posted
I wonder what it'll be next year, maybe the Willie Mammoth flu, or the Gieco Gecko flu, or Puff The Magic Dragon flu, you'll catch that from smoking weed with friends.
Posts: 190 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I live near Disney World and considering the huge number of visitors to this area, I figured I'd hear about someone in this area contracting "Swine" Flu. As of this evening, I haven't heard about a single case in the entire state of Florida.
Like "Footgirl" said "Just take precautions". Life's way too short to worry about the next case of creeping butt crud to come along and wipe out humanity.
Since you're more likely to die in a freak accident than of a case of the flu, make sure you look both ways before crossing the street. And if you should encounter Chicken Little, tell him his momma is looking for him.
-------------------- It's a sick world, and I'm a happy guy! Posts: 762 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cain: Yeah i was sweating a little today cause my son had flu like symptoms but he is ok just the regular strain of the virus.
quote:Originally posted by footgirl0226: considering over 30,000 peeps die of the regular flu a year, I think everyone is making too much fuss over this shit...
Flu severity is not based on total fatalities. It is based on case-to-fatality ratio. Seasonal flu results in over 30,000 deaths in the US per year, you are right. But that is only 0.1% of those infected. So far, this swine strain appears to be killing at least 2% of those infected (and primarily healthy young adults). The deadly 1918 flu pandemic also had a kill rate of approx 2%. Estimates range from 50-100 million people were killed worldwide in a matter of months.
You understand why, if this spreads (which it appears to be relentlessly doing), then it could be VERY BAD.
This is not just a health risk. It is a monumental economic threat and will generate severe social unrest.
posted
How can you say that this strain has a kill rate of at least 2% ? Nobody knows the number of people infected in Mexico and I'm pretty sure that we don't know the accurate number from anywhere else either. So we don't know if the kill rate is 2% or .00002%
A lot of things are different now than they were in 1918. Medicine has come a LONG WAY. As soon as the particulars are figured out, vaccine will be produced on a scale that wasn't imagined in 1918. Aviation was only 15 years old at that time. We travel around the world in a matter of hours now. Which is aiding the spread of the virus now. (But we're not seeing people dropping like flies.) If that should happen, I don't know how we can do any more to prevent it.
Bottom line: Relax, wash your hands, cover your mouth when you sneeze or cough and don't travel if you feel ill. And Chicken Little, Put a helmet on.
-------------------- It's a sick world, and I'm a happy guy! Posts: 762 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This whole flu thing can be taken care of very easily. Just keep your body In an alkaline state and you'll never get sick.
Posts: 649 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by footgirl0226: considering over 30,000 peeps die of the regular flu a year, I think everyone is making too much fuss over this shit...
Flu severity is not based on total fatalities. It is based on case-to-fatality ratio. Seasonal flu results in over 30,000 deaths in the US per year, you are right. But that is only 0.1% of those infected. So far, this swine strain appears to be killing at least 2% of those infected (and primarily healthy young adults). The deadly 1918 flu pandemic also had a kill rate of approx 2%. Estimates range from 50-100 million people were killed worldwide in a matter of months.
You understand why, if this spreads (which it appears to be relentlessly doing), then it could be VERY BAD.
This is not just a health risk. It is a monumental economic threat and will generate severe social unrest.
Good point. Another thing to consider is that typically the only ones who die of the flu are the very young, the very elderly or those with an already compromised immune system. I also work in health care and a little prevention goes a long way (i.e., washing your hands)
-------------------- The FJ Cruiser. Posts: 199 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sofatater: How can you say that this strain has a kill rate of at least 2% ? Nobody knows the number of people infected in Mexico and I'm pretty sure that we don't know the accurate number from anywhere else either. So we don't know if the kill rate is 2% or .00002%
A lot of things are different now than they were in 1918. Medicine has come a LONG WAY. As soon as the particulars are figured out, vaccine will be produced on a scale that wasn't imagined in 1918. Aviation was only 15 years old at that time. We travel around the world in a matter of hours now. Which is aiding the spread of the virus now. (But we're not seeing people dropping like flies.) If that should happen, I don't know how we can do any more to prevent it.
You're right, there are a lot of unknowns, and the numbers are currently statistically inadequate to accurately determine a case-to-fatality ratio. I am just a bag of nerves right now over what might be on the horizon come autumn. Every flu pandemic we have ever seen, starts with a mild first wave, and a few months later, usually beginning in late summer or early autumn, is followed by a series of increasingly lethal waves that do a great deal of damage.
I'm sure, like you say, our more sophisticated state of medicine will help to mitigate fatalities. But I am concerned that the benefits may be relatively negligible. For example, the vast majority of deaths in Mexico are in the normally unaffected age group of 20-45. The reason why new or 'novel' influenza virus pandemics often single out the young and healthy is because the virus sends healthy immune systems into severe overreaction, resulting in a cytokine storm. Once one's body gets to that point, which is often terrifyingly rapid (frequently within hours of onset of symptoms), it is pretty much a lost cause and there is actually no medicine in existence to deal with that scenario.
I don't think I would be reacting with this much concern if I was a bachelor. The fact that my wife and I are expecting our first child in September just has me a little on edge. Pregnant women are extremely high risk for influenza complications from regular seasonal flu, nevermind 'novel' influenza pandemics. Otherwise I'd be on the "Come What Come May" side of the fence.
posted
I didn't mention it before because my memory is so full of holes and I've been wrong before. This is at least the 2nd time we've had a "swine flu" scare.
The last time was in 1976. I was in boot camp at the time and all military personnel were vaccinated for it. If you google Swine flu 1976 you'll find pages of information about the B.S. scare dumped on the public. After all was said and done, it was no worse than any other flu we'd experienced. It sure sold a lot of newspapers and ad space though. As well as put billions in the pockets of the drug makers.
Great way to drum up future business, huh? Start a panic in the spring that will give the public several months to worry over, then when the new flu season comes around you've got an eager and ready market to peddle your latest cocktail to.
-------------------- It's a sick world, and I'm a happy guy! Posts: 762 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
nope! My throat has been hoarse lately but thats coz i was screaming support for my team who lost 60 something nil.
Posts: 251 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Otherwise I'd be on the 
