H1N1 (Swine Flu) and e-cigs?

[Wildsky]

..........

 

[leaford]

Leaford, I agree with pretty much everything you've said except for this.

I've looked and looked and haven't found any solid evidence of swine flu being any more virulent or deadly than the common flu. The only figures I've found are from CDC who suggest that the mortality rate in the US is a preliminary 2% (this is quite high), but that it's impossible to tell for sure due to unreported cases, and deaths that are attributed to the common flu. They actually suggest that it could be higher than 2%, which surprises me, because I think the vast majority of cases of swine flu that go unreported would not lead to death.

I am on vacation, and can only get CNN, so you may be right. I may have gotten an exaggerated sense of its impact from the obvious hysteria. I mean, even for a virulent strain, this has gotten nuts. But, I thought I heard some of the deaths were in the healthy adult category, instead of the expected infants and elderly.

Now, I'm all in favour of modern medicine and vaccines, but at the same time I do not trust the pharmaceutical industry, including the WHO and the government run CDC, to always act in the best interests of the public. Maybe they're just being overcautious, but I can't help but think that there could some financial gains to be made, and that this swine flu thing is just a giant, international scare campaign to help a few people out in this financial crisis.

I'd really like to see some data from some independent research on the whole matter.

I should also point out that both swine flu and the common flu are strains of the same virus, Influenza A (H1N1).

If I may ask, if not the pharmacies, governments, or inter-governmental groups like WHO, well, who do expect to fund any kind of study? Where does the money come from? The personell? Etc?

I'm not neglectful, if she got sick I'd seek the help she needed.

I am certainly not suggesting you are stupid, or neglecting your children, but you aren't giving them the best protection against disease you could. And the ones they're unp0rotected against are the potentially fatal ones. I agree with letting them get a sniffle without rushing to the hospital, letting them scrape a knee, etc. But not the stuff that is both potentially fatal, and potentially contageous. Especially when it's easy and there's no good reason not to.

 

[cucurucho]

But, I thought I heard some of the deaths were in the healthy adult category, instead of the expected infants and elderly.

Of the two deaths in the US, one was a 22 month old child, the other was a woman with "chronic underlying health conditions". As for mexico... who knows?

There is a statistic I read somewhere that said most infections were in people under 30 (this has been attributed to older people having been exposed to more flu viruses and having stronger immunity), but we're talking about mortality here.

If I may ask, if not the pharmacies, governments, or inter-governmental groups like WHO, well, who do expect to fund any kind of study? Where does the money come from? The personell? Etc?

Good question... Upon pondering this further, and doing a little more reading, I've realised that the only real way to know how dangerous this virus is, is to closely monitor its effects. Which is what WHO is doing. Much though as I don't trust them, I think they're the most authoritative source of data. What bothers me about the WHO is that they are doing a lot of talk about the potential of a pandemic, and emphasising the potential (but unconfirmed) dangers of the virus, without doing much to negate the media hysteria. A pandemic isn't necessarily as bad as it sounds. All it means is that there's a virus out there that is spreading around the world. It doesn't even have to be a killer virus to cause a pandemic.

So let me do a little research of my own....

• 44 Deaths in Mexico, 2 in the US confirmed as a result of the virus
• Approximately 2% mortality in mexico (going by confirmed cases only)
• Approx 0.15% for the rest of the world (going by confirmed cases only)
• "During the 2007--08 influenza season, the percentage of deaths attributed to pneumonia and influenza (P&I) exceeded the epidemic threshold for 8 consecutive weeks in the 122 Cities Mortality Reporting System during the weeks ending January 12--May 17, 2008 (weeks 9--16). The percentage of P&I deaths peaked at 9.1% during the week ending March 15, 2008 (week 11)." - CDC - Influenza (Flu) | 2007-08 U.S. INFLUENZA SEASON SUMMARY

Conclusion: seasonal flu is much more scary

References:
WHO | Influenza A(H1N1) - update 22
Map of Latest H1N1 Swine Flu Outbreak Cases and Statistics
CDC - Influenza (Flu) | Flu Activity

 

[leaford]

Good to know. It reminds me of the SARS scare. I got a $375 round trip ticket to Thailand that year, I just had to be willing to transit through Hong Kong.

 

[cucurucho]

Actually, I need to correct myself. The 9.1% referring to Pneumonia and Influenza deaths is actually the percentage of total deaths in the US that are caused by P&I.

So I did a little more digging, and found this on the WHO website:

Seasonal epidemics

Influenza epidemics occur yearly during autumn and winter in temperate regions. Illnesses result in hospitalizations and deaths mainly among high-risk groups (the very young, elderly or chronically ill). Worldwide, these annual epidemics result in about three to five million cases of severe illness, and about 250 000 to 500 000 deaths. Most deaths associated with influenza in industrialized countries occur among people age 65 or older. In some tropical countries, influenza viruses circulate throughout the year with one or two peaks during rainy seasons.

WHO | Influenza (Seasonal)

So going by these figures, the international mortality rate of seasonal flu would be about 8.3% to 10%.

So the figure is around the same, but the method is more correct.... I actually find this quite disturbing. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[doc g]

DOH!
500,000 is 10% of 5,000,000.

 

[TropicalBob]

In Gina Kolata's excellent history of the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic (which was much later identified as Influena A H1N1), she says the average death rate from seasonal flu is one tenth of one percent. The Spanish flu death rate, as best could be determined, was 2.5 percent, according to the book "Flu".

While the pandemic began as a viral infection, many of the deaths were from rapid transition to bacterial pneumonia. Apply that information to what we know about PG's anti-bacterial properties, and the fact that the research that discovered that fact in the early 1940s was being done for the military, to prevent another flu pandemic among soldiers.

 

[doc g]

Good find TBob.
I'm looking forward to reading the book when I can get my hands on a copy.

"The 1918 virus gene sequences are related more closely to avian H1N1 viruses than are any of the other known mammalian influenza H1N1 strains."
The above statement was taken from this CDC webpage
CDC - Influenza (Flu) | Q & A: Reconstruction of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic Virus

Eleanora I. McBean, Ph.D., N.D. makes a compelling case that the 1918 pandemic was caused by vaccination-
The Spanish Influenza Epidemic of 1918 was caused by vaccinations---E. McBean (Swine Flu Expose)

Another must read swine-flu website-
Swine Flu vaccine

 

[katink]

I came across another nice little read also... (btw also about nicotine used AGAINST cancer... talk about science being able to give results 'as wished'??):
Nicotine, Anti-inflammatory H1N1 Cure: Vagus Nerve Stimulation Blocks Cytokine Storm of Swine Flu | Suite101.com

 

[yvilla]

Katink, an interesting find, thanks.