Flu outbreak....

[Watchful]

You need to be VERY carefull what you say. The above is so wrong it should be retracted.

And why is it wrong, by the way? Are you saying that less people die of the flu than other forms combined?

People die of the flu yes but the death rate is a mere fraction of what SARs was and Avian flu.

You are mixing two totally different ideas. More people die total of the flu than SARs or avian flu combined. If you're talking percentage of mortality and morbidity rate (that is, the number of people who get X die of X > the number of people who get Y and die of Y), you have opened the door to a wide variety of odd ideas. You need to divide that by the lifetime odds of getting the disease the first place.

By way of example, and by using your analysis, we should never take showers, as the number of people who die after slipping and falling in the shower is statistically quite high.

IF this is the big one we have been waiting for there could be a 50% death rate or higher for those who catch it. Think about that for a minute.

And if you don't get it, the death rate is 0%. You can't simply look at at risk in one dimensonal terms, but an X-Y matrix: X = what is the chance of getting it and Y = what is the effect.

Also, I think your use of the phrase "the big one we have been waiting for" is significantly telling, psychologically.

 

[Brian Jones]

skimmerhorn, your days here are numbered. And it is a very small number.

 

[skammer]

And why is it wrong, by the way? Are you saying that less people die of the flu than other forms combined?

.

Not going to banter with you until tou understand the numbers.

45,000 dead out of 900,000 infected with regular flu is a very different story than 450,000k dead out of 900,000 infected with a new deadly flu strain.

These are fictitious numbers of course but plausable.

The info is out there research it.

SKam

 

[dealperfect]

Everyone should stay home ,do not out

 

[stabman]

Yep, the world is ending AGAIN.
First, Y2K made all the nukes go off, and the planes fall out of the sky.
Then SARS killed off half the remaining people.
THEN, the Avian flu came to get 77% of the survivors of SARS.
Screw it, I'm not going to fall into a panic this time either.
We live in an idiotic environment of overblown fears.
I used to get the flu EVERY SINGLE YEAR, and all I'd say is "at least I ONLY got the flu."

 

[HikingMano]

Some relatively undiluted information. We should all do a little more research before putting forth risk assessments or debating if and why people are donning tin hats:

http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/

http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/general_info.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/investigation.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/pdf/HAN_042509.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/media/transcripts/2009/t090424.htm

http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_04_24/en/index.html

http://www.pandemicflu.gov/


The fact is, not much is known yet. So we'll just see how it turns out guys. Now let's stop this craziness.

 

[CaptInsano]

Not going to banter with you until tou understand the numbers.

45,000 dead out of 900,000 infected with regular flu is a very different story than 450,000k dead out of 900,000 infected with a new deadly flu strain.

These are fictitious numbers of course but plausable.

The info is out there research it.

SKam

Do you understand that this doesn't make him wrong by any rational standard? Do you understand that those numbers are plausible for a different flu strain as opposed to the strain we're actually talking about?

 

[Will Power]

You raise a very good point dougo, and I should probably do more research before stating it as concrete fact. But I'm pretty sure that while those factors contributed to the severity of the pandemic, it was the specific nature of that strain which really made it a nasty pandemic. I could be wrong...now you have me doing research...




I think so too, but that shouldn't make us complacent either. But yes, I agree with you guyon, we are in better shape to combat something like this than we were back then. :thumbup:

Yes and no, the abuse of antibiotics and thinning of vaccines makes our defences not as strong as you may like to think.

Also, there are a lot more homo sapiens on the planet now than was the case in 1918, probably three times more...plus rapid air travel means very rapid transmission of viruses.We are also highly dependent on the import and quick distribution of goods/foodstuffs where our forebears were used to improvising or getting by on less etc.

This outbreak could be very worrying,if people were forced into some kind of regional or global quarantine then I can't see most people coping and how could medical aid and care be distributed if there were this breakdown?

Get some tinned and dried food in....

 

[Will Power]

England expects that every man will do his duty.

Some will, some won't. Courage cannot be mandated. Societies survive on the strength of their most committed members.

Reading this thread, we see many who will account for themselves well.

It's true,courage and devotion to duty can't be mandated /forced but the only hope for the human race is when people have the resolve&courage to act in terrible situations at great personal cost but for common good.

23 years ago today, teams of maintenance staff,fire brigades and other emergency workers braved the aftermath of the explosion at the nuclear power station in Tchernobyl, Ukraine, to contain the explosion and prevent a total meltdown of the reactor. The helicopter crews who flew missions to seal the holes and other front line emergency workers faced catastrophic doses of radiation, nearly all perished from radiation sickness in the coming months. Some rescue workers fled the scene and abandoned the populace, others were understandably too terrified to go in and could not be forced, but fortunately enough took the risk to carry out the repair work over the days and weeks that followed.If they had not, then large parts of Europe may have become uninhabitable due to nuclear contamination. As it was many people and the environment were badly affected, birth defects and a rise in cancers over the years.The effects of Tschernobyl reached across to Britain in the west and far into then USSR in the east,but without the courage of these brave people the disaster would have been a nightmare.

So, if the porcine flu outbreak does turn into a pandemic, we will be saved only by the devotion to duty of the medical and emergency services rather than the "I'm alright Jack, to hell with everybody else" approach. Let us hope it does not come to this.

 

[Trent Rock]

All part of the culture of fear
BREAKING NEWS!!!!
Swine flu is coming
Details after the commercial

 

[koyote]

Not going to banter with you until tou understand the numbers.

45,000 dead out of 900,000 infected with regular flu is a very different story than 450,000k dead out of 900,000 infected with a new deadly flu strain.

These are fictitious numbers of course but plausable.

The info is out there research it.

SKam

I understand what you are saying about mortality rates as percentage of infected persons. However, this is completely orthogonal to the original statement - which is that more people die each year of common flu strains that the total number of people who die from 'exotics'.

What this means is that if 500,000,000 people get a disease with a .005% mortality rate- then 25,000 people die. Call that the 'common flu strain'

Then, if 100,000 people get a variety of exotic strains with a 15% mortality rate, you have 15,000 die.

That's LESS THAN 25,000. (these are fictitious numbers being used to explain a mathematical word problem)

Leading to the statement that more people die from common flu strains than from exotics that have a vastly higher mortality rate.

 

[koyote]

I'm personally much more interested in the flu itself. I'm generally not a doom and gloomer- even though much of my emergency preparation revolves around longer term scenarios rather than arbitrary seeming 72 hour limits and such.

But since our Household does think and plan in those terms, this is almost a business as usual case. We're ready to batten down and fort up, or leave, whatever seems needful.

Right now it looks like we've got a strain of flu that is human-human transmissible, fairly infectious, and mostly mild enough that it's going to be hard to track as something separate from regular flu strains. Current exception being that it seems to be killing a fair number of people in Mexico City.

For perspective, the current total is around .001% (one one thousandth of one per cent) of the population of the city- 22 million- with anywhere from a high of 10% mortality to a low of 1.5% mortality rate in Mexico City. (there is, understandably, a lot of confusion about the numbers and sources).

I stress the location because there are several social, economic, and environmental factors that can be taken into account. Remember that the smog in Cuidad De Mexico kills people, all by itself. It's very possible that environmental factors like this could have an effect on survivability of a flu strain, especially a new hybridized, and relatively unknown one.

 

[Ramm9]

However, this is completely orthogonal to the original statement -

Sorry folks, I have to step off topic a sec and admit I had to look up "orthogonal."

 

[Mistwalker]

Sorry folks, I have to step off topic a sec and admit I had to look up "orthogonal."

Me too....and I thought I had a pretty good vocabulary...

 

[Mistwalker]

Ah, I'll have to remember that one

 

[HikingMano]

Yes and no, the abuse of antibiotics and thinning of vaccines makes our defences not as strong as you may like to think.

Also, there are a lot more homo sapiens on the planet now than was the case in 1918, probably three times more...plus rapid air travel means very rapid transmission of viruses.

Right, I don't think we're invincible. And yes, I would say that increased globalization and the ease of travel has made containment difficult/impossible now. But I do agree with Guyon in the sense that medical science has made significant advances since 1918, and we are in better shape to control or fight something like this. I don't know if it'll be enough, but we are better off than people were back then. I think we're probably better off planning-wise as well, especially in light of the recent Avian flu scares.

Dr. Besser, Acting Director for the CDC, in a press briefing:

There has been extensive planning across the federal government, across federal, state and local governments within the private sector, in schools. Our communities have been planning for pandemic influenza for many, many years.

We don’t know that this strain will develop into a pandemic strain. But the level of planning that has taken place in this country in unprecedented. And I think will allow us to respond in ways that we would not have been able to respond had this occurred 10 years ago.

At this point we don’t know what actions will need to be taken. There is a lot of work that's been going on around community control of a pandemic virus and what needs to take place. The type of activities that need to take place depend on the severity of the virus. And, you know, I’d refer you to our Web site on pandemic flu planning to see the detailed guidance around those types of steps.

Again, though in terms of this situation and this swine flu we are not at the point and WHO is not at the point of declaring a pandemic. We are at the point of trying to learn more about this virus and understand the transmission and how to control it.

I hope if something does happen, all the plans and systems put in place will actually work....

I'm not sure how much antibiotic abuse comes into play here as I generally associate antibiotics with bacterial diseases, but that is a concern unto itself; multi-drug resistance is no joke, for example, MDR-Tuberculosis.


In light of the fact that vaccines take, at minimum, months to develop or scale up (and only after a pandemic has been declared IIRC), I hope this doesn't turn into something serious. I don't know how effective Tamiflu and other antiviral drugs are, but I don't think they're cures. I think antiviral drugs and other such measures are employed to hold the gates until a vaccine can be made and scaled up. I could be wrong, I'm not a immunologist or epidemiologist.


There is still much uncertainty with this whole swine flu, we'll just have to see.

 

[skammer]

be killing a fair number of people in Mexico City.

For perspective, the current total is around .001% (one one thousandth of one per cent) of the population of the city- 22 million- with anywhere from a high of 10% mortality to a low of 1.5% mortality rate in Mexico City. (there is, understandably, a lot of confusion about the numbers and sources).

I stress the location because there are several social, economic, and environmental factors that can be taken into account. Remember that the smog in Cuidad De Mexico kills people, all by itself. It's very possible that environmental factors like this could have an effect on survivability of a flu strain, especially a new hybridized, and relatively unknown one.

You bring up good points:thumbup: and all factor in at this point agreed. Fact is we dont know what this is yet or what its going to do.

Could this be the next 1916? Who knows but the death rate "seems" low for now but what concerns science is: will this strain mutate further or change in a manner that kills at a much higher rate?

At that stage any comparrison to regular flu is apples and oranges and does not appply, to believe otherwise is foolish. Science thinks its just a matter of time, maybe its this strain maybe not but its comming. To chalk this up to media panic and the next big story that will die out could be accurate but to dismiss the issue entirely is no way to keep ahead of the educational curve.

Certainly not a time for panic but maybe a time to ponder what if? and all the soul searching questions that come with it.

Skam

 

[CaptInsano]

You bring up good points:thumbup: and all factor in at this point agreed. Fact is we dont know what this is yet or what its going to do.

Could this be the next 1916? Who knows but the death rate "seems" low for now but what concerns science is: will this strain mutate further or change in a manner that kills at a much higher rate?

You could say the same of ANY communicable disease. So what is your point?

At that stage any comparrison to regular flu is apples and oranges and does not appply, to believe otherwise is foolish.

I specifically asked you what the distinguishing characteristics of this strain were and you failed to provide anything that would lead me to believe that this flu was not comparable to "regular" flu. Actually, you didn't respond to the question at all.

 

[CaptInsano]

In light of the fact that vaccines take, at minimum, months to develop or scale up (and only after a pandemic has been declared IIRC), I hope this doesn't turn into something serious. I don't know how effective Tamiflu and other antiviral drugs are, but I don't think they're cures. I think antiviral drugs and other such measures are employed to hold the gates until a vaccine can be made and scaled up. I could be wrong, I'm not a immunologist or epidemiologist.


There is still much uncertainty with this whole swine flu, we'll just have to see.

The CDC is saying that both Tamiflu and Relenza are effective against swine flu.

 

[skammer]

You could say the same of ANY communicable disease. So what is your point?


I specifically asked you what the distinguishing characteristics of this strain were and you failed to provide anything that would lead me to believe that this flu was not comparable to "regular" flu. Actually, you didn't respond to the question at all.

No, you cant say that about every communicable disease, cold and flu viruses are more prone to mutation than most.

I did answer and said symptomology is the same as regular flu but the death rates are vastly different depending on strain. The symptomology of any flu is the same for many illnesses. Its death rate that matters.

What is your point exactly? State it.

Skam