A/H1N1 (swine flu) hot zone mortality rates are over 1%, millions will die soon

OP thought I would let you know what I heard on the radio 2 days ago here in Sydney.
I was in shock really as they said that all flu this year is really, depending on the severity, a mild case of Swine Flu.

I looked around for links to these stats and found only one article referencing it.
The scary thing about this, is that this was issued as stats for the State of Victoria and yet there were saying the same thing here in Sydney (New South Wales). There was no mention on the radio that these stats were for VICTORIA they made no mention of that and then went onto warn people how to best protect themselves (washing hands etc)

Either they are scare mongering here in NSW OR this is correct for the whole of Australia. It also said on the radio, that they were no longer testing people with mild flu and were now assuming that it is mild Swine Flu.

I'm sure this will skewer any statistics that people are trying to compile regarding Australian stats. Even if you just have a regular flu (which most people get in Winter at some point) they will now class it as Swine Flu.
How people are supposed to ascertain the REAL infection rates of Swine Flu now that ALL cases of flu are going to be tallied up as Swine Flu, is beyond me. Sounds like something is coming down the pike to me.

Link to the one story I could find here...

www.theaustralian.news.com.au...

[edit on 11-7-2009 by Flighty]

Several days ago the WHO told nations to stop testing for swine flu because the new strain had pretty much wiped out the old seasonal flu everywhere they looked, so it you get the flu, you've got a nearly 100% chance it's swine flu. A/H1N1 has become the flu.

The way flu mutates, when a new strong strain emerges, it wipes out the previous strains nearly completely. So from now on, this bug is going to be the new "seasonal" flu, except every season seems to be its season, it just likes the cold a little better than the hot.

www.newscientist.com...

globalhealth.kff.org...

[edit on 11-7-2009 by apacheman]

reply to post by zingzang123


Are you asking about the infection rate (morbidity), that is, the number of people who will get it, or the mortality rate, the number of people who will die after they get it?

If you are asking about morbidity, the current projections range from a (very) conservative figure of 40% to a high of 100% over the next two years.

Of that, in the hot zones, the aggregate mortality rate is 1.4%, with Argentina in the unenviable position of #1: an incredibly horrifying 3.1% and rising. As a point of comparison, the 1918 pandemic had an average mortality of a little over 2,5%, with hot spots of 30-40% mortality.

reply to post by rogerstigers


You've just proven my point. Thank you. Even though the spanish flu spread to all corners of the globe, not everyone got sick. If 2.5 to 5% of the world's population actually died from the spanish flu then the mortality rate is higher than 2.5% because NOT EVERYONE GOT SICK. Therefore a 1% mortality rate, while ten times higher than the death rate for ordinary flu, is NOT a global disaster.

By the way, I've come across some anecdotal evidence that pure apple cider vinegar, taken daily in small doses mixed with honey, seems to keep people from becoming sick from colds and flus. Another item that might help against swine flu is L-Lysine. An amino acid that is well known to suppress the outbreak of cold sores which are caused by a virus similar to herpes. If L-Lysine can suppress one virus, might it not suppress all viruses including swine flu? It seems a reasonable hypothesis.

Vitamin D is also good at fighting viruses. The theory is that in the winter months, when people stay indoors more and expose less skin to sunlight when they do go out, their bodies produce less vitamin D, which makes them more vulnerable to flu and cold viruses and that's apparently the reason why flu season is during the winter months. By taking vitamin D in pill form (or even just getting at least 15 minutes of direct sunlight per day on your body), you can keep your vitamin D levels up.

If you do all three at the same time, you should be much more protected against swine flu and other viruses.

Well this was in another thread...

Originally posted by elgregro
Well if you are not trying to stick a needle in your arm... get yourself a class 2 medical device.


www.cleanstation.com


The Clean Station is a class 2 medical device used by Nasa,The Military, doctors offices, surgery rooms, etc.

The best air filter that kills 100% airborne pollutants such as virus, mold, bacteria, pollen, dust, pet dander, mites, down to 0.3 microns. Thats 3K times smaller than the tip of a hair strand.

Great for people with asthma and allergies. It is also great tool against the spread of diseases that are airborne such as the swine flu.



for more info... 516-694-7873 or 877-565-7873

mention the merchant code #1002 that they will ask you for.



Clean Station Video

Class II medical device review

Can we please bring some perspective to this debate?

Someone posted the following. 40,000 deaths per year in the US from ordinary flu. Ordinary flu mortality .05% therefore 80 million people were infected each year. I'm not disputing the 40,000 deaths although I will say that a lot of deaths attributed to flu virus are actually caused by other factors like pneumonia, which is the final straw for bodies that have been weakened by the flu. But that's not my main point. Let's use some common sense. Since authorities don't know what new strain of flu will show up each winter, they make flu vaccines based on past strains. It's well known that once you get sick from a virus, you will never get sick from that same strain again because your body has built up antibodies. The reason we get colds more than once is because there are over 200 identified cold viruses floating around. 80 million out of a total population of 300 million means that roughly one person in 4 will supposed be infected by the flu virus each year. Now maybe if you include people who contract the virus but don't show any symptoms, that may be accurate but no one can know for sure because anyone who doesn't show any symptoms, is highly unlikely to be diagnosed as having the flu virus. So that 0.05% mortality number has to be based on estimated infection rates. I've yet to see any official data presented of ordinary flu deaths as a percentage of confirmed flu cases. It's also an established medical fact that your resistance to getting sick from a new strain of flu virus depends on whether your body has fought off past flu viruses. Apparently, flu vaccines aren't as effective at preventing getting sick from a new strain as does naturally produced anti-bodies.

So the idea that people who have mild cases of the swine flu now will suffer more than others this coming winter is simply bad science. The opposite is far more likely to be true. If you've already caught the swine flu strain now, you're not going to get sick again from the same strain and you're less likely to get sick from a new strain. By the way, with regards to the spanish flu, the highest mortality rates were in areas where hygiene was poor like for example the trenches where WW1 was being fought. Areas with good hygiene had lower mortality rates. This is why experts say that washing your hands frequently is the single best way to avoid catching any kind of virus whether it be flu or cold viruses.

But getting back to ordinary flu mortality rates, if the 0.05% rate is based on estimated infection numbers and not confirmed cases, then the actual death rate is almost certainly higher. So let's say it's 0.1%. If the swine flu mortality rate is 1% ie. ten times higher, then all other things being equal (which is a HUGE assumption by the way) then 400,000 Americans can be expected to die from swine flu in a year. I'm not saying that's nothing. It's clearly something to be concerned about but it's NOT the sky-is-falling disaster that some people are portraying it to be. I note with interest that the mortality rate in the southern hemisphere, which is going thru their winter season, is not a whole lot higher than it is in the northern hemisphere.

reply to post by Studenofhistory


Not to rag on you, but this thread is NOT about debating anything: it is about reporting statistics. There are lots of threads to debate in, so if that is your aim, go to those, please.

People are free to draw their own conclusions based upon the reported stats. If you want to draw the conclusion that it isn't much of a much, that's fine. But if you wish to participate in this thread, please participate by providing new stats with links.

Go debate the significance elsewhere please. I have posted factual data in regards to how flu virii mutate, what it signifys, andwhy flu can't be weaponized elswhere in the appropriate threads for those discussions. I keep an eye on them and will reply in those to the sorts of things you keep bringing up here.

Again, this thread is for hot zone stats reporting. Please help keep it on track by providing good verifiable stats. If you are correct in your opinion, the stats will show it and we can all breathe a sigh of relief. If not, the stats will show that, too, and we can take precautions. If you have a specific question regarding reported data, I'll do my best to answer it.

Thanks for your cooperation..

reply to post by Elliot


Good ideas on the natural ingredients, but could you be more specific about echnacea? You don't take it constantly, for one thing. Also, if you take after being exposed to the virus, there is still a lot of questions about a cytokine storm.

reply to post by apacheman


...and the majority of these cases are happening outside of flu season. This should be another red flag what will happen when phase II hits in the fall.

reply to post by Crakeur


Cap. Tripps? That's fear mongering!

Seriously, there's a co-worker who still has a cough. She got meds through an alternate source and won't go for a follow up.

There's so many factors, including your boss not wanting you to be off.

reply to post by apacheman


WHO Figures from the link you provided give mortality rates in the region of 1 death in every 238 cases (global) and 1 death in every 188 cases (USA).

OK, So you have identified some hot-spots but you can not apply hot-spot mortality figures to a "global" infection. That's just manipulating statistics to achieve your desired "inflated" figures.

People on ATS are truth seekers and will see straight through this, please give them a little more credit. We have seen SARS and Bird Flu sweep across the globe in recent years and both of these were ramped up by World Gov'ts to keep us all running scared.

To date I think that there have been less than 1200 global deaths attributed to each. In order to die from Swine flu, you have to catch it. Factor that into your statistics and your figures will not look so scary.

I applaud you for addressing the issue but sense a hint of sensationalism worthy of any Government spin doctor.

PEACE,
RK

I agree with the OP - the death rate is lower as we still have a functional medical service. Once paralysed by the large number of ill people, the death tool will rise, possible to 5 %. Sure, I do not talk about mutations (4-5 in a flu season) that could bring unexpected surprises.

Due to the fact that the WHOhas stopped aggregating infection/death numbers, I will no longer have a handy means of calculating global hot zones. I am having to rely on national numbers directly which is spottier in time, but probably more accurate. The CDC continues so far to publish Friday updates, so I will be posting US figures every Friday. For the rest of the world, I'll put up what I can when I can.

One thing you should know is that I'm defining a hot zone as anywhere the mortality rate exceeds 0.69%, about 50% higher than the high end predictions of the WHO and the CDC. By that criteria, there's about a dozen states on my watch list.

Today's CDC numbers:

Arizona: 1.4%, 11 of 762
California: 1.6%, 52 of 3161
Michigan: 1.6%, 8 of 515
Missouri, 1.4%, 1 of 70
New jersey: 1.0%, 14 of 1350
New York: 2.1%, 57 of 2670
North Carolina: 1.0%, 4 of 395
Oregon: 1.1%, 5 of 465
Rhode Island: 1.1%, 2 of 188
Utah: 1.4%, 14 of 966

Overall US hot zones mortality rate: 1.6%, 168 of 10542

Trend lines:

Arizona: 1.3%, 1.4%, 1.4%
California 1.1%, 1.3%, 1.6%
Michigan: 1.5%, 1.6%, 1.6%
Missouri: nl (not listed), 1.5%, 1.4%
New jersey: 0.8%, 0.8%, 1.0%
New York: 1.76%, 2.0%, 2.1%
North Carolina: 0.8%, nl, 1.0%
Ohio: nl, 0.7%, nl
Oklahoma: nl, 0.7%, nl
Oregon: 1.1%, 1.0%, 1.1%
Rhode Island: nl, 1.1%, 1.1%
Utah: 1.1%, 1.5%. 1.4%
Virginia: nl, 0.7%, nl

overall: 1.3%, 1.4%, 1.6%

It's still early but I don't like the trend lines..we'll see in another three weeks or so where this is heading.

I'll publish what international figures I have later today. gotta go water the gardens now.

reply to post by Flighty


Flighty-

My apologies for not having links at present- will find and post as can do-

But I, as well, have heard that not only in Australia, but indeed in most of the world, statistical testing has shown that over 90% of all those who present at the doctor or hospitla with flu have H1N1, not a seasonal strain. It's edging out all of the others, and according to CDC and WHO, moving very quickly, with high contagion rates.

If this does NOT mutate badly, and the mortality rates stay at, say 0.1-.5%, we're still looking at billions, or at least hundreds of millions- of deaths from this outbreak. That is not small change.

Flu does kill many people each year- but the "36,000/year" in the US is completely fabricated- it is an interpolation done by CDC, as flu is not a reportable illness unless we're under a pandemic. So I would assume that far fewer people die each year from flu than are reported- just as far more are ill or dying now, than reported.
And on top of it- WHO just announced they're STOPPING COUNTING H1N1 vicitms!!!! So, not only will we AGAIN not know who has died from it and who has not- we will have no firm data to which to refer during the next pandemic.

Insanity......

Stay well

Originally posted by apacheman
Due to the fact that the WHOhas stopped aggregating infection/death numbers, I will no longer have a handy means of calculating global hot zones. I am having to rely on national numbers directly which is spottier in time, but probably more accurate. The CDC continues so far to publish Friday updates, so I will be posting US figures every Friday. For the rest of the world, I'll put up what I can when I can.

ECDC has European and Worldwide figures which I believe are still being updated every Friday.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

Hope that helps you with trying to keep track of the numbers.

reply to post by apacheman

Apacheman:

I'd add Illinois-

So far, 3,357 cases reported, with 15 deaths (per Illinois Dept of Public Health)--that's a little below 0.01%--but it is grossly underreported--we personally know handfuls of freinds who are ill, and some who are in hospital- can only imagine what's going on in the city), but now, no one is counting- and as my nurse friends have shared, suburban hospitals are full, ICU and NICU wards are full, with ventilators on backorder). Cook County Hospital (our Chicago hospital where most go who are not insured, is at capacity-only emergency surgeries are being performed, treatment of gun shots, etc.).
I had an MRI on Thursday at a hospital in a very affluent suburb, and the security guards were wearing sidearms.

www.idph.state.il.us...

We're trending upwards- and like NYC I imagine Chicago is rife with infections. We're the national and international hub for United Airlines; we host Loolapaloza (next month); have just finished the Taste of Chicago- with 3 million people gathered in Grant Park on the lake for fireworks; our Cubs and Sox fans were pretty quiet in May and early June- many were staying home from crowds- now the stadia are packed. We had VERY little traffic all of June- it has picked back up again: it is still not as bad as normal Chicago hell, but there are more cars on the road now than there were a month ago. It seems people had an initial fright, then got back to their activities.
I did noticie, on the way home from the hospital on Thursday, however, that the two largest daycamps were closed for the summer- first time I've seen that in probably 20 years.

Chicago is a hugely diverse city, as well- we have large Polish, Indian, Korean, Russian, Eastern European, Irish, Chinese, Japanese, Greek and Italian communities (and many more)- all of whom travel frequently. As a result we have some of the best neighborhoods and restaurants, art, etc., in the world, but also large groups who can share the bug with us from their international families and friends.
Keep an eye on Illinois- we certainly are

We're going to see this mumbers jump soon.

reply to post by Maya00a


Thank God someone is keeping track. I was beginning to feel as though the only scientist left were stuck in 12$/hour jobs in the basements of Universities, doing real work.....

(Data are for the U.S.)

Number of deaths for leading causes of death

* Heart disease: 631,636
* Cancer: 559,888
* Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 137,119
* Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 124,583
* Accidents (unintentional injuries): 121,599
* Diabetes: 72,449
* Alzheimer's disease: 72,432
* Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,326
* Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 45,344
* Septicemia: 34,234

Leading Causes of Death

Why all the panic

[edit on 19-7-2009 by harvib]

Thanks to Maya00a for the link:

ecdc.europa.eu...

Costa Rica: 1.6%, 7 of 428
Dominican Republic: 2.0%, 2 of 108
El Salvador: 0.7%, 3 of 404
Honduras: 0.8%, 1 of 123
Mexico: 0.9%, 125 of 13646
Jamaica: 4.5%, 2 of 44

Argentina: 4.5%, 137 of 3056
Colombia: 4.0%, 8 of 202
Ecuador: 0.8%, 3 of 357
Paraguay: 2.0%, 3 of 150
Uruguay: 1.6%, 9 of 550

Central/South America hot zone aggregrate: 1.6%, 300 of 19068

Trend lines:

Costa Rica: 0.9%, 1.1%, 1.6%
Dominican Republic: 1.9%, 1.9%, 2.0%
El Salvador: nl, nl, 0.7%
Honduras: 0.8%, 0.8% 0.8%
Jamaica: nl, nl, 4.5%
Mexico: 1.2%, 1.2%, 0.9%

Argentina: 1.6%, 3.1%, 4.5%
Colombia: 2.0%, 1.7%, 4.0%
Ecuador: nl, nl, 0.8%
Paraguay: nl, 0.9%, 2.0%
Uruguay: nl, 2.1%, 1.6%


Something bad is obviously going on in Central and South America, those numbers are truly scary. But remember: it's still early yet, they could go down fast if they are an artifact of reporting difficulties or due to a very small population. When Mexico is removed from the data set, the numbers really pop. Whatever is currently hitting Argentina, Colombia, and Jamaica appears to be far deadlier than what hit Mexico in the spring.

Brunei, Thailand, and New Zealand are on my current watch list. Japan I'm keeping an eye on even though they don't have any deaths so far...I suspect that the death rate will explode there for several reasons,. I sincerely hope I'm wrong...but...well, we'll see.

[edit on 19-7-2009 by apacheman]

reply to post by CultureD


Illinois is one of the states on my watch list: they are very, very close to my threshold of 0.7%, a death or two more will put them there. Your assessment of the risk factors is accurate in my judgment. Whatever happens, Chicago is going to be hit hard.