TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Swine Flu
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Swine Flu

post #1 of 85
4/27/09 at 3:45pm
Thread Starter 
It's all over the news, all around the world.

Started in Mexico, where a bunch of people have died from it. In the US, there are quite a few cases over quite a few states, but they seem to be "mild" cases where only one out of the 40 or so in New York required hospitalization. It's also documented in Canada, Israel, France, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Denmark...

Here's a Google Map where someone is keeping track of the confirmed, suspected, etc. cases. Zoom out and look around the world...interesting how fast this thing has spread.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...,25.488281&z=5

Of course the media is freaking out about it, practically declaring it a pandemic (meaning world-wide outbreak) already. Many Asian countries have banned the import of US pork, even though it's pretty well proven that you can't get the swine flu from eating pork. Russia banned imports of US beef and pork, even though there is zero correlation between this illness and beef. Not sure who is banning what imports from other countries. Seems a bit premature since the cases in the US are SO few and far between for the population, but what do I know?

My own pure speculation and opinion: IMO mother nature has been trying to "thin the herd" for years, but we've (human beings) always managed to stay one step ahead. Good for us, probably bad for the eventualities. Mad Cow, Hoof and Mouth, Aviane Flu, SARS, now Swine Flu, all these "new" and exotic illnesses with the potential for epidemic and/or pandemic proportions. They are rapidly changing, and we come up with bigger and better anti-virals and anti-biotics. One of these days Mother Nature is going to whomp us with something big. Is this it? I don't know. If it is, it is and there isn't a whole lot that we can do with all of our big gadgets and fancy science.

When a prairie dog population gets too big, bubonic plague hits the colonies hard. Population is kept in check. When the deer population explodes, there may be a really bad winter where many starve due to lack of available food. Population is kept in check. Unless there are outside forces, the predator and prey populations ebb and flow to keep things in balance. Man has no predator threat; but mother nature will find a way to keep the population in check. How long do we think we can keep her in "check"? Mother nature always wins.
Reply
post #2 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:01pm
The last big pandemic was almost 100 years ago so we are due. The next one will spread a lot faster than that one because of the amount of global travel. I don't think this one is it though because the mortality rate in this country is still zero and so far it isn't spreading very fast. I know the cases in New York started with kids that went to Cancun on spring break.
Reply
post #3 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:07pm
According to the news tonight, there are 2 cases in Canada, 40 in the USA, and 2 in the UK.

Hardly anything to panic about. And there is no evidence that this flu is any more deadly than any other flu.
Reply
post #4 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:13pm
There is a case in Sacramento County and they think there might be8more there.
They have the Tamaflu vaccines ready.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...n152913D09.DTL
Reply
post #5 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:21pm
Don't forget the Ebola outbreaks. Those were devasting and deadly also...occuring mainly in Africa but a sup-species almost hit us in the U.S.A., but it turned out deadly for monkeys but harmless to humans. (book: The Hot Zone) by Richard Preston, talking about Ebola and deadly viruses/illnesses.
Hopefully we can get Swine Flu contained and find a quick vaccination.
Reply
post #6 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:21pm
As much as I don't think this truly is a pandemic or anything to be terribly worried about (and I study infectious disease) I don't think all the media is a bad thing. If it does turn out to be highly infectious or at all deadly the public HAS to take immediate action, if they haven't been alerted it'll take a lot longer. The only way to truly stop a virus is to contain it by quarantine of infected individuals, they are already doing this in Mexico. I don't think it's smart that people are still traveling there, but chances are the damage was done before we knew what it was, so if it's going to spread it's already had the chance.
Reply
post #7 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loubelia View Post
Don't forget the Ebola outbreaks. Those were devasting and deadly also...occuring mainly in Africa but a sup-species almost hit us in the U.S.A., but it turned out deadly for monkeys but harmless to humans. (book: the Danger Zone) by Richard Preston, talking about Ebola and deadly viruses/illnesses.
Hopefully we can get Swine Flu contained and find a quick vaccination.
Ebola is actually less dangerous then something like the flu. Even though Ebola is far more deadly, it effects an individual (ie they get symptoms) very quickly after contracting the virus so it's easier to contain the virus. SOmething like the flu that can take up to 14 days to show symptoms is more dangerous to cause a pandemic because it has a lot more time to spread unknowningly. A vaccine would be good, but it's too late to stop it and administer it to everyone who could possibly be affected, so if this turns out to be as contageous as it could be, quarantine will be a must........
Reply
post #8 of 85
4/27/09 at 7:32pm
That's true, quarantine is a must, only....
like you said, like the flu, it is not showing symptoms that early...so in that case, it will be tough to figure out who to quarantine and when.., right?
Reminds me of the movie...Outbreak with Dustin Hoffman and Morgan Freeman/Rene Russo. Only...they dealt with the 'fictional' ebola.
Reply
post #9 of 85
4/28/09 at 5:26am
You also have to remember with the outbreaks of Ebola in Africa, they STILL have not been able to find the sources for any of the major outbreaks. They can't find an animal, plant, etc. that originated the disease. The only thing they can find out is who the first person to contract it was.

The flu is similar, but you have a MUCH lower fatality rate. I'd rather have the swine flu than Ebola Zaire, thank you very much.
Reply
post #10 of 85
4/28/09 at 5:57am
To be honest, I'm not much concerned. Do I think what is happening is horrible? Yes. I wouldn't wish the swine flu or anything else on anyone! But, and I hate to be cliche, but it's true - what will be, will be. In my opinion, God has a plan and things will happen according to His will. I know some people are sick of hearing that and don't believe that, but that is just my opinion and belief.

On another note, I had never even HEARD of a swine flu! I was like, "Woah... weird." Of course, I'm very young, but still. Crazy stuff, but expected.
Reply
post #11 of 85
4/28/09 at 6:05am
Ebola is only spread by contact with infected body fluids. They may not know how the first person caught it but they do know that it is present in chimps so butchering and eating bush meat is thought to be how it jumps to humans. Bush meat is illegal in many areas of Africa, even though it is not enforced, it isn't something that people will admit to doing to authorities. They do know that it spreads through poor nursing techniques in developing countries, even the reuse of hypodermic needles because of a shortage of supplies. Because of the nature of the disease there is a lot of body fluids that the person caring for an ill person can be exposed to and it is highly contageous through fluids. If Ebola ever mutated into a disease that could be spread through the air like influenza then it would be a nightmare that could wipe out a huge percentage of the world's population.
Reply
post #12 of 85
4/28/09 at 7:45am
That's pretty much how I feel about it.

I realize with mass media being what it is, stuff like this is magnified so much greater than in generations past, but still...things haven't felt "right" in a long time. With economic issues felt on a global scale (at least partially from what I think is a 'technology v. workforce' conundrum, which includes overpopulation and a profit-enhancing methodology to reduce the human workforce), as well as seemingly irreparable ecological issues, maybe this is how things are put back in a state of equilibrium, by reducing some of the mass of humanity?

Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldSongbird View Post
To be honest, I'm not much concerned. Do I think what is happening is horrible? Yes. I wouldn't wish the swine flu or anything else on anyone! But, and I hate to be cliche, but it's true - what will be, will be. In my opinion, God has a plan and things will happen according to His will. I know some people are sick of hearing that and don't believe that, but that is just my opinion and belief.

On another note, I had never even HEARD of a swine flu! I was like, "Woah... weird." Of course, I'm very young, but still. Crazy stuff, but expected.
Reply
post #13 of 85
4/28/09 at 7:54am
This is the latest over here, but their fine and their telling people not to panic, and i'm not

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...cle2399388.ece
Reply
post #14 of 85
4/28/09 at 8:05am
I've been very interested in the 1918 influenza pandemic for years. I was wondering when another H1N1 virus was going to appear...
Reply
post #15 of 85
4/28/09 at 8:13am
I read that Influenza kills 35,000 people a year in the United States.
I don't see the media freaking out about that.
Reply
post #16 of 85
4/28/09 at 8:31am
I hate to be too picky about things, but technically, the current swine flu virus doesn't really qualify as a potential pandemic virus. A potential pandemic virus is defined, among other things, as a novel strain that is not easily treated. While novel, this strain of swine flu responds to two medications.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken seriously, or that the media is wrong to report about it. But it does mean that this particular strain of the H1N1 virus isn't really on the same level as the 1918 strain. Personally, I think the media is being somewhat alarmist by continually talking about all the "bodies piled up in the morgues" during the 1918 epidemic. I think it's unlikely we'll see it get to those proportions.
Reply
post #17 of 85
4/28/09 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
My own pure speculation and opinion: IMO mother nature has been trying to "thin the herd" for years, but we've (human beings) always managed to stay one step ahead. Good for us, probably bad for the eventualities. Mad Cow, Hoof and Mouth, Aviane Flu, SARS, now Swine Flu, all these "new" and exotic illnesses with the potential for epidemic and/or pandemic proportions. They are rapidly changing, and we come up with bigger and better anti-virals and anti-biotics. One of these days Mother Nature is going to whomp us with something big. Is this it? I don't know. If it is, it is and there isn't a whole lot that we can do with all of our big gadgets and fancy science.

When a prairie dog population gets too big, bubonic plague hits the colonies hard. Population is kept in check. When the deer population explodes, there may be a really bad winter where many starve due to lack of available food. Population is kept in check. Unless there are outside forces, the predator and prey populations ebb and flow to keep things in balance. Man has no predator threat; but mother nature will find a way to keep the population in check. How long do we think we can keep her in "check"? Mother nature always wins.
My analytical and scientific nature agrees with your opinion. I am always amazed at the amount we humans have propogated without regard to our enviroments. Overpopulation of this planet is a real issue, IMO. Reminds me of a scene in the movie The Matrix where Mr. Smith is comparing the human species as a virus. Replicating until their are no more resources left and then moving on to use all the resources somewhere else.

That being said the human part of me worries about my parents and my brother. My parents who have had health issues and my brother who has a seriously imune suppressed system. I doubt he would make it through a bad case of the flu.

I am not sure all the media hype is warrented but if one thing I hope comes of it is better hygene for the population. In particular, wash your hands and cover your mouth if you cough. The amount of times I have seen people leave the restroom without washing their hands is seriously repugnant to me. I also ride the metro here in DC and see people just sneezing without even a token attempt to cover their mouth. Get a kleenex for goodness sakes and throw it in the trash. The other thing is I hope people don't panic as this is also allergy season and some of the symptom of swine flu, such as runny nose, mimic allergy symptoms.
Reply
post #18 of 85
4/28/09 at 9:13am
Overcrowded emergency rooms is a real danger with the hype about a pandemic. Everything I have heard has been emphasizing having a fever of at least 101 which filters out allergies and colds. They are also emphasizing calling your doctor first instead of just showing up at a medical facility which only adds to it being passed around. Of course people without a doctor to call can't do that. My Father was born in 1913 and though he doesn't have much in the way of memories about the 1918 pandemic he did grow up with a lot of first hand accounts about it. This doesn't seem anything like it. It hit people in the prime of life from 20 to 40 particularly hard. People would wake up ill in the morning and be dead by that night. It went into a deadly form of pneumonia very quickly, people literally drowned from the fast buildup of fluid in their lungs.
Reply
post #19 of 85
4/28/09 at 10:40am
I'm not worried about it. A coworker and I are now calling this the swirdman flu, since it part swine, bird and human flu virus
Reply
post #20 of 85
4/28/09 at 11:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denice View Post
Overcrowded emergency rooms is a real danger with the hype about a pandemic. Everything I have heard has been emphasizing having a fever of at least 101 which filters out allergies and colds. They are also emphasizing calling your doctor first instead of just showing up at a medical facility which only adds to it being passed around. Of course people without a doctor to call can't do that. My Father was born in 1913 and though he doesn't have much in the way of memories about the 1918 pandemic he did grow up with a lot of first hand accounts about it. This doesn't seem anything like it. It hit people in the prime of life from 20 to 40 particularly hard. People would wake up ill in the morning and be dead by that night. It went into a deadly form of pneumonia very quickly, people literally drowned from the fast buildup of fluid in their lungs.
One of the strangest manifestations of the 1918 virus was its proclivity toward just those people that were in their prime of life as opposed to the "normal" flu that targets the elderly and immunocompromised. I believe this is due to the actual inflammatory response that healthy individuals mount; the "healthy" immune response is actually what killed these people.
Reply
post #21 of 85
4/28/09 at 2:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kluchetta View Post
One of the strangest manifestations of the 1918 virus was its proclivity toward just those people that were in their prime of life as opposed to the "normal" flu that targets the elderly and immunocompromised. I believe this is due to the actual inflammatory response that healthy individuals mount; the "healthy" immune response is actually what killed these people.
It didn't target them. They're just the ones that had the strongest positive feedback loop of cytokines and immune cells (as you said). One thing we all need to step back and think is - everyone gets the flu (unless one wants to suggest all of our members on here getting bad cases of the flu are elderly, too? ). Was it spring '07 or '08 that the flu vaccines failed and people were still getting hit with pretty tough strains of flu?

As for quoting anything today as being as deadly as the 1918 flu. Sure, if we're suddenly reverted to 1918 technology overnight. People forget (and take for granted) the modern medicines and treatments we have now that keeps the strains of flu going around each year from being as deadly. Sanitation goes a long way, too. Mexico is also not very good to base from, unless one is living in Mexico or another similar country...

The real danger here is from people closing down schools and businesses over fear. It has affect stocks already.
Reply
post #22 of 85
4/28/09 at 3:29pm
A vendor just called here and was saying he heard, "that if the flu epidemic gets any worse, Obama is going to close all the schools and businesses in the country for two weeks"



Like Barack could really shut down private businesses for two weeks.
Reply
post #23 of 85
4/28/09 at 3:34pm
My family got back from Mexico on Saturday. My sister came down with a flu/cold on Sunday and is now on swine flu alert. Her doctor asked her to stay home for 5 days and to wear a mask to protect her partner. They have sent swabs in, and will know in a few days if it's swine flu or some other bug she picked up. They don't really expect it to be swine flu though, just taking precautions.
Reply
post #24 of 85
4/28/09 at 3:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sohni View Post
My family got back from Mexico on Saturday. My sister came down with a flu/cold on Sunday and is now on swine flu alert. Her doctor asked her to stay home for 5 days and to wear a mask to protect her partner. They have sent swabs in, and will know in a few days if it's swine flu or some other bug she picked up. They don't really expect it to be swine flu though, just taking precautions.
How does that cover the fourteen days before symptoms showed in which she'd have been spreading any flu virus if she had it?
Reply
post #25 of 85
4/28/09 at 3:40pm
http://www.capitalcentury.com/1976.html

Read the above link about the 1976 Flu Season where ONE Army private died from the New Swine Flu and dozen of people died from forced innoculations.
Reply
post #26 of 85
4/28/09 at 3:46pm
I'm not worried about this at all...If it's going to be a pandemic it will be even if there is no media coverage on it. It's just annoying how the media escalates everything in people's minds. But it's not just the media it's human nature also to be this way.
Reply
post #27 of 85
4/28/09 at 4:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by strange_wings View Post
It didn't target them. They're just the ones that had the strongest positive feedback loop of cytokines and immune cells (as you said). One thing we all need to step back and think is - everyone gets the flu (unless one wants to suggest all of our members on here getting bad cases of the flu are elderly, too? ). Was it spring '07 or '08 that the flu vaccines failed and people were still getting hit with pretty tough strains of flu?

As for quoting anything today as being as deadly as the 1918 flu. Sure, if we're suddenly reverted to 1918 technology overnight. People forget (and take for granted) the modern medicines and treatments we have now that keeps the strains of flu going around each year from being as deadly. Sanitation goes a long way, too. Mexico is also not very good to base from, unless one is living in Mexico or another similar country...

The real danger here is from people closing down schools and businesses over fear. It has affect stocks already.
Sorry if I said that wrong (i'm at work, and tend to do my posts quickly.) I am not suggesting that people here are elderly; however, don't we hear over and over again that the mortality of the flu is usually highest in the elderly, very young, and immunocompromised?
Reply
post #28 of 85
4/28/09 at 7:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kluchetta View Post
Sorry if I said that wrong (i'm at work, and tend to do my posts quickly.) I am not suggesting that people here are elderly; however, don't we hear over and over again that the mortality of the flu is usually highest in the elderly, very young, and immunocompromised?
Yes, we usually do because their health is precarious to begin with. And no, I didn't think you were honestly suggesting anything, I was joking!
As for the the cytokine storm - do you know that can happen with typical strains of the flu, common colds, and other common respiratory viruses (among other things)? It's not something that only happens with rarer flu strains, though it's typically not mentioned as a possible complication.

My respiratory health is usually pretty good, my overall health is ok (I won't dropped dead from anything tomorrow). But every time I get even common flu strains I end up with at least mild bronchitis - more often bad bronchitis and infection, and pneumonia in the past.
The main point I've been trying to make is flu, all strains, can be bad. Just because it has a special name tacked on doesn't make it that much worse for the average person. And in this hype people seem to forget this sort of thing.
A person has a greater risk of dying in a car accident than dying from this flu. Yet people are still hoping in their cars...
Reply
post #29 of 85
4/28/09 at 7:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by emrldsky View Post
You also have to remember with the outbreaks of Ebola in Africa, they STILL have not been able to find the sources for any of the major outbreaks. They can't find an animal, plant, etc. that originated the disease. The only thing they can find out is who the first person to contract it was.

The flu is similar, but you have a MUCH lower fatality rate. I'd rather have the swine flu than Ebola Zaire, thank you very much.
Definitely, me too. I'd prefer not to get the Swine Flu, but I'd rather get that then any form of Ebola, especially Ebola, Zaire.
This was on the local internet-news site from my area. This might help answer some common questions...
http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2...ons%20&cid=rss
Reply
post #30 of 85
4/29/09 at 1:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by strange_wings View Post
Yes, we usually do because their health is precarious to begin with. And no, I didn't think you were honestly suggesting anything, I was joking!
As for the the cytokine storm - do you know that can happen with typical strains of the flu, common colds, and other common respiratory viruses (among other things)? It's not something that only happens with rarer flu strains, though it's typically not mentioned as a possible complication.

My respiratory health is usually pretty good, my overall health is ok (I won't dropped dead from anything tomorrow). But every time I get even common flu strains I end up with at least mild bronchitis - more often bad bronchitis and infection, and pneumonia in the past.
The main point I've been trying to make is flu, all strains, can be bad. Just because it has a special name tacked on doesn't make it that much worse for the average person. And in this hype people seem to forget this sort of thing.
A person has a greater risk of dying in a car accident than dying from this flu. Yet people are still hoping in their cars...
Sorry, LOL, guess I got a little over sensitive there!

So what do you think about people that have an overly imflammatory response already, like RA? More or less likely to have a response to something like the flu? (like us, LOL.)
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Swine Flu