info on the swine flu - why mutation is suspected

boyohboyohboy wrote: finally got some time to research the swine flu and now I understand why the experts are so worried. This isn't the first time the Us dealt with the swine flu. The flu in 1918-1919 that killed over 600,000 Americans and around 50 million worldwide was a swine flu. It came in 3 waves--the first wave was a mild form of the flu in the summer of 1918 then it mutated and became severe by the fall. The third wave came in the spring of 1919. There were 2 other swine flu pandemics--one in 57 and one in 68 that killed 3 million worldwide combined. I wasn't worried, but now I understand the experts concern. I thought they were just erring on the side of caution when they said that there was a good chance it would mutate, but history shows that it probably will. What makes swine flu so dangerous is that pigs are capable of being petry dishes that combine human and bird flus and then pass it on to humans. Another concern is that they are rushing to create a vaccine. They did that in 19
76 when there was a swine flu that was contained at an army baracks and they ended up causing a bunch of deaths. I know I probably don't have to tell some of you this but just be weary of any rushed vaccine. Now I'm concerned, but I'm going to hope for the best. I apologize if this causes you more worry, but I wanted you to know what I found and thought it helped every one make a more informed decision.

coasterqueen replied: Wow, sounds like if history repeats itself we could be dealing with this for some time then before it's over with.

PrairieMom replied: I was just trying to explain that very thing to my MIL last night. She was all about the whole thing, and asked me as a medical professional ( ) what I thought about it.
I'm not freaking out, but ITA that we should be concerned and careful about this whole thing. I'm kinda just sitting back and watching cautiously. Its pretty scary.

boyohboyohboy replied:
I am with you tara, as a medical professional, I realize that if worse comes to worse there isnt going to be a miracle save here..
I am being diligent about hand washing and controling the exposure we have to people right now..I wish school was out.

I dont think that mass panick is the answer, but definately not a causal take on the whole thing either..
I thought this was worth some thought...

we have begun to stock up on things we can use if the flu hits, or people are asked to stay home..I think its things we can use no matter what, but its there to decrease the need to go to the grocery store, and also in case we are sick and need it right away..
also at some point I think people are going to start stocking up and there will be items missing that we cant get as easily..this way I am ready.

PrairieMom replied: The thing I think is going to happen is that people are going to get all freaked out, and then loose interest when this doesn't go anywhere, then when it mutates and flairs again, when people SHOULD worry they will be so over it.

mummy2girls replied:
yes that is scarey but that was over 100 years agoa nd back then there was not much medical vaccines, meds etc etc etc. It could get worse yes but again im nto too worried because this was 100 years and more ago. Dont get me wrong, im being very cautious , i am worried it will hit us and im not taking it lightly. I just think that pandemic was a loooong time ago and what we have now we didnt back then. We have come a long way in medicine for sure. Im not denying it will get worse because that would be stupid of me.

PrairieMom replied:
agreed, BUT those vaccines take time to be created, and people weren't jet setting all over the globe at that time either. At any rate, its gonna be a waiting game no matter how you look at it.

Kentuckychick replied:
Exactly. 100 years ago not only were we greatly lacking in vaccines and medical facilities to help ill persons... we were also greatly lacking in any type of real health precautions. Back then they didn't know as much about handwashing and staying home from school and work.

We sent a note home to parents today that said if a child is sent to school ill they absolutely will be sent home. There are times when we'll allow a child with a mild fever to stay or a child with just a cold to stay. Not now. Any fever at all and they have to go home for 24 hours.

They thing with flus (any flus) is that they linger a long time. An individual can continue to spread the flu for days even after they start feeling better.

People need to stay home if they're sick.

boyohboyohboy replied: the last outbreak was 1976, that was not 100 yrs ago..

also, maybe because this is not a strain that many people remember hearing about before..or because the word flu is attatche to it..
but would you feel the same if it were an outbreak of TB?

either way, I think people who dont take the precautions now are going to be caught in a very hard spot..Its not being freaked out to wash your hands more, and to stay home and not be a social butterfly during a time of flu outbreak..

in reality, if the normal flu's were in the media as often as their outbreaks this would be the same discussion..

I hope it doesnt mutate this time....I hope it turns out to be nothing but media hype..I pray that it...

Kentuckychick replied:
Oh I definitely agree that we should take precautions - I just think we should be hesitant to point to the outbreak and numbers from 100 years ago when today we are thankfully able to take so many more precautions. And I noticed that the 1976 outbreak was contained -- I think that shows just how far we've come.

I did read about the first "US" death... which actually if you look at the facts, while the child died in the US - I wouldn't consider him a US statistic. It was a child who was visiting from Mexico, contracted the illness in Mexico and had underlying health issues before he even left Mexico. The doctor's also say the child died of pneumonia related to the flu and that he was already "critically" ill when brought to the hospital.

I feel like the first "US" death would be the first person in the US to contract the virus here in the US -- an individual who did not travel to or from Mexico *I understand this is not how statistics work*, I just think it should be. So far of 109 confirmed cases (all still linked to individuals who've traveled in Mexico) they are calling the flu "mild" and saying that it follows the course of the seasonal flu. And doctors are being mindful to remind that 36,000 individuals die each year in the US alone from the seasonal flu, so one death in 109 is not surprising.

I mean I definitely agree that like any other illness this has the potential to get really bad... but let's just hope it doesn't.

jcc64 replied:

Yeah, but that's what happens when someone is considered a flu statistic. People die of flu-related pneumonia--that's how you die from the flu. I'm not sure I'm getting your point when you say he was "already critically ill when brought to the hospital." Could you clarify?

And I for one am taking no comfort in the fact that medicine is more advanced and that's going to protect us. The flu is a virus, for which there is no cure. There wasn't one then, and there isn't one now. And we further exacerbate the problem by being far more mobile and globally inter-connected/dependent than we were back in 1918, when most people didn't even have cars. Even in 1976, air travel wasn't as commonly used as it is today. So, we may have more advanced antivirals (which are NOT a cure) , but we are far more capable of spreading communicable disease on a global scale.

Kentuckychick replied:
I know -- actually I think a great number of individuals who die from flu complications die from pneumonia.

As for the critically ill - I mentioned that because the article made it an absolute point to say that this was an at risk child who was already in critical condition by the time his family sought medical attention. (Ie; a very typical flu death -- not that that makes it any less heartbreaking for the family).

The entire article was just basically pointing out that at this point the flu is mild and though yes, there has been one death, it wasn't so much surprising.

Again -- I understand this has the potential to become something very serious (so did SARS and West Nile and all of those)... but it's okay to hope it doesn't.

PrairieMom replied:
So DOES SARS and West nile.

Like I said, I'm not panicking , but one of these days, something BAD is going to go down. I would like to hope that the Media and general public don't loose their minds when it happens, but that is a dream.
This is just a good time to start thinking about all the what if's and start making your own battle plan, just in case.

coasterqueen replied: We've had "possible" cases here in our city, but no confirmed cases. I figured our school district would be a little concerned about it, especially with all the field trips this month, but they aren't. They sent home a teeny tiny note on the monthly newsletter (which I normally don't read, so I am glad I did, lol) about how to treat it as the regular flu and wash hands, etc, etc. We didn't do anything different today on our field trip than we've done on any others.