Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/headlines/S...ead.5225884.jp
Is it only sheffield's papers scare mongering?

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

the biggest word in that posting is "yet"....

:reaper:<<<he's coming to get us all....


NOW

teh death by swine fluez

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

What I'd like to know is, what the hell is going on in the world at the moment that 'they' don't want anyone to know about? Seems to me that we have a flu pandemic every flippin year of one sort or another. I understand that this is a bit of an unknown quantity, but it's not a new virus as I understand it. The media hysteria is reaching epic proportions, but I'm struggling to see exactly what is so different about this virus. Every year a flu type virus emerges as the most well adapted to exploit human to human transmission, and we all at one point or another catch them don't we? The vital piece of information that seems to be missing at the moment is the mortality rate from this particular strain of H1N1. At present we don't know what that is because we don't know how many people worldwide have been infected. But from the estimations I've seen, there is no reason to think that this particular virus is any more dangerous than 'normal' flu, which kills loads every year, particularly the young and weak. This pandemic would deserve the media hype IF it is shown to be killing an unusually high number of people that caught it OR if the people that died are in their prime of life. This last point is important because from what I can find out, the flu virus rarely actually kills anybody, it is rather a trigger for the immune system to go totally over the top and THAT is what kills people, and that is why those with fit and robust immune systems are most at risk from dangerous types of flu virus (spanish flu 1918 for example). So far this hasn't been show to be the case, so why the hysteria? I reckon the financial markets are the only beneficiaries of this nonsense, they are on the up and up whilst the media has been given something else to do instead of talking the markets down!
On another track, these pandemics do have a habit of coming back with avengance a few months after they have died down, but they can mutate slightly and cause far more damage than the first 'exploratory' pandemic. I think I'm going to try and catch the thing now so I can build up some immunity before the big nasty pig flu pandemic strikes come winter!:shock:

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for many of the deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed a disproportionate number of young adults.[1] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset. Preliminary research results from Hong Kong also indicated this as the probable reason for many deaths during the SARS epidemic in 2003.[4] Human deaths from the bird flu H5N1 usually involve cytokine storms as well.[5] Recent reports of high mortality among healthy young adults in the 2009 swine flu outbreak has led to speculation that cytokine storms could be responsible for these deaths.[6] However, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has indicated that symptoms reported from this strain so far are similar to those of normal seasonal flu,[7] with the CDC stating that there is "insufficient information to date about clinical complications of this variant of swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus infection."[7]

From Wiki for example. Last bit is what I mean, the cytokine storm thingy is the immune system self destructing....apparently :smt119

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

The mortality rate specifically for the 1918 pandemic was 2.5%. Previous pandemics had a mortality rate of 0.1%.

To put H1N1 into perspective, the global mortality rate for this "outbreak" (since it's not officially a pandemic yet) is 1% or thereabouts (roughly 1 in 100 people infected end up dying).

Note though that you don't die directly from the influenza virus, you die from pneumonia. In all but 3rd world regions, you'd be very unlucky to die from pneumonia, simply because of medical provisions.

A "pandemic" sells papers, therefore the media is interested. A pandemic is simply an outbreak over a large area. You could have a pandemic of some minor illness that has no chance of killing anyone, yet it'd hit the papers.

If mortality rate stays, for example, at 0.1%, but the virus spreads, you end up with a larger number of people dying simply because there's an even greater number infected. That's enough to scare people into buying newpapers etc to find out what's happening.

This is just modern society for you.

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

Not really, Spanish flu is reputed to have killed 50 million world wide. the misuse of the name flu when people have a sniffle has trivialised as serious killer if the wrong strain hits.

remember 1 sneeze in an aircraft could infect 300

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

Yeah I know... But one minor point here is that we don't know that the mortality rate is 1% as you said above, because we don't know how many people have had it! If a lot of people were dying from it in Mexico, then yes we probably would, but we don't and this could be for a variety of reasons, ie, poor data gathering in Mexico or only a small proportion of people who have had it have been to the hosp/doctor because it was percieved as just another 'sniffle'

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

Data from the US only in the table...

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/

1 person out of 109 infected has died. Therefore using the US as a sample to project globally, mortality rate is around 1%. Did you think I plucked the number from thin air? :D

Yes, I know the implications of projecting such a small sample globally, but that's about the best data we have to go on.

EDIT: The WHO article below states as of yesterday, Mexico has 156 cases, of which 9 deaths. I make that 264 cases, 10 deaths, within the US & Mexico. That lifts mortality rate projections to 2-3%.

EDIT2: I forgot to add the WHO article link. Oops. http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_05_01/en/index.html

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

Still ****e though, if that rate stays the same and it spreads to the uk I've got like a 50% chance of someone on my family dieing of it.

Re: Flu or a State of Fear
 

To have a 50% chance of someone in your family dying, you'd have to have somewhere in the region of 40 people within your family infected. Those that aren't infected cannot be included in the statistics.

The above is also based on wildly inaccurate projections for mortality.

The virus doesn't infect everyone, so far, there's also no proof that it passes from person to person like regular influenza can.