Pandemic over !

[GostHacked]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/10/pandemic.waning/index.html?hpt=T2

Well, at least I can stop worrying about it every single second I am awake .

So what will the next pandemic be and when? Place your bets.

[charter.rights]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/10/pandemic.waning/index.html?hpt=T2

Well, at least I can stop worrying about it every single second I am awake .

So what will the next pandemic be and when? Place your bets.

Whatever big pharmaceutical needs to sell off next......

I think the next pandemic might be a sexually treated disease and won't you know they will have complete cure-all in pill form.

[Shwa]

I predict that infidelity will be the next pandemic and they are already working on a vaccine:

Scientists developed a cheating vaccine that works on rodents. Meadow voles are extremely promiscuous. By injecting them with the vaccine they turned monogamous. A cheating vaccine for humans won’t be available any time soon. There are lots of moral quandaries.

First meadow voles, then frisky spouses. After The Great Infidelity Pandemic is cured, the next pandemic will have something to do with out-of-work divorce lawyers.

[Bonam]

I dunno, but take overly alarmist statements about mild flus from the WHO with a grain of salt.

[GostHacked]

I dunno, but take overly alarmist statements about mild flus from the WHO with a grain of salt.

Many of us here did. Some did not.

[Michael Hardner]

I guess that's one way to look at it, i.e. "Damn it we didn't all die as they warned we might..."

Too bad ?

[capricorn]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/10/pandemic.waning/index.html?hpt=T2

Well, at least I can stop worrying about it every single second I am awake .

So what will the next pandemic be and when? Place your bets.

Well it's interesting that something that didn't happen makes front page news. Here's my headline news: I didn't get hit by a bus today.

[segnosaur]

I dunno, but take overly alarmist statements about mild flus from the WHO with a grain of salt.

Many of us here did. Some did not.

Well, here are the problems...

- Medicine is not always a perfect science. Without the ability to predict the future, there's no exact way to tell just how bad a particular disease/epidemic will be. Its possible that some of the dire predictions surrounding H1N1 were over-hyped, but its also possible that some people were taking a cautious approach. (Remember, while the death toll of H1N1 was lower than that of other flu strains, it was hitting young people harder.)

- While some may have been overly pessimistic about H1N1, there were people who took the completely idiotic attitude that "I don't need the flu shot", a thought process usually based on ignorance and stupidity. Even if H1N1 wasn't as serious as initially predicted, it is still beneficial to get vaccinated. If doctors over hype the dangers of the flu, it may cause panic but it may save lives. When idiots claim "I don't need no stinkin' vaccine", people die. Which is the worse problem?

[GostHacked]

Well, here are the problems...

- Medicine is not always a perfect science. Without the ability to predict the future, there's no exact way to tell just how bad a particular disease/epidemic will be. Its possible that some of the dire predictions surrounding H1N1 were over-hyped, but its also possible that some people were taking a cautious approach. (Remember, while the death toll of H1N1 was lower than that of other flu strains, it was hitting young people harder.)

Different flues will affect different people. It's not hard to figure that out. They said upfront that the flu deaths for H1N1 were low, but they still said we should get the shot. But the regular seasonal flu shot would not protect you from H1N1 and the new vaccine had not been tested enough to prove it's effectiveness.

- While some may have been overly pessimistic about H1N1, there were people who took the completely idiotic attitude that "I don't need the flu shot", a thought process usually based on ignorance and stupidity. Even if H1N1 wasn't as serious as initially predicted, it is still beneficial to get vaccinated. If doctors over hype the dangers of the flu, it may cause panic but it may save lives. When idiots claim "I don't need no stinkin' vaccine", people die. Which is the worse problem?

I've not had a flu shot in over 20 years. And my choice was not bases on ignorance or stupidity. It was based on the fact that the number of deaths was far lower than what the average flu kills per year. And for the most part H1N1 like any other flu would affect people that already have a weak immune system due to some ailment.

The debacle over the distribution of vaccines also indicated that there was no real serious threat. Remember Avian flu?

[segnosaur]

Different flues will affect different people. It's not hard to figure that out.

Yes, but the majority of flu strains tend to affect either the elderly, or those who are otherwise weakened more than they affect the strong and healthy. Its very rare for any strain of flu to hit the younger, healthy people more than elderly people. This was one of the causes of concern.

They said upfront that the flu deaths for H1N1 were low, but they still said we should get the shot.

And they were right.

But the regular seasonal flu shot would not protect you from H1N1...

Yes, the regular seasonal flu shot doesn't stop H1N1, but non-H1N1 strains were still circulating, and it was still wise to vaccinate against them as well as H1N1.

I got both shots the same day.

...and the new vaccine had not been tested enough to prove it's effectiveness.

Which is completely incorrect.

The H1N1 vaccine had undergone multiple double-blind studies to demonstrate both its safety, and its ability to generate resistance prior to its release to the general public.

While some may have been overly pessimistic about H1N1, there were people who took the completely idiotic attitude that "I don't need the flu shot", a thought process usually based on ignorance and stupidity.

I've not had a flu shot in over 20 years. And my choice was not bases on ignorance or stupidity.

Actually, from the quality of your response, your choices certainly were based on ignorance and stupidity.... Which is the problem that those in the health care field have to deal with.

It was based on the fact that the number of deaths was far lower than what the average flu kills per year.

While it is true that H1N1 caused fewer deaths, that doesn't mean that there wasn't a need for the H1N1 vaccine. Fewer deaths is not the same as no deaths.

Its like playing russian roulette. Playing Russian Roulette with 1 bullet in the gun causes fewer deaths than playing with 2 bullets in the gun, but its still not as safe as avoiding the game altogether.

And for the most part H1N1 like any other flu would affect people that already have a weak immune system due to some ailment.

First of all, H1N1 wasn't just affecting people with weak immune systems. It was affecting otherwise healthy people. And even if you didn't think you were at risk from dying, why would you want to risk getting a disease that will make you feel miserable for weeks, miss work, etc.? I know people who were otherwise healthy adults who caught H1N1. Didn't die, but felt miserable for weeks.

Secondly, even if you're not worried about dying, you should be worried about passing the disease on to people who might be at risk. Granted, maybe you don't have anyone in your life that you love. But some of us do.

The debacle over the distribution of vaccines also indicated that there was no real serious threat.

First of all, define 'serious threat'. People died of the flu. The fact that fewer died (or were going to die) doesn't mean that the threat is not worth dealing with.

Secondly, yes there were problems with vaccine distribution. But guess what? Even if the distribution of the vaccine was not optimum, it doesn't necessarily mean it was worthless. Even giving it to a normal healthy adult (rather than someone at risk) contributes to herd immunity.

[GostHacked]

Segnosaur

Check how many deaths are related to H1N1, then compare those numbers to the regular flu for that same period. It was much ado about nothing. Besides the pandemic was already considered in full effect before the vaccines were introduced. Those who were going to be affected had most likely already been exposed to the virus.

I'll admit I was wrong in saying the vaccines were not tested.

[Guest TrueMetis]

I guess that's one way to look at it, i.e. "Damn it we didn't all die as they warned we might..."

Too bad ?

Well it's better than them saying "oh no it nothing serious" then having hundreds of millions of people die, Which could have damned well happened because despite what people here seem to think a lot of people got the vaccine. I didn't because I'm an idiot, same goes for anyone who didn't get the vaccine.

Hindsight is 20/20 but doesn't work in cases like these. If this shows anything it's that we are pretty damned prepared for disease outbreaks.

[Smallc]

Well it's better than them saying "oh no it nothing serious" then having hundreds of millions of people die, Which could have damned well happened because despite what people here seem to think a lot of people got the vaccine. I didn't because I'm an idiot, same goes for anyone who didn't get the vaccine.

Same here. I didn't get the vaccine, but I made my sister and mom get it....and I think my brother got it too. I know many people that got it.

[segnosaur]

Check how many deaths are related to H1N1, then compare those numbers to the regular flu for that same period.

Ummm... go back and look at post #8, where I already admitted that H1N1 had a lower death rate than the seasonal flu in previous years.

Once again though, the fact that having a lower death rate does not mean that the risk was zero. I've explained that already. Why won't it sink in?

Besides the pandemic was already considered in full effect before the vaccines were introduced.

Ummm... so? Do you think the virus was just going to appear, infect people, and disappear all within a few weeks?

The vaccine was introduced in November 2009. Now, assume that it took a few weeks for vaccinations to be available, and for people to build up immunity. In the months following the introduction of the vaccine, there were roughly 800 deaths related to the flu in the United States. There were roughly 10 times the number of people hospitalized due to the illness. So, you're talking almost 10,000 people who's lives could have been saved, and/or who would not have been hospitalized had either they, or the people around them, gotten vaccinated (after the vaccine was available). And that's just in the U.S.

Not to mention the people that caught the disease and were miserable for weeks (perhaps even missing work) due to the flu.

I got my vaccine in December (after all the 'priority' people got theirs). Anyone who wanted the vaccine at the time could get it, no problems (no claims of "lineups are too long). After my immunity built up (it takes a week or 2 for a vaccine to actually fully protect someone), there were roughly 3600 hospitalizations in the U.S. due to the flu, most of which were H1N1. And this was off peak. Do you think having thousands of people hospitalized for an easily preventable disease is a "good thing"?

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2009-2010/data/AHDRA20.htm

Yes, the vaccine came to late to stop the illness among many at the 'peak' of the epidemic, but your still talking about thousands upon thousands of people who could have been helped by the vaccine had they had the sense to get vaccinated.

I'll admit I was wrong in saying the vaccines were not tested.

People claiming the vaccines "weren't needed" usually are wrong about a lot of things.

Edited August 10, 2010 by segnosaur

[segnosaur]

I didn't because I'm an idiot, same goes for anyone who didn't get the vaccine.

Same here. I didn't get the vaccine, but I made my sister and mom get it....and I think my brother got it too. I know many people that got it.

Just wondering... the 2 of you seem to be pretty rational/logical over the issue. Is there any particular reason you didn't get the vaccine? (I can understand people waiting until high-priority people get it.)

Its a good thing that SmallC insisted members of his family get vaccinated. The problem is, there are a small number of people for whom the vaccine isn't effective. (And no, that doesn't mean the vaccine should be scrapped). There's a small chance that his sister or mother was one of those rare individuals for whom the vaccine was ineffective, and they might run the risk of catching the disease anyways (possibly from smallc).

[Smallc]

Just wondering... the 2 of you seem to be pretty rational/logical over the issue. Is there any particular reason you didn't get the vaccine? (I can understand people waiting until high-priority people get it.)

I didn't get it at first because I wanted to leave it for the priority groups, and then because there were lines in Winnipeg...I just didn't think of it afterwards....and everything seemed to be dying down already by that time.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Just wondering... the 2 of you seem to be pretty rational/logical over the issue. Is there any particular reason you didn't get the vaccine? (I can understand people waiting until high-priority people get it.)

I was waiting for the high-priority people, then by the time that was done with I had pretty much forgotten about it. I think there was all of one outbreak where I live, and a couple of normal flu outbreaks that people thought might be H1N1. I still feel like an idiot for not having gotten it.

[bloodyminded]

Well it's better than them saying "oh no it nothing serious" then having hundreds of millions of people die, Which could have damned well happened because despite what people here seem to think a lot of people got the vaccine. I didn't because I'm an idiot, same goes for anyone who didn't get the vaccine.

I'm inclined to agree. I was going to get it, then there was some issue about it temporarily running out in my area, then I pretty much said, "fuck it."

But it's irresponsible. As Segnosaur said, it's not only for oneself, but to avoid spreading it. My mistake.

[Michael Hardner]

Well it's better than them saying "oh no it nothing serious" then having hundreds of millions of people die, Which could have damned well happened because despite what people here seem to think a lot of people got the vaccine. I didn't because I'm an idiot, same goes for anyone who didn't get the vaccine.

Hindsight is 20/20 but doesn't work in cases like these. If this shows anything it's that we are pretty damned prepared for disease outbreaks.

And the panic, hopefully, taught them something about executing mass vaccinations.

[Sir Bandelot]

And the panic, hopefully, taught them something about executing mass vaccinations.

Experienced doctors know that already. The hype was fueled by government bureaucrats and big pharma companies. It was pretty clear if you looked at the statistics, common flu was more deadly on a large scale than this virus, or other recent scary sounding virus that they went bananas over, and turned out to be nothing. ("SARS")

Sure, it's better to be safe than sorry. I won't disagree. There was a lot of concern that the vaccine was not given the same amount of testing that previous vaccines are routinely given. Keep playing Russian roulette with the population, on a grand scale. It's only a matter of time before something WILL go wrong.

[Smallc]

Experienced doctors know that already. The hype was fueled by government bureaucrats and big pharma companies. It was pretty clear if you looked at the statistics,

If you look at the fact that Winnipeg ran out of intensive care beds and ventilators...which pretty much never happens..you realize that this was no normal flu, and it could have been bad. This flu affected young, healthy people and they had to be put in medically induced comas for protection. In Winnipeg, they had to convert surgery recovery beds to intensive care beds, and transfer staff and surgeries between hospitals. At the peak, they even had to transfer some intensive care patients to other nearby small cities (Brandon, Winkler, Portage, Selkirk, Steinbach...each of which have 6 or fewer intensive care beds) because there were so many people in intensive care on ventilators that there was literally nowhere to put them.

We where hit worse than anyone, and this could have happened pretty much anywhere with the right conditions (most of these people were from northern reserves). What about those statistics?

Edited August 11, 2010 by Smallc

[Bryan]

The lesson that H1N1 should have taught people is to stop listening when government agencies tell you the sky is falling.

H1N1, Avian Flu, West Nile, SARS, Listeriosis, and on and on. We keep jumping from panic to panic over things that never turn out to be anywhere near as bad as the hype. In the mean time real damage is done to people in the form of needlessly adding stress to their lives.

[Jack Weber]

Always thought it was wwwwaaaayyy overblown...

Never got the shot...No regrets...

[Bonam]

The lesson that H1N1 should have taught people is to stop listening when government agencies tell you the sky is falling.

H1N1, Avian Flu, West Nile, SARS, Listeriosis, and on and on. We keep jumping from panic to panic over things that never turn out to be anywhere near as bad as the hype. In the mean time real damage is done to people in the form of needlessly adding stress to their lives.

Yep. Not to mention the whole "boy who cried wolf" problem... if a real pandemic ever comes, people will already be desensitized to these types of warnings and won't take them seriously.

[bloodyminded]

If you look at the fact that Winnipeg ran out of intensive care beds and ventilators...which pretty much never happens..you realize that this was no normal flu, and it could have been bad. This flu affected young, healthy people and they had to be put in medically induced comas for protection. In Winnipeg, they had to convert surgery recovery beds to intensive care beds, and transfer staff and surgeries between hospitals. At the peak, they even had to transfer some intensive care patients to other nearby small cities (Brandon, Winkler, Portage, Selkirk, Steinbach...each of which have 6 or fewer intensive care beds) because there were so many people in intensive care on ventilators that there was literally nowhere to put them.

We where hit worse than anyone, and this could have happened pretty much anywhere with the right conditions (most of these people were from northern reserves). What about those statistics?

This might answer itself, re the apparent apathy about how serious it could have been.