300 Days. Is Swine Flu Really That Deadly? (Pic)

This chart puts things into perspective.

Its a myth, you have more chance of dieing of Dengue fever.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Ignorance Denied


Chart is a bit misleading. Swine Flu is merely 1 STRAIN of the Influenza virus, yet is compared to Cancer deaths despite there being a near complete A to Z list of different types and classifications of Cancer.. Cardiovascular disease is by far and away the highest killer on your list... but from what causes? Stroke? Heart Attack? Ruptured valve? The two major killers in Africa are TB and Malaria, often are related in death toll with AIDs. HIV doesn't actually kill you, it just compromises your immune system to something else ends up killing you. So it's listing on there is a bit of a misnomer.

That chart is not to be accepted without closer scrutiny. Still, H1N1 death rates aren't yet even over typical flu mortality rates IIRC. Current mortality rates aren't the concern... it's the potential. The virus may never mutate into a form which reaches a mortality rate even close to the regular seasonal flu strains. The concern is over how it can be deadly to even healthy young people. The idea is prevention, to try to keep a handle on it so it won't get that chance to possibly mutate into something more virulent.

While medicine can create an environmental selector to be overcome (by infectious bacteria such as MRSA), remember that evolution works with two prior co-requirements being Reproduction and Mutation. Contain the spread of the virus, limit it's population growth to controlled levels, and we can better estimate the course of it's evolution.

(The major problem with Influenza is that it has these spike like structures on it's outside called hemagglutinin which the virus uses to attach itself to host cells. Since the the hemagglutnin's functionability is not extremely rigid, or conserved, mutations are free to build up that cause modifications in these structures. These act as a decoy for the immune system by preventing our antibodies from developing immunities to the conserved proteins like the M2e ion channel targeted in the universal flu vaccine. The influenza virus cannot easily mutate that structure to overcome immunity without crippling the functionality of the virus.)

Influenza virus - Molecular Expressions Cell Biology

reply to post by Lasheic


Then it should also be stated that these people didnt die from swine flu they died from resulting infections such as pneumonia. So to tell you the truth if you take the misleading amount of deaths on both sides i think youd be looking at the same graph

reply to post by conspiracyrus

Then it should also be stated that these people didnt die from swine flu they died from resulting infections such as pneumonia.

Pneumonia isn't a species or strain of infectious secondary pathogen. It's a condition of the lungs which can be triggered several different ways by various different vectors, such as parasites, bacteria, fungus, and of course - viruses. So when people die of pneumonia triggered by the H1N1, Pneumonia is considered the complication. On the contrary, in HIV/AIDS patients, the HIV virus is initially unrelated to the disease which will eventually kill the patient - but it creates conditions in the body favorable for such an event by weakening the immune system. The patient still dies of TB or Malaria, but in this scenario, AIDS is the complication.

These type of posts are sad to me because I would bet the people who know somebody who died from h1n1 are probably not thing its a myth like you say. We are also very early on in the stages of what we will see with h1n1 so I don't think it should be written off yet.

reply to post by Lasheic


exactly why h1n1 didnt kill them, pneumonia is treatable... thanks for proving my point!

Originally posted by whoshotJR
We are also very early on in the stages of what we will see with h1n1 so I don't think it should be written off yet.

Not true. The CDC claims that Swine Flu has already peaked.

reply to post by conspiracyrus

exactly why h1n1 didnt kill them, pneumonia is treatable... thanks for proving my point!

Did you even have a point? You're trying to argue the point of the effect it's had thus far, when the entire fuss over the virus from the very beginning has been about it's potential, because of how it infects and who it infects.

Proving your point? Before trumpeting a tissue paper victory, did you even bother attempting to check what the CDC had to say?

From 2009 H1N1 Swine Flu & You: Infections in Humans.

Human infections with 2009 H1N1 are ongoing in the United States. Most people who have become ill with this new virus have recovered without requiring medical treatment.

So congrats bud. You latched on to a flawed argument in defense of a graph that used un-sourced and suspicious data in a botched attempt to prove what the CDC was already saying. Bravo.


reply to post by GoldenFleece


That snippet doesn't say that H1N1 has peaked. It's saying it's already reached a proliferation level comparable to the point that most previous Influenza strains reach during their peaks. A peak is merely the point at which the virus is most prolific, and isn't truly discernible until after the season when the data can be compared.

The peak isn't limited by some arbitrary outside factor which limits population growth upon reaching a certain size. Viruses don't quota resources. Unchecked, they will reproduce exponentially forever. There's a lot of environmental factors influencing the level of growth, though the winter season is when it hits the hardest, specifically February in the N. Hemisphere.

The fact that H1N1 has reached typical flu infection and death levels this early is NOT comforting news, and there's a lot of winter months ahead. It's not necessarily bad news either... we won't really know until it's here. However, considering how atypical H1N1 has behaved thus far - the fewer surprise curveball that get thrown our way - the better.


[edit on 30-10-2009 by Lasheic]

reply to post by Lasheic


My point was that h1n1 doesnt kill most people ... the people that unfortunately do die, die from complications ... like pneumonia.

Number 2 i didnt hype a thing what exactly are you talking about here?

And number 3 didnt you see that the cdc stopped testing for swine flu and regarded all flu deaths and flu like symptoms would be attributed to swine flu?

i guess you didnt

heres a thread with some good information on the topic

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 30-10-2009 by conspiracyrus]

[edit on 30-10-2009 by conspiracyrus]

reply to post by conspiracyrus

My point was that h1n1 doesnt kill most people ... the people that unfortunately do die, die from complications ... like pneumonia.

/facepalm

You're just being facetious right? That's how it kills, by triggering an aggressive form of pneumonia. What you're neglecting or avoiding is the direct causal relationship.

Number 2 i didnt hype a thing what exactly are you talking about here?

Typo, and already fixed before you replied. OP was promoting that chart (either his or found elsewhere), and you were defending it without even explaining why, brushing errors off with baseless conjecture.

And number 3 didnt you see that the cdc stopped testing for swine flu and regarded all flu deaths and flu like symptoms would be attributed to swine flu?

No... because that never happened. Sorry, but you've been lied to. If you had bothered to leave ATS for a moment and verify whether or not what you heard was true, you'd probably be a lot better informed.

2009-2010 Influenza Season Week 42 ending October 24, 2009 - Pneumonia and Influenza Hospitalization and Death Tracking:

This new system was implemented on August 30, 2009, and replaces the weekly report of laboratory confirmed 2009 H1N1-related hospitalizations and deaths that began in April 2009. Jurisdictions can now report to CDC either laboratory confirmed or pneumonia and influenza syndromic-based counts of hospitalizations and deaths resulting from all types or subtypes of influenza, not just those from 2009 H1N1 influenza virus.

They expanded the system to collect and organize the data regarding the activity of multiple independent strains for comparison purposes. The data tables are right there, go look at them. They didn't stop collecting information. Just click the link above, and read what's there. It's not difficult.

[edit on 30-10-2009 by Lasheic]

Without being alarmist, let's look at the factors that are in play regarding the new flu this particular season, considering the physical, social, economic, and epidemiological environments.

In reverse order:

Epidemiological environment:

www.cdc.gov...

CDC laboratory studies have shown that no children and very few adults younger than 60 years old have existing antibody to 2009 H1N1 flu virus; however, about one-third of adults older than 60 may have antibodies against this virus. It is unknown how much, if any, protection may be afforded against 2009 H1N1 flu by any existing antibody.

How does 2009 H1N1 flu compare to seasonal flu in terms of its severity and infection rates?

With seasonal flu, we know that seasons vary in terms of timing, duration and severity. Seasonal influenza can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death. Each year, in the United States, on average 36,000 people die from flu-related complications and more than 200,000 people are hospitalized from flu-related causes. Of those hospitalized, 20,000 are children younger than 5 years old. Over 90% of deaths and about 60 percent of hospitalization occur in people older than 65.

Visits to doctors for influenza-like illness (ILI) increased steeply since last week in the United States, and overall, are much higher than what is expected for this time of the year. ILI activity now is higher than what is seen during the peak of many regular flu seasons.

Total influenza hospitalization rates for laboratory-confirmed flu are climbing and are higher than expected for this time of year. Hospitalization rates continue to be highest is younger populations with the highest hospitalization rate reported in children 0-4 years old.

The proportion of deaths attributed to pneumonia and influenza (P&I) based on the 122 Cities Report has increased and has been higher than what is expected at this time of year for four weeks now. In addition, 22 flu-related pediatric deaths were reported this week; 19 of these deaths were confirmed 2009 H1N1, and three were influenza A viruses, but were not subtyped. Since April 2009, CDC has received reports of 114 laboratory-confirmed pediatric 2009 H1N1 deaths and another 12 pediatric deaths that were laboratory confirmed as influenza, but where the flu virus subtype was not determined.

more info...
www.cdc.gov...

So we are far above normal already in terms of numbers sick and dead, few have any immunity, and total numbers in both categories will go much higher if normal trend lines are followed.

Economic:

Failing economy means more people in shelters (more crowded conditions), fewer health services available, more malnourished people with "underlying health problems".

Social:

Linked to economic, more people living together out of neccessity. Fewer able to help outside their immediate circle.

Physical:

Again linked to economic. Lower incomes means fewer calories of lower quality resulting in weaker immune systems. Early winter, as seems to be the case, adds stress to an already over-stressed situation.

Think about those factors, then YOU tell me what the most likely result will be by springtime.

Personally, I wouldn't and don't discount the severity of the new flu.



[edit on 30-10-2009 by apacheman]

reply to post by Lasheic


your third quote actually says that it can be labratory or symptomatic so doctors need not test they can just use the symptoms and make a judgement ... meaning the numbers a trumped up , err i mean its right there in pretty plain english. compare... more like lump together...

[edit on 30-10-2009 by conspiracyrus]

reply to post by conspiracyrus

your third quote actually says that it can be labratory or symptomatic so doctors need not test they can just use the symptoms and make a judgement ... meaning the numbers a trumped up , err i mean its right there in pretty plain english. compare... more like lump together...

You got it all backwards.


Please take note of the columns listed as "A(Subtyping not performed)" and "A (unable to sub-type)¥". Those are the columns in which untested or symptomatic only reports are counted. They are not lumped in with H1N1. So it actually deflates the number of H1N1 cases confirmed, when in reality some of those as of yet unverified reports are likely Swine Flu. However, they CANNOT be considered as such without verification. In fact, the "¥" symbol above correlates to the following note at the bottom of the graph:

¥ The majority of influenza A viruses that cannot be sub-typed as seasonal influenza viruses are 2009 A (H1N1) influenza viruses upon further testing

... which describes an observed trend for the majority of cases in that column to be discovered as H1N1 as revealed by subsequent verification in the lab. Yet they will not attribute any of those reports to the H1N1's column until such verification demands it.

[edit on 30-10-2009 by Lasheic]

reply to post by conspiracyrus


Are you aware how many terminal diseases kill by means of pnuemonia? My mother had lung cancer that spread to her brain. In the end, she died of pnuemonia. That doesn't mean that the cancer didn't kill her, it did. This is just the means of that death.

reply to post by space cadet


Thats just the thing though, if an overwhelming majority get better and h1n1 causes no where near the amount of deaths as regular influenza, doesnt that show a preexisting immunodeficiency for the dead infected with swine flu?

diseases-viruses.suite101.com...

its pretty cut and dry...

www.med.umich.edu...

and everyone is saying most at risk people are those with health risks to begin with....

and heres one from your beloved cdc
www.cdc.gov...



[edit on 31-10-2009 by conspiracyrus]

reply to post by conspiracyrus


It is actually kind of the opposite of what you are saying, it is not necesarily the weakened immune system at all,

What happens with young and healthy patients is that their immune systems react so strongly that they can triggers something known as a "cytokine storm".

When this happens the person's immune system overreacts to the totally new flu virus and actually attacks the body's healthy organs and systems - that makes the healthy approximately 15 to 60 year old individual the most likely to actually succumb to the flu.

Also it has been discovered that people over 52, due to previous flu exposure, have built up an immunity to swine flu and may be safe even if it mutates into the form that folks are all worried about.

All is not known nor over yet with this flu, read up on the 1918 flu, you will understand much more.

reply to post by space cadet


no you missed the parts of all of those links where it said most at risk was infact people with pre existing medical conditions...

the most likely to have complications are the ones with medical condition prior.... it says it in all 3 of those links
1 from a blog
1 from umich
1 from the cdc

[edit on 31-10-2009 by conspiracyrus]

reply to post by conspiracyrus


OK, so just totally ignore the facts, that is your perogative. I intend to listen and heed the facts myself.

reply to post by space cadet


guy are you kidding me i just linked you the facts its your perogative if you want to ignore them

reply to post by conspiracyrus


First of all can you not look at my avatar and tell I am not a guy? Just in case you cannot, let me tell you that I am not a guy, ok, and that is a fact.

Second, did you happen to look up cytokine storm? Or cytokine storm as it relates to swine flu? How about terminal illness and the cycle they take? Nope? Oh, yeah, you have links to look at.