Posted on 05/15/2009 8:36:36 AM PDT by luckystarmom
“a disease that can kill some shouldn’t be feared by all.”
Pretty much ALL diseases can kill.
Including ALL influezas and various things we take for granted nowadays as no big deal.
Without the huge advances we’ve had in OUR medical industry (no thanks to communists who want to make it all “cheap”), we’d understand how every disease is a big deal underneath, and how spoiled we are.
I don’t believe this swine flu is any worse than any other. Still, no-one has explained to me WHY we should be so scared.
BTW, they (public health folks) are getting a better grasp of how bad this swine flu is. They are placing it somewhere between the 1918 and the 1957 flu ~ and that’s pretty bad.
This is still NOT telling me WHY this is “bad”.
Don’t tell me it’s the “same” as 1918. 2009 is a LOT different from 1918. The virus can be the same, but the conditions around it are different. Heck, in 1918 the main reason people died was it led to PNEUMONIA; not the disease itself. Things are different now, for cleanliness, sterility, treatment; and all kinds of secondary issues are different too - such as food contamination and so on. We have refrigeration everywhere now, e.g.
Influenza - all of it - has been a killer by nature for centuries.
We spoiled people largely think of flu as a joke now, and something you just suffer through with a few pills. It CAN kill even the healthiest people, but advances have largely made that moot.
We’ll see. Not saying you can’t be cautious, but being paranoid is a waste of time and money.
Remember 1976? That was a joke and the hysterical “do-something” “solution” was what cost people lives.
"Pneumonia" and "lung infection" are the same illness, so the son (or the writer) was being redundant - although the pneumonia could be caused by the flu virus and complicated by another organism such as a bacterium.
I’d agree that you have a pretty good handle on the big picture, Rebel.
Thanks for cheering me up at the start of my weeklong business trip overseas.
Flu season is lasting longer because we have a cool spring. There are no sunspots either.
The rapid vaccination of a large part of the population stopped that flu epidemic in its tracks. The death rate would have been in the tens of thousands otherwise.
vaudine
We aren’t. We are in San Jose, and it’s going to be close to 100 tomorrow, and we’ve had other hot days in the 90s.
All autoimmune diseases are symptomatic of having an immune system that’s in tip top operating shape and is going after you!
I do not believe gout has anything to do with autoimmune. www.wrongdiagnosis.com, etc. It’s a build-up of uric acid in places it shouldn’t be.
Autoimmune is not “weak” immunity, but hypersensitive (if you will) immune system. Your own immune system attacks your own body thinking something is foreign when there is no such thing.
Thanks. I hope so.
Anyway, I’m still not getting a solid answer on why we’re in danger. “It’s like the 1918!” is not an answer.
I’d like to be added also.
You are on the list!
At present it would seem we are not. It is, so far, a mild flu (in terms of fatality/infection).
However, it has proven to be eminently transmissable.
Like all flu viruses, the ability to recombine with other flu variants and produce a new strain exists, and this strain is unusual enough.
There are some other pretty nasty strains out there (in terms of deaths/infection) with fatality rates, at least based on confirmed cases, of 50% in the instance of H5N1, although H5N1 is presently difficult to catch.
The concern arises when there is a very real possibility of a recombinant form of this flu which would make the rounds in a subsequent wave and be much more deadly.
That may be what happened with the 1918 flu, and it and subsequent pandemic flus have started out with a relatively mild spring strain, followed by a more deadly one in the late summer or fall.
Concern, too arises over potential reisitance to antivirals, and overwhelming the available health care resources/personnel, which are geared to taking care of far fewer patients than a sudden (even doubling of current numbers) surge in ventilator patients would bring in.
All the logistical problems from the health care end, coupled with limited availability of ordinary products in an economy dependent on on-time delivery of goods from afar (which would rapidly deplete local inventories) and quarrantine.travel restrictions would mean there woulc be shortages of common items people use in their every day life.
Services might be interrupted as well, including power, fuel delivery, water, etc. due to people being out sick.
All of this is not necessarily cause for panic (we can always panic later), but it is reason enough to make sure you have your pantry stocked for anywhere from a couple of weeks to a couple of months (or more, YMMV), some water on hand (bottled) and means to purify more, a way to cook (camp stove/grill and fuel), and plenty of TP, garbage bags, etc.
Means to defend yourself in the event of civil unrest might be wise, and keep your gas tank full at a minimum.
Think, too, of OTC medication you might use if you have the flu, too, including expectorants to help get the gunk out of your lungs--not cough suppressants which might help your lungs fill up with mucous.
There may not be a problem, It could be severe. No one knows, but by being prepared for whatever as best you can, you remove yourself from being dependent on the Government for the basics, and come a little closer to guaranteeing your safety and that of your family.
But I don’t understand really why this flu is a “killer”. That is what I don’t get an answer to. Not really, anyway. Your discussion of disruptions is OK, but I still say things are much more advanced medically, technologically, sanitization, etc. I don’t understand either how this flu is so bad in itself, or how it can reach the levels of 1918 with all we have now.
This article explains some of it:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2253069/posts
It is a killer, but mostly in the third world.
...but I still say things are much more advanced medically, technologically, sanitization, etc.
Yes, and no. We have tremedous medical advancements, but the ability to use them is based on how many machines are available. For those with pulmonary complications, this means a mechanical respirator to get ventilation. The number of available respirators is not that great, and a widespread need for them would overwhelm the system.
(Hospitals pretty much have to show a profit, or at least break even, so there are not a lot of these devices just sitting in the back room waiting to be needed, nor the personnel to run them.)
So while we are significantly more advanced (than 1918), there is a limit to how many people can be treated at any given time. If that limit is exceeded people will die in greater numbers.
As for sanitation, before antibiotics, people recognized that infection was a killer. We have become more complacent, despite our greater knowledge, and are more likely than ever to take something which will mask symptoms and go out in public.
In addition, we rely on both antibiotics and technology to save lives, but if there were no hospital beds open, no available respirators, and demand even doubled or tripled for specific antibiotics (for opportunistic bacterial pneumonia--the major killer complication) or antivirals to try to head off the flu itself, the stocks of drugs would run out.
Keep in mind the pharmaceuticals have an expiration date, and that while no one wants to run out, no one wants to be left holding a lot of out-of-date inventory, either. So those stocks are based on projected need.
In limited outbreaks, the localized need can be covered, but in a truly widespread (pandemic) outbreak, there is no surplus to shift around.
We have not reached that point, and hopefully will not, but hope is not a viable plan of action.
So far, this flu has not reached that critical mass where the medical establishment here is overwhelmed. Although people in the US have died, they have been relatively few in number because even the most severe cases in the US still have access to the resources we have.
Two things could make this far worse.
One, that severe cases become so widespread that there is no slack in the system.
Two, that the current virus may recombine with other variants to produce a more lethal strain which is readily communicable. The more people infected, the more opportunities for such recombination exist.
“It is a killer, but mostly in the third world.”
I have said, ALL flus (and almost all diseases) are killers; but we’ve so far outpaced them that many are simply not considered such here, anymore. Flu is 1 that is at heart a killer, but has largely been tamed here.
“(Hospitals pretty much have to show a profit, or at least break even, so there are not a lot of these devices just sitting in the back room waiting to be needed, nor the personnel to run them.)”
I can appreciate the idea that there could be an overrun - but again, why assume it’s so bad that people go to a hospital for it? Or even bother with OTC medicines, because most flus aren’t at all cured by them, just “relieved”.
So while we are significantly more advanced (than 1918), there is a limit to how many people can be treated at any given time. If that limit is exceeded people will die in greater numbers.
“As for sanitation, before antibiotics, people recognized that infection was a killer. We have become more complacent, despite our greater knowledge, and are more likely than ever to take something which will mask symptoms and go out in public.”
Again, I don’t mean just the OBVIOUS direct kind of advancements - I mean EVERYWHERE in the BIG PICTURE. Not just that people obviously ill are sanitary and the people with them, but EVERYTHING is pre-emptively sanitary. Restaurants, hotels, etc; everywhere you go. Compared to 1918, trust me, it’s a bit different.
“Keep in mind the pharmaceuticals have an expiration date, and that while no one wants to run out, no one wants to be left holding a lot of out-of-date inventory, either. So those stocks are based on projected need.”
Pharmacies may deliberately toss them, but how about us? Expiration dates are mainly for “lost effectiveness”, not safety, and usually have a fudge factor to boot. I don’t toss drugs either OTC or prescription (yes, I’ve often not taken all of it) just for an old date.
“So far, this flu has not reached that critical mass where the medical establishment here is overwhelmed. Although people in the US have died, they have been relatively few in number because even the most severe cases in the US still have access to the resources we have.”
2 people have died? 1 a Mexican youngster, another near there with childbirth issues (God rest her child). Are there any others?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.