to be spreading quicker than the typical flu and not as much is known about it as the typical flu. For most people the flu can make them miserable but won't kill them or put them in a hospital. The problem is that for some people who are already sick or with compromised immune systems it can be deadly or cause them to become very ill. Because there is the potential for this spreading so quickly and they don't know how bad it will become they want to try to prevent it from spreading to the majority of the population. Even though there has only been one death in the US this could be the early stages and there might be more deaths. No one can know for sure. I'm definitely not an expert but this strain seems to be spreading more quickly. I for one wouldn't want to have to deal with influenza again. My dd had it in March and she was very sick (high fever, awful aches and pains and very weak). I had to literally hold her head up so that she could take a sip of water or take her medicine. She lost a lot of weight and she wasn't even vomiting. For the first few nights I set my alarm clock to go off every 1-2 hours to check on her. I would often find that her temp would spike even though she was on Advil. I would have to sponge her off. She was sick in bed for over a week. She was this ill even though she took Tamiflu and one other anti-viral medication. It did help with the fever within a few days but she still had the aches and pains and was very lethargic for quite awhile. I can't imagine someone getting influenza if they already had other problems (cancer, immune system problems, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I must be missing something. Seriously - can someone tell me why we should be so worried about being exposed to what sounds like glorified sniffles? edited because I realized too late the tone sounds bad. I don't mean this in a snarky way. I am just. not. understanding. and I'm usually the one jumping on the fear-wagon. (Copied from the last thread) This virus is similar in structure to the one that caused the Spanish flu of 1918-1919. The last pandemic was so bad because we didn't (and really, couldn't) do anything to attempt to halt the spread. They don't really know how bad this is or could get, but at this point are trying the easiest and most obvious tactics to slow this thing down until they can get a handle on it. It isn't that it's so bad now, but has the potential to get bad. No one wants to say in hindsight..."If only we had tried X" Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 As someone mentioned, the other swine flu thread is long, and I know the board has had problems when threads get too big. I know there were some questions I wanted to respond to, but now I can't find the original posts. Maybe we should continue the thread here. I apologize to anyone whose questions weren't answered; please repost. My question, "How certain are they that the whole thing started with the 5yo?" has been answered by this article: Scientists struggle to understand swine flu virus A current theory is that the outbreak started in the town of La Gloria on the eastern coast of Mexico, because a 5-year-old boy was the first known case. He first suffered flu-like symptoms in late March. However, Mexican health officials have downplayed claims the outbreak started in La Gloria, because mucous samples of other patients from there found nothing. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MomLovesClassics Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 BUMP just trying to move this up so people will see it & quit posting in the other thread. :) Another bump Will it work? I am unsure where to post questions or concerns. I am reading too much about this flu and from too many sources. I have never done this before with other stuff. On another board, it was mentioned that mask were sold out even on UK sites. I am in Ga and have not seen on the news any cases here yet. There was a case in Nashville http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_150080.asp Alabama, North and South Carolina, unconfirmed in Fla. Then on the news it is broadcast officals state deaths likely in this state before the first case has even been confirmed. I want to protect my family. At this point I don't think anyone can be too careful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Here's something I've been wondering about:NY has 51 confirmed cases according to CDC. Reports indicated many family members of those 51 are also sick, but it appears no testing is done to confirm all those sick with flu symptoms are sick with H1N1. Is there any thing to indicate how much this illness is being underreported? Are there 5 cases of H1N1 for every 1 confirmed case? Or are there 50 or 500? Underreporting seems to be the most likely scenario according to the article I just posted. The fact that this virus is currently mild or even asymptomatic in most would suggest that there are many, many more people who have this virus or have had it in the past and don't even know it. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fshinkevich Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I must be missing something. Seriously - can someone tell me why we should be so worried about being exposed to what sounds like glorified sniffles? edited because I realized too late the tone sounds bad. I don't mean this in a snarky way. I am just. not. understanding. and I'm usually the one jumping on the fear-wagon. Well I may be totally wrong here, I often am and could have my dates wrong, but isn't it too early to tell? The virus was in Mexico for a month or so before they started seeing deaths. Also this is a new strain, that no one has immunities to, and it is spreading rapidly. What might be mild to us, or even more serious with a quick trip to the Dr. could be potentially more dangerous to someone who is already ill or has no health insurance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Here's something that occurred to me this morning, and made me wonder if it might at least partially explain the difference in mortality between Mexico City and elsewhere in the world - since most influenza deaths are from complications of pneumonia (is that right??), could the fact that Mexico City has perhaps the worst air quality in the world raise the mortality rate?? Not according to this: _ Altitude or air pollution: Mexico City's altitude and its infamous air pollution have raised speculation that those factors may have made people more susceptible to the virus. But severe cases are being reported over much of Mexico, including coastal communities and places with cleaner air, making that theory unlikely. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9PJJvaROOPZdpFqydJYDQ4jxXRAD97SCGB00 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueridge Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 My dh just canceled a business trip he had scheduled for Chicago in 2 weeks. Did you all see Joe Biden this morning saying that he is cautioning his family not to use public transportation right now? Just one sneeze in a confined space would go 'all over the place'. That is his personal opinion, which seemed to really aggravate Dr. Nancy Snyderman on the morning program. She said we should not worry at all...She went from rubbing her hands all over a public bus hand rail to running down the street for a big pork sandwich! I am wondering if now the government is down-playing the dangers just a bit to prevent public fear? Ginger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueridge Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 sorry..double post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeatherInWI Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 And why does the confirmation take so long. The 99% chance cases that were reported in Illinois and Wisconsin yesterday morning still haven't been "officially confirmed" - even ones that have been run through a special quick system at a hospital in Milwaukee that does gene sequencing -- they're still pending. It seems to me that the slow confirmation must be adding to the spread. Also, btw, there are reports around here that people are going in with full-blown symptoms and the doctors are saying "It's just a virus. Let it take its course." without bothering to test at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 My dh just canceled a business trip he had scheduled for Chicago in 2 weeks. Did you all see Joe Biden this morning saying that he is cautioning his family not to use public transportation right now? Just one sneeze in a confined space would go 'all over the place'. That is his personal opinion, which seemed to really aggravate Dr. Nancy Snyderman on the morning program. She said we should not worry at all...She went from rubbing her hands all over a public bus hand rail to running down the street for a big pork sandwich! I am wondering if now the government is down-playing the dangers just a bit to prevent public fear? Ginger I think they are constantly correcting toward the middle. It's a fine line to walk between complacency and panic. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret in GA Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Another bump Will it work? I am unsure where to post questions or concerns. I am reading too much about this flu and from too many sources. I have never done this before with other stuff. On another board, it was mentioned that mask were sold out even on UK sites. I am in Ga and have not seen on the news any cases here yet. There was a case in Nashville http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_150080.asp Alabama, North and South Carolina, unconfirmed in Fla. Then on the news it is broadcast officals state deaths likely in this state before the first case has even been confirmed. I want to protect my family. At this point I don't think anyone can be too careful. Just read on ajc.com that someone in LaGrange has it. She was traveling from Kentucky and they think had recently been to Cancun. http://www.ajc.com/news/content/health/stories/2009/04/30/swine_flu_georgia.html Margaret, who is now a little worried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Mexico City mayor says outbreak may be stabilizing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Good, well balanced article: When it comes to swine flu, don't fall prey to pandemic panic Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caroline4kids Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Another bump Will it work? I am unsure where to post questions or concerns. I am reading too much about this flu and from too many sources. I have never done this before with other stuff. On another board, it was mentioned that mask were sold out even on UK sites. I am in Ga and have not seen on the news any cases here yet. There was a case in Nashville http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_150080.asp Alabama, North and South Carolina, unconfirmed in Fla. Then on the news it is broadcast officals state deaths likely in this state before the first case has even been confirmed. I want to protect my family. At this point I don't think anyone can be too careful. We are in Madison county. My kids wanted out of school since everyone else is. I'm not letting them play outside though. I am also getting ready to make remedies should anyone show symptoms: http://www.hpathy.com/papersnew/lewis-make-own-remedy.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenn in Mo Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Caroline, I am very interested in the remedy aspect, but not understanding the article in the link. What is the pepsi remedy a remedy FOR? I understand the penicillin one, but what remedy solution would you use for the flu? This stuff fascinates me and I'd love to learn more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.S. Burrow Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 And why does the confirmation take so long. The 99% chance cases that were reported in Illinois and Wisconsin yesterday morning still haven't been "officially confirmed" - even ones that have been run through a special quick system at a hospital in Milwaukee that does gene sequencing -- they're still pending. It seems to me that the slow confirmation must be adding to the spread. Also, btw, there are reports around here that people are going in with full-blown symptoms and the doctors are saying "It's just a virus. Let it take its course." without bothering to test at all. I watched the Chicago & Dallas health dept updates yesterday on CNN and they both said that after preliminary testing on the local level all "positive" flu test are then sent to the next level (state?) and THEN if it test positive for Type A to the CDC for confirmation of the new flu - whatever name they are now calling it. So start to finish testing could take 3 days....1 day at the local/state and then up to 48 hours at the CDC. ***If this has changed, would someone please correct this information? The Dallas health dept said in this same conference that they were trying to get the necessary laboratory equipment in place to conduct testing without having to send it to the CDC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneRoomSchoolHouse Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Started new post (my info was long): Swine Flue info...from the CDC I live very close to an infected area and this comes from a doctor attending the CDC and Health Department meetings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenstet Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I am in NH, but they had a press conference in Lowell, Ma which confirmed 2 cases, 2 siblings who had just returned from Mexico last weekend after break. They said one of the boys had gone to the emergency room but was never admitted. I think they had just swabbed him and sent him home with meds. The boys are doing fine and are expected to be back at school maybe Monday. I just found it nice to hear more specifics about what was going on with at least one case. I don't know if that helps anyone. I know Maine is confirmed now and I think CT. They are saying around here that no one has been admitted to the hospital. I wonder if once you get the flu can you get it again? They just don't seem to know much about it right now, or they aren't sharing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneRoomSchoolHouse Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Google maps has a swine flu tracking program...pretty cool! http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=p&msa=0&msid=106484775090296685271.0004681a37b713f6b5950&ll=32.639375,-110.390625&spn=15.738151,25.488281&z=5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Google maps has a swine flu tracking program...pretty cool!http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=p&msa=0&msid=106484775090296685271.0004681a37b713f6b5950&ll=32.639375,-110.390625&spn=15.738151,25.488281&z=5 Hmm. Weird. We have one confirmed case here in AZ and ours isn't on the map. The other thing that makes me wonder is all those cases in CA and TX, but none (well, one) in Mexico and Arizona which are also border states. I don't get it :confused: Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneRoomSchoolHouse Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 There are color differences on the map...one indicates confirmed cases, and the other is suspected cases, that haven't been confirmed yet. If you zoom in and run your cursor over the colored dot thingy it pops up a note about each case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in AL Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I posted this last night around 10:00PM Central time along with a big "Thank you" to Perry and everyone else for their info and patience :001_smile: : "...our local schools (all schools in Madison county, Alabama, for those wanting to know) have just been closed due to two *probable* cases of swine flu in one of our schools. I'm looking for some clarity on what constitutes 'possible' and/or 'probable'. A friend of my dc had ALL the symptoms last week, but the ped. didn't even WANT to check for swine flu on Friday, despite the mom asking if he/she wanted to swab her child for it. So what makes things different now? Why would a dr check for swine flu in one person, but not the other? Is there info passed among those who are 'in the know' that suddenly makes them look for it? Why would one case be labeled 'possible' and another discounted? The info says that they are 95% sure that this is swine flu. How can they know that without the test results?" My newly added comment to this new posting: It seems to me that the number of cases would be skewed greatly if they are missing chances to confirm it....and possibly reporting a larger percentage of deaths as a consequence. So....anyone have an explanation as to who decides to test & when or why? Thanks!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 There are color differences on the map...one indicates confirmed cases, and the other is suspected cases, that haven't been confirmed yet. If you zoom in and run your cursor over the colored dot thingy it pops up a note about each case. No I get that. There are no colored dots at all in those areas. I wonder why the flu seems to be spreading diagonally. At first I just thought they weren't testing in my state because AZ is basically bankrupt. But now it seems they *are* testing and just not turning anything up yet. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alicia64 Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 For those who don't think there's a problem ~ how do you think epidemics/pandemics begin? 100,000 people just show up ill one day?? Of course, it starts a little here, a little there and begins to insidiously spread. Hopefully this isn't a beginning, but it's got the look of one. Still I'm hoping, hoping, hoping it's not. Perry ~ That said, what do you recommend we do at this point? I'm sooooo bored staying home. I've been sick so staying home was convenient actually, but I'd like to get out again. Dh is saying stay out of populated parks, library etc. But, gosh, the boy down the street had the flu and two of his school mates and they're all recovering fine. So far, this flu seems mild. I mean, since we're not in Mexico. So, I'm unclear what we should do at this point. Alicia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenn in Mo Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 (Copied from the last thread) This virus is similar in structure to the one that caused the Spanish flu of 1918-1919. The last pandemic was so bad because we didn't (and really, couldn't) do anything to attempt to halt the spread. They don't really know how bad this is or could get, but at this point are trying the easiest and most obvious tactics to slow this thing down until they can get a handle on it. It isn't that it's so bad now, but has the potential to get bad. No one wants to say in hindsight..."If only we had tried X" Barb At the risk of sounding thick-headed, I still don't get it. The reason the last pandemic was so bad was that so many people were dying from it. In this case, we aren't seeing any larger percentage of deaths than would be expected from the regular flu...and that's only if you include Mexico. Take the Mexico cases away and you have zero deaths. Everything I'm reading says that it is following a normal flu pattern, except that it isn't flu season. No more or less contagious and certainly not more dangerous. I understand that if it were a deadly virus spreading at this rate, it would be dangerous, but so far, it's not proving itself to be anything more than a mild sick-bug. If the regular flu were swabbed and identified with a scary name, would it not also be showing up as spreading worldwide at the same rate? The only difference I am seeing (outside of Mexico's odd, unexplained situation) is that this flu is being specifically identified and tracked where regular flu isn't generally even taken to the doctor. And because we're tracking it so diligently, are able to put the word "pandemic" beside it. I am quite likely VERY WRONG in this perception - it's just how I'm seeing it and I'm trying to understand better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bess Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 At the risk of sounding thick-headed, I still don't get it. The reason the last pandemic was so bad was that so many people were dying from it. In this case, we aren't seeing any larger percentage of deaths than would be expected from the regular flu...and that's only if you include Mexico. Take the Mexico cases away and you have zero deaths. Everything I'm reading says that it is following a normal flu pattern, except that it isn't flu season. No more or less contagious and certainly not more dangerous. I understand that if it were a deadly virus spreading at this rate, it would be dangerous, but so far, it's not proving itself to be anything more than a mild sick-bug. If the regular flu were swabbed and identified with a scary name, would it not also be showing up as spreading worldwide at the same rate? The only difference I am seeing (outside of Mexico's odd, unexplained situation) is that this flu is being specifically identified and tracked where regular flu isn't generally even taken to the doctor. And because we're tracking it so diligently, are able to put the word "pandemic" beside it. I am quite likely VERY WRONG in this perception - it's just how I'm seeing it and I'm trying to understand better. I'm with you. I don't get it. So, we get the swine flu.... and? We get over it. What's the big deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 The reason the last pandemic was so bad was that so many people were dying from it. That is because you are looking at statistics from the entire pandemic spanning a couple of years. We are only a few months into the thing and the actions that are being taken are in the hopes of nipping things in the bud and stabilizing the situation. Actions that are easy to do and cost little, like closing schools with confirmed cases to isolate the virus, are sensible first steps. Everything I'm reading says that it is following a normal flu pattern, except that it isn't flu season. No more or less contagious and certainly not more dangerous. Correct, but that was also the case in the 1918 flu. The first wave of H1N1 was as mild as the usual flu, but then after a summer hiatus, came roaring back in mutated form in the fall. If the regular flu were swabbed and identified with a scary name, would it not also be showing up as spreading worldwide at the same rate? The only difference I am seeing (outside of Mexico's odd, unexplained situation) is that this flu is being specifically identified and tracked where regular flu isn't generally even taken to the doctor. And because we're tracking it so diligently, are able to put the word "pandemic" beside it. The patterns of transmission, the structure of the flu, and the origins of the virus are all completely different than the usual strains. Here's a link to the old thread from yesterday that has LOADS of excellent information: Old thread Perry, maybe you should edit your post on top to include a link so the old thread doesn't get buried? There was so much good information there that it would be a shame to have to repeat it all each day. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I'm with you. I don't get it. So, we get the swine flu.... and? We get over it. What's the big deal? Probably nothing to you as an individual, at least not now while it's mild. But we all have a vested interest in keeping the thing contained so it doesn't get any worse on a worldwide scale. At least that's how I understand it. Barb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fshinkevich Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I'm with you. I don't get it. So, we get the swine flu.... and? We get over it. What's the big deal? I got these quotes off another board, maybe not the nicest tone, but I thought they were good. Makes sense to me. Regular Influenza has a .2% morality rate. So if 1000 people get infected, 2 die This strain has a 5-10% mortality rate. So if 1000 people get infected, 100 die. Its 50 times more lethal, more infectious and just like the flu will hit us all year long. People have some natural immunity to the standard yearly flu strain given past exposures and vaccinations. People have no immunity to the Mexican flu (swine is racist now?). H1N1 is lethal and we will not see how bad it is for 60-90 days of exposure when it is already too late. Thats why im shocked at the apathy and empty rhetoric coming out of some people. *** So we dont panic until 100 people die? or 1,000? or 10,000? or 100,000? You dont seem to understand how flu works. By the time you start having death rates in the thousands you already have millions infected. This thing takes 3 weeks to kill and 2 weeks to gestate. You will not see the true death rates of this thing for 60-90 days when we get full exposure and spread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenn in Mo Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Thank you, Barb. I do see these points and don't mean to imply that we shouldn't be carefully watching this. The oddity of different reactions in Mexico demand that this be studied carefully. And I understand that if it were to undergo some sort of change, a 2nd wave could prove dangerous. My confusion lies in the current fear of the current situation, not future what-if's. I hear people saying "They found a case in my state, should I still go buy groceries?" and have to cock my head sideways and say "huh?" At this moment, the worst case scenario is....you catch the sniffles? Sniffles with a scary name, but sniffles nonetheless. As for mortality rates being a higher percentage, isn't current data saying something like only 8 confirmed deaths? There is so much conflicting data out there, it's confusing. I'm ready to jump in and freak out at any time.....I just want to be sure it's time first. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bess Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 As for mortality rates being a higher percentage, isn't current data saying something like only 8 confirmed deaths? There is so much conflicting data out there, it's confusing. I'm ready to jump in and freak out at any time.....I just want to be sure it's time first. ;) That's what I find confusing and is why I don't get it. If indeed the mortality rates are higher for the swine flu, then why aren't there already deaths in the the U.S. since so many people have gotten it? Will the mortality rate only show itself higher with the potential second wave?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peek a Boo Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 They cancelled the Circle Ten Scout Show in the Dallas area-- thousands of kids were gonna be there. I'm definitely in the skeptic camp. ask me again in 3-6 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 That's what I find confusing and is why I don't get it. If indeed the mortality rates are higher for the swine flu, then why aren't there already deaths in the the U.S. since so many people have gotten it? Will the mortality rate only show itself higher with the potential second wave?? No one seems to understand why, but to me that seems to suggest the need for more caution, rather than less. So far, it seems like we are only ruling things out (from http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9PJJvaROOPZdpFqydJYDQ4jxXRAD97SCISO0): Webby and others do not believe the swine flu in Mexico is different from what's been seen in U.S. patients. The virus samples in both countries match. The CDC sent four epidemiologists and one lab scientist to Mexico over the weekend to investigate the disease there, and the agency expects to send a half-dozen more people this week, said Dowell, of the CDC. Among the hypotheses being ruled out as explanations for Mexico's higher death rate: _ A second infection complicating the flu cases. A common danger in flu is that the patient is co-infected with pneumonia or other bacteria, which can lead to death. But lab tests of 33 Mexican patients, including seven who died, did not find that problem. _ Low-quality health care. CDC investigators have not seen any obvious problem. They have found capable doctors and well-equipped, high-quality hospitals, Dowell said. _ A medicine is compounding the problem. Investigators have looked into whether patients who got sick had taken some over-the-counter medicine or folk remedy that actually made things worse. Such a problem has sometimes occurs in children recovering from flu who are given aspirin — a severe illness called Reye's syndrome, which causes vomiting, lethargy and even seizures. But there's no evidence of something like that in Mexico, Dowell said. _ Altitude or air pollution: Mexico City's altitude and its infamous air pollution have raised speculation that those factors may have made people more susceptible to the virus. But severe cases are being reported over much of Mexico, including coastal communities and places with cleaner air, making that theory unlikely. The CDC has also been investigating when the swine flu first hit Mexico. Some have wondered whether it's possible people have been getting sick with the virus for months, but the illness went undetected because special swine flu tests were not used to diagnose patients. But CDC officials say no, the flu probably did not hit Mexico until March at the earliest. An analysis of hundreds of samples from Mexico that were collected from January to March never turned up the swine flu virus, Dowell said. There's also the question of where it started — a standard inquiry of public health investigations since at least the mid-19th century. One of the heroes of public health history is John Snow, a London physician who helped end an 1854 cholera outbreak by determining that cases were clustered around a water pump and that the disease was spread through water. The pump handle was removed, and the cholera deaths subsided. But flu is different because it's spread by human-to-human contact. Scientists know it's more difficult to pin down the origin of a novel strain of influenza to a specific country, let alone a village or pig farm. Knowledge of the origin is also less useful than in a cholera outbreak. "Flu, unlike cholera, spreads around the world in a matter of weeks. You can't remove the pump handle" to stop the epidemic, said Dr. Andrew Pavia, a University of Utah pediatrics professor who leads the Infectious Diseases Society of America's pandemic flu task force. A current theory is that the outbreak started in the town of La Gloria on the eastern coast of Mexico, because a 5-year-old boy was the first known case. He first suffered flu-like symptoms in late March. However, Mexican health officials have downplayed claims the outbreak started in La Gloria, because mucous samples of other patients from there found nothing. Dowell said the place of origin is a secondary concern at the moment. "That probably will be useful in the long term. But for the present, our team in the field is focused on things that will make the most difference for mitigation" of the outbreak, he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Here's another really good article quoting Richard Webby again. Ironically, I found it when Googling the title of the last article I posted: Scientists struggle to understand swine flu virus By Karen Kaplan and Alan Zarembo Los Angeles Times Posted: 04/29/2009 08:20:49 PM PDT Updated: 04/29/2009 10:16:16 PM PDT As the World Health Organization raised its infectious disease alert level Wednesday and health officials confirmed the first death linked to swine flu inside U.S. borders, scientists studying the virus are coming to the consensus that this hybrid strain of influenza — at least in its current form — is not shaping up to be as fatal as the strains that caused some previous pandemics. In fact, the current outbreak of the H1N1 virus, which emerged in San Diego and southern Mexico late last month, may not even do as much damage as the run-of-the-mill flu outbreaks that occur each winter without much fanfare. "Let's not lose track of the fact that the normal seasonal influenza is a huge public health problem that kills tens of thousands of people in the U.S. alone and hundreds of thousands around the world," said Dr. Christopher Olsen, a molecular virologist who studies swine flu at the University of Wisconsin School of Veterinary Medicine-Madison. His remarks came the same day Texas authorities announced that a 22-month-old Mexican boy with the virus had died in a Houston hospital Monday. "Any time someone dies, it's heartbreaking for their families and friends," Olsen said. "But we do need to keep this in perspective." Flu viruses are known to be notoriously unpredictable, and this strain could mutate at any point — becoming either more benign or dangerously severe. But mounting preliminary evidence from Advertisement genetics labs, epidemiology models and simple mathematics suggests that the worst-case scenarios are likely to be avoided in the current outbreak. "This virus doesn't have anywhere near the capacity to kill like the 1918 virus," which claimed an estimated 50 million victims worldwide, said Richard Webby, a leading influenza virologist at St. Jude Research Hospital in Memphis. When it was first identified, the similarities between the 1918 flu and the current virus seemed ominous. Both arose in the spring at the tail end of the flu season. Both seemed to strike people who were young and healthy instead of the elderly and infants. Both were H1N1 strains, so called because they had the same kinds of two key proteins that are largely responsible for a virus' ability to infect and spread. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health published genetic sequence data Monday morning of flu samples isolated from patients in California and Texas, and thousands of scientists began downloading it immediately. Comparisons to known killers — such as the 1918 strain and the highly lethal H5N1 avian virus — have since provided welcome news. "There are certain characteristics, molecular signatures, which this virus lacks," said Peter Palese, a microbiologist and influenza expert at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York. In particular, the swine flu lacks an amino acid that appears to increase the number of virus particles in the lungs and make the disease more deadly. Scientists have identified several other differences between this virus and its 1918 predecessor, but the significance of those differences is still unclear, said Dr. Scott Layne, an epidemiologist at the UCLA School of Public Health. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingChris Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 From my understanding, the first patients in Mexico didn't tend to die either. It was the later patients. I believe that the fear in the medical community is that this will be a repeat of the 1918 flu which appeared in the Spring, killed hardly any, than reappeared in the fall and killed millions. We are going about our business since there have been no outbreaks here. I am a bit curious about that since the DC area has a more than normal proportion of people who travel. Lots of people travel as tourists and lots of people travel for work. But we haven't had any cases in our metropolitan area. What we do have in this area is probably an extremely high rate of flu shot takers. That is because it is one of our government health care benefits and even if you aren't reimbursed for it, this area is so competetive, people just don't want to be sick for weeks so they get the shot. I am wondering if the years of shots that people got my give them some sort of modified immunity. Back in 1918, no one had ever gotten a flu shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WishboneDawn Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 One more thing to consider about the death rate in Mexico is that their method of gathering information on this is different. They record cases on the swine flu when people come into the hospital system whereas it's a different method here in Canada and the US. So they may not be catching many people who have had the flu but only very mild cases. That would affect their death rate statistics quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennifer Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 Someone asked what other states have confirmed cases-Colorado does, as of this morning. The first is a woman just back from a cruise and the other is a baggage handler at Denver International. He has been hospitalized the past three days. Jennifer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeatherInWI Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 A friend of my dc had ALL the symptoms last week, but the ped. didn't even WANT to check for swine flu on Friday, despite the mom asking if he/she wanted to swab her child for it. So what makes things different now? Why would a dr check for swine flu in one person, but not the other? Is there info passed among those who are 'in the know' that suddenly makes them look for it? Why would one case be labeled 'possible' and another discounted? The info says that they are 95% sure that this is swine flu. How can they know that without the test results?" A friend of mine is a doc in AL, and, as of last night, the feds still hadn't gotten any test kits to that practice, so the doctors were helpless to do anything but tell them to go home and treat it as any other virus. I was told that there were at least couple of cases that they were positive were swine flu, but with no test kits, there was no way of knowing. Our local places in WI aren't testing either, probably for the same reason. I guess the government needs to learn how to use overnight shipping? My guess it that there are thousands of cases all over the country which are not being tested and reported. On the good side, maybe this means that the fatality rate is far lower than previously thought, however, it apparently only takes one mutation to make it more fatal, so having it continue to spread probably isn't good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.