swine flu detained, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

Topic started on 28-4-2009 @ 05:21 PM by stander

As the situation is developing, it's becoming obvious that the virulence of the agent that causes the present concern can hardly deliver the punch of the bug that caused the Spanish Flu that killed between 20 to 40 million people worldwide after the WWI.

Southern California is the most exposed region due to large Latino population; many people visit their relatives in Mexico and so this state is where WHO should focus its attention to estimate the course of the touted epidemic. But if the organization does, a slight contradiction emerges:

New York has the largest number of swine flu cases, with a heavy concentration at a Catholic school in Queens section of New York City, where students recently went on a spring break trip to Mexico.

The Los Angeles County coroner's office was investigating the recent deaths of two men for links to swine flu. So far, no deaths linked to the disease have been reported outside Mexico.

news.yahoo.com...

You don't have to rigorously study the development of the Spanish Flu to know that the touted potentials of the swine flu are just not there to warrant all the hoopla.

About 35,000 people die during recurrent flu seasons. This bug would have to work much harder to match the usual number -- it would have to spread as quickly as the unwarranted, stupid fear-mongering has to command due respect.

reply posted on 28-4-2009 @ 05:25 PM by FlyersFan

Originally posted by stander
the virulence of the agent that causes the present concern can hardly deliver the punch of the bug that caused the Spanish Flu that killed between 20 to 40 million people worldwide after the WWI.

that's not true.

The Spanich Flu of 1918 started the same way. It started fairly weak and then got stronger as the weeks went by. The first people to get the Spanish Flu survived. It's those that got it later that died.

only time will tell if this flu acts the same way .. starting weak and getting stronger.

reply posted on 28-4-2009 @ 05:44 PM by Lebowski achiever

In annual influenza epidemics 5-15% of the population are affected with upper respiratory tract infections. Hospitalization and deaths mainly occur in high-risk groups (elderly, chronically ill). Although difficult to assess, these annual epidemics are thought to result in between three and five million cases of severe illness and between 250 000 and 500 000 deaths every year around the world. Most deaths currently associated with influenza in industrialized countries occur among the elderly over 65 years of age.

The death rate of influenza is scary. I just found this on the WHO website.

WHO

Now the thing that is different about this flu is that it kills young adults more than anyone else. This is why this is on Par with the Spanish Flu which did the same. Young adults are the load bearers of society and if they fall, the rest will fall too.

Old people..nobody seems to care about them..At least, not when they have the flu. It is astounding when you think about it.

reply posted on 28-4-2009 @ 06:18 PM by stander

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by stander
the virulence of the agent that causes the present concern can hardly deliver the punch of the bug that caused the Spanish Flu that killed between 20 to 40 million people worldwide after the WWI.

that's not true.

The Spanich Flu of 1918 started the same way. It started fairly weak and then got stronger as the weeks went by.

The rate of infection just doesn't match the way Spanish Flu spread. The morbidity ratio in Mexico is a bit lower, but comparable to the one in Kansas where 500 soldiers fell sick and 48 died in March 1918. The development in Southern California is a natural barometer to go by no matter what WHO says.

Interesting correlation:

The first pandemic influenza wave appeared in the spring of 1918, followed in rapid succession by much more fatal second and third waves in the fall and winter of 1918–1919, respectively. The Spanish flu pandemic had another unique feature, the simultaneous (or nearly simultaneous) infection of humans and swine.

Who exactly infected who?

reply posted on 29-4-2009 @ 08:15 PM by stander

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever

The death rate of influenza is scary. I just found this on the WHO website.

WHO

Now you see why it was so easy for Hitler to point his finger at Jews and declare them no good and a threat to Germany. There would be always a bunch of mind-sick individuals who won't wait to see if the claim is true or not. The "regular" influenza kills so many people each year and this touted fancy outbreak didn't come yet an inch close to deliver the deadly punch of a regular seasonal flu, but it's already on the way to be elevated to the plague of a new millenium.

reply posted on 2-5-2009 @ 01:29 AM by stander

Originally posted by stander
As the situation is developing, it's becoming obvious that the virulence of the agent that causes the present concern can hardly deliver the punch of the bug that caused the Spanish Flu that killed between 20 to 40 million people worldwide after the WWI.

Swine flu may be less potent than first feared

news.yahoo.com...

The swine flu outbreak that has alarmed the world for a week now appears less ominous, with the virus showing little staying power in the hardest-hit cities and scientists suggesting it lacks the genetic fortitude of past killer bugs.

President Barack Obama even voiced hope Friday that it may turn out to be no more harmful than the average seasonal flu.

What did I tell you?

It's not virus H1N1 that will do us in; it's gene STUP94 that will send us one nice century back to the caves with extinction in the tow.

reply posted on 2-5-2009 @ 01:39 AM by whoshotJR

Originally posted by Lebowski achiever

In annual influenza epidemics 5-15% of the population are affected with upper respiratory tract infections. Hospitalization and deaths mainly occur in high-risk groups (elderly, chronically ill). Although difficult to assess, these annual epidemics are thought to result in between three and five million cases of severe illness and between 250 000 and 500 000 deaths every year around the world. Most deaths currently associated with influenza in industrialized countries occur among the elderly over 65 years of age.

The death rate of influenza is scary. I just found this on the WHO website.

[

The death rate of influenza is not scary it's the death cause by pneumonia or dehydration that is scary. Sure they are attributed but TPTB are playing with semantics to scare the crap out of people so they can push vaccinations. Now they are using the reverse for a few days to downplay this Flu because everyone knows their isn't a vaccine ready yet.

reply posted on 2-5-2009 @ 04:38 PM by stander

Originally posted by whoshotJR

The death rate of influenza is not scary it's the death cause by pneumonia or dehydration that is scary. Sure they are attributed but TPTB are playing with semantics to scare the crap out of people so they can push vaccinations. Now they are using the reverse for a few days to downplay this Flu because everyone knows their isn't a vaccine ready yet.

The absence of the vaccine was there from the beginning. Are you suggesting that WHO realized that only now?

If there is any other reason for "downplaying this flu," then it's the reaction of ever-increasing paranoid population -- the real menace behind the swine flu event.

reply posted on 2-5-2009 @ 04:49 PM by tothetenthpower

reply to post by stander

Stander, I think your assesment of the current situation is correct, there is no real need to panic in this situation as people aren't dying in the streets.

However, in 1918, the way this flu started, during the summer it was very lax, alot of people were infected but few died.

It was the latter actual flu season in the fall that things became very ugly as the most prominent strains of the virus began to circulate among populations world wide.

No panic, but to watch and monitor closely is the right thing to do. We will want to be informed and up to date with the process of treating and preventing spread if and when this thing does go crazy on us.

~Keeper

reply posted on 2-5-2009 @ 06:35 PM by stander

reply to post by tothetenthpower

It has never been my intention to downplay virus infection in general. Viruses have relatively simple genom and mutate fast. This bug called "swine flu" can re-arm and strike with a full deadly force next time -- maybe three years from now. The point is to have some idea what you dealing with -- you don't call a cop on everyone that passes by your house, right?

When something far more serious develops, people shouldn't panic; they shold stay cool and try to be resourcesfull to stay clear from being infected. That presence of paranoid behavior as you see it now doesn't help the cause.

If nothing else -- thanks god -- the swine flu scare showed that the number of mentally disturbed conspirators or other assorted paranoids is on the rise. At the same time though, their yelling wasn't heard that far: I haven't seen anyone in the shops wearing a face mask yet. But if I did see the face masks out, then I would know that the virus hit the fan.

[edit on 5/2/2009 by stander]

reply posted on 7-5-2009 @ 07:03 PM by stander

Are we all dead yet?

No?

Why not?

Flu overhyped? Some say officials 'cried swine'

CHICAGO – Did government health officials "cry swine" when they sounded the alarm on what looked like a threatening new flu? The so-far mild swine flu outbreak has many people saying all the talk about a devastating global epidemic was just fear-mongering hype. But that's not how public health officials see it, calling complacency the thing that keeps them up at night.

The World Health Organization added a scary-sounding warning Thursday, predicting up to 2 billion people could catch the new flu if the outbreak turns into a global epidemic.