Pandemic over !

[Bryan]

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

The answer may well be in the question, but if past patterns of action are any indication, it probably has more to do with free plane rides into the city than how serious anything was.

[bloodyminded]

The answer may well be in the question, but if past patterns of action are any indication, it probably has more to do with free plane rides into the city than how serious anything was.

I was really only saying, in a more gentle way than is my unfortunate norm, that a lot of people don't give a shit about natives, because a lot of people are racist morons.

[Smallc]

The answer may well be in the question, but if past patterns of action are any indication, it probably has more to do with free plane rides into the city than how serious anything was.

Yes, I'm sure all the people who went into comas couldn't wait to get here to go shopping....and eat as Foody Goody.

[Smallc]

H1N1, Avian Flu, West Nile, SARS, Listeriosis, and on and on.

All of these things could have been much worse (and bird flu might very well be)...especially SARS. We were lucky that we were able to contain it, or else many many people would have died. This flu also would have killed many more people without the vaccine.

[Topaz]

Well, we didn't have to wait for the next "superbug" it out there and right on its center in Pakistan and India. I sure we'll quite a few by next spring. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100811/world/eu_britain_superbug

[GostHacked]

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.

This is a big problem to me. We are told almost yearly that a new super virus is going to wreck havoc. And when they fizzle out as it has been with the ones in the last decade people might be complacent when a real crisis hits.

We can place the hype blame on the governments and medical facilities. We have one in our warehouse, and in talking to the doctor here about it, he was pretty pissed the way the officials handled the so called crisis. He said, it's not much different from the regular flu, it was overblown and when the vaccines were available, there turned out to be a shortage because it was everyone must get it, then only the elderly and ill, then the rest of us, I will say the majority of people never got the shot for various reasons. If that is teh case then this pandemic was quite overblown.

[Michael Hardner]

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")

Doctors ? How about planners and bureaucrats ? Do they train doctors how to prepare to open physical locations, and how to organize a queuing system ?

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.

I will also look on the bright side.

[Sir Bandelot]

Easy, they hyped it up so much that people were running to the hospital at the first hint of feeling ill. Some people were scared. There was panic in some areas, if you recall. Mobs became unruly. For those of you with conveniently short memories.

People were clogging up the emergency wards when they just had a cold. That made it tougher to deal with the ones who actually had the flu.

Edited August 11, 2010 by Sir Bandelot

[GostHacked]

Easy, they hyped it up so much that people were running to the hospital at the first hint of feeling ill. Some people were scared. There was panic in some areas, if you recall. Mobs became unruly. For those of you with conveniently short memories.

People were clogging up the emergency wards when they just had a cold. That made it tougher to deal with the ones who actually had the flu.

Hypochondriacs I guess. I am rarely sick with a cold or with the flu. So for me it was not a priority to get a vaccine. The people who did need it were the sick and elderly. And those who were supposedly healthy dieing from H1N1 most likely had some other undiagnosed previous condition that made them more susceptible to the virus.

First the vaccine did not exist when the 'pandemic' hit.

Second, when the vaccine was available, there was not enough to go around. Not all the people that really needed it got it. And many who did not need the shot, did get it.

Third, by the time the 'pandemic' started to drop off the radar, others did not get the shot, crisis was over.

People with a simple cold end up going to the doctor. And the doc will tell you the same thing as last time, go to the pharmacy and pick up some cough/cold medicine. People with common ailments are clogging up the system when they know they can take care of that on their own.

[Michael Hardner]

Easy, they hyped it up so much that people were running to the hospital at the first hint of feeling ill. Some people were scared. There was panic in some areas, if you recall. Mobs became unruly. For those of you with conveniently short memories.

People were clogging up the emergency wards when they just had a cold. That made it tougher to deal with the ones who actually had the flu.

What are you saying about that ? All of those things would happen next time around, and need to be planned for.

[segnosaur]

You know, I'm really quite impressed.

When you first posted in this thread, you exhibited classic ignorance of the facts.

But here' you've gone quite beyond that. You've raised points that I've already debunkedearlier in the thread. I've dealt with most of the issues you raised back on the first page. (See, for example post #14: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16906&st=0&p=568652entry568652 )

Hypochondriacs I guess. I am rarely sick with a cold or with the flu. So for me it was not a priority to get a vaccine. The people who did need it were the sick and elderly. And those who were supposedly healthy dieing from H1N1 most likely had some other undiagnosed previous condition that made them more susceptible to the virus.

Ummm.... No.

From: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE66B6XA20100712

The Thorax study found that 55 percent of all hospital admissions and 59 percent of H1N1 deaths in hospital occurred in people with no previous health problems.

First the vaccine did not exist when the 'pandemic' hit.

Second, when the vaccine was available, there was not enough to go around. Not all the people that really needed it got it. And many who did not need the shot, did get it.

Third, by the time the 'pandemic' started to drop off the radar, others did not get the shot, crisis was over.

Ummm... repeating idiotic statements does not make them any truer.

As I pointed out in post #14:

- The vaccine was widely available to everyone by December 2009.

- Even though the disease may have peaked prior to that there were still over 3000 hospitalizations in the U.S. alone in the months that followed the widespread availability of the vaccine (and not just in the target groups). Hundreds more died.

That's thousands of people, even after the "crisis" was over, that were sick enough to be confined to the hospital, draining health care resources, who's problems could have been prevented if not for the idiotic attitudes of the vaccination ignorant. Thousands of people who could have gotten the vaccine because it was available to everyone by then, but chose not to, and as a result ended up hospitalized (not just stuck in some emergency room, but committed to hospital beds with serious illness.)

Perhaps you feel that all those people hospitalized after the vaccine was available to everyone (not just the priority people) just wanted to eat hotel food for a few days. Maybe the healthy people who died after the vaccine was available actually deserved to die.

Here's a suggestion: Before posting more idiotic nonsense, why don't you actually go back and read previous posts to see if the stuff your saying has previously been debunked. I can understand someone missing a post in a thread that's a dozen pages long, but this thread so far is only 3 pages.... you should be able to keep up.

Edited August 11, 2010 by segnosaur

[GostHacked]

You know, I'm really quite impressed.

When you first posted in this thread, you exhibited classic ignorance of the facts.

It's hardly ignorance, I looked at the bigger picture and it still fit in a wallet.

But here' you've gone quite beyond that. You've raised points that I've already debunkedearlier in the thread. I've dealt with most of the issues you raised back on the first page. (See, for example post #14: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16906&st=0&p=568652entry568652 )

From: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE66B6XA20100712

The Thorax study found that 55 percent of all hospital admissions and 59 percent of H1N1 deaths in hospital occurred in people with no previous health problems.

I said undiagnosed previous conditions. Meaning there was probably another factor involved that the doctors missed. The person could have had an unknown undiagnosed precondition that would have made them more susceptible to H1N1.

It's pure speculation on my part.

As I pointed out in post #14:

- The vaccine was widely available to everyone by December 2009.

That's great because the pandemic was in full swing according to officials long before that. And there were shortages from Sept 2009 when it was introduced. That carried on for some time.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=vaccine+shortage+h1n1&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

- Even though the disease may have peaked prior to that there were still over 3000 hospitalizations in the U.S. alone in the months that followed the widespread availability of the vaccine (and not just in the target groups). Hundreds more died.

Since it had peaked before the vaccine was ever introduced means that says to me that this specific strain was not a lot to worry about. It was simply overblown big time.

That's thousands of people, even after the "crisis" was over, that were sick enough to be confined to the hospital, draining health care resources, who's problems could have been prevented if not for the idiotic attitudes of the vaccination ignorant. Thousands of people who could have gotten the vaccine because it was available to everyone by then, but chose not to, and as a result ended up hospitalized (not just stuck in some emergency room, but committed to hospital beds with serious illness.)

Perhaps you feel that all those people hospitalized after the vaccine was available to everyone (not just the priority people) just wanted to eat hotel food for a few days.

Well after the initial panic, officials changed their stance and said that only the sick, elderly and young children should get the shot. So with the people who had any amount of reasoning in them, decided to hold off and let the priority group get the shot, even BEFORE officials indicated such. We were told more would be available soon. There was shortages of the vaccine early on because of many people getting the shot when they did not need it.

Maybe the healthy people who died after the vaccine was available actually deserved to die.

Maybe, but that is not the view I hold.

Here's a suggestion: Before posting more idiotic nonsense, why don't you actually go back and read previous posts to see if the stuff your saying has previously been debunked. I can understand someone missing a post in a thread that's a dozen pages long, but this thread so far is only 3 pages.... you should be able to keep up.

There was another large thread about H1N1 ..... many of us even at the start knew it was not going to be a big deal. The numbers told us so regardless of the number of healthy people dying from it.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE66B6XA20100712

From your article it does talk about those who are at risk, but aside from the title, there is no mention of the healthy people dying other than the one paragraph near the end of the article.

The Thorax study found that 55 percent of all hospital admissions and 59 percent of H1N1 deaths in hospital occurred in people with no previous health problems. Just under half of patients had underlying conditions, mostly asthma.

55% of ALL admissions

59% of H1N1 deaths with no problems, but yet say that 50% of those had asthma. So 1/2 of 59% means about 28% of those who had died from H1N1 had a previous condition, asthma. I could be reading this wrong.

Edited August 11, 2010 by GostHacked

[GostHacked]

What are you saying about that ? All of those things would happen next time around, and need to be planned for.

Say it ain't so!

[Topaz]

I gotta say this, I wouldn't be surprised if its all planned to made money and reduce the population of the world. There's too many people to fed, especially in Africa, who are starving to death in parts of the continent. How much money did Harper's friend who owned the company that produced the vaccine in Canada? Most of these virus are man-made that somehow escape and get out into the population. I know this may not be reality to some, but, they never did find that pig that started the flu in Mexico.

[GostHacked]

I gotta say this, I wouldn't be surprised if its all planned to made money and reduce the population of the world. There's too many people to fed, especially in Africa, who are starving to death in parts of the continent. How much money did Harper's friend who owned the company that produced the vaccine in Canada? Most of these virus are man-made that somehow escape and get out into the population. I know this may not be reality to some, but, they never did find that pig that started the flu in Mexico.

I seriously believe there is no food shortage problem. We do have a food distribution problem. But as the planet's population grows, it will become an issue in the future.

[Oleg Bach]

Just like animals on the farm we lined up and took our shots for some strange disease that never materialized - and the vet and his drug supply grew rich and more powerful on our fear.

[Sir Bandelot]

What are you saying about that ? All of those things would happen next time around, and need to be planned for.

Yeah, they should be. But somebody was saying, Oh, the hospitals were full! It was a bad time." And it was. But I know that a large percentage of people showing up at the hospital didn't have the H1N1. But they were scared. Or they were scared for thei kids, whatever.

Next time, try not to hype it up so mauch that people panic.

Oh yeah, the idea that they hadn't developed the vaccine yet, but quickly produced it and put it out there, does not comfort me. You know how lethal it could be, improperly tested? I wouldn't put that crap in my arm.

In the end they threw away a million doses. But still, ching ching, bling bling

[segnosaur]

I gotta say this, I wouldn't be surprised if its all planned to made money...

Well you should be surprised. Flu vaccines are not a big money-maker for drug companies. I'm not necessarily saying they loose money, but profit margins are not exactly great. The market for vaccines is only around 2% of the size of the global market for drugs, mutations to the flu virus require changes to the vaccine every year, and unused does can sometimes get thrown out (which also harms profits.) Furthermore, its often governments who purchase the vaccines, and the single purchaser model gives them the ability to influence prices.

The fact is, there used to be dozens of companies involved in the manufacture of the flu vaccine. Now, there are only a few (at one point there were only 2). If there is so much money in flu vaccines, why aren't more companies involved in this biological gold rush?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/flushot.asp

How much money did Harper's friend who owned the company that produced the vaccine in Canada?

Ummm... first of all, do you have any, you know, PROOF that people connected to Harper benefited from the production and sale of flu vaccine?

Secondly, if I remember correctly, Canada's flu vaccine came from a company called GlaxoSmithKline. This is a publically traded company, and its based in Britain. There is no single "owner of the company", and its doubtful that any Canadian owns a signicant part of the company.

Most of these virus are man-made that somehow escape and get out into the population.

Ummm... proof?

The fact is, new viruses and strains of viruses appear from a number of well known biological processes, including mutation and gene transference. Its all natural... no need for some evil scientist to make it happen.

I know this may not be reality to some,

Ummm... its not really reality to anyone. It may however be fantasy pretending to be reality.

but, they never did find that pig that started the flu in Mexico.

Ummm, so?

Lets pretend you're right, The fact that you tend to make unsupported statements bordering on insane conspiracy theories not withstanding... All I can say is, so what? There are probably millions of pigs in Mexico. There were probably hundreds if not thousands of them that would have caught the swine version of the flu. Why exactly do you have to assume that there were "evil scientists" involved when a more rational, likely explanation is that there were just too many animals involved to identify "patient zero"?

[segnosaur]

Yeah, they should be. But somebody was saying, Oh, the hospitals were full! It was a bad time." And it was. But I know that a large percentage of people showing up at the hospital didn't have the H1N1. But they were scared. Or they were scared for thei kids, whatever.

Ummm... keep in mind that it wasn't just emergency rooms that were being overwhelmed. Hundreds if not thousands of people were admitted to the hospital due to the flu. (Smallc paints a pretty good description of this.) These were people who typically did have H1N1, and needed to be admitted, not just people who "got scared".

Oh yeah, the idea that they hadn't developed the vaccine yet, but quickly produced it and put it out there, does not comfort me. You know how lethal it could be, improperly tested?

Umm.. the H1N1 vaccine was tested. Multiple times. Both for safety, and for its ability to create antibodies. These tests often appeared in peer reviewed journals (or were run by governments). And many of the tests were done before the vaccines were given to the general public.

Here's a study that was done on over 2000 patients: http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa0908535

Here's on that was done on over 100 pregnant women: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00963430

Here are a couple of studies done on over 600 children and adults for the nasal version: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/168418.php

Here's a test involving another 350 people: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2809%2962039-0/abstract

I could go on, but why bother? Just in 5 minutes I've found tests that were done on over 3000 people.

I wouldn't put that crap in my arm.

Ooooo... big bad evil medicine. Big bad evil drug companies. Only testing vaccines on thousands of people.

By the way, sarcasm was intended.

I wish I could say this was just "Darwin at work" (i.e. kill off the dumb people, and let the smarter people survive). Unfortunately, as I stated before, individuals who fail to get vaccinated can put other people at risk (e.g. people who can't get vaccinated do to their age, or allergies) by compromising herd immunity

In the end they threw away a million doses. But still, ching ching, bling bling

Yup, and by vaccinating the people that they did, they probably prevented hundreds if not thousands of hospitalizations and a bunch of deaths.

I think the best take on the whole "companies earn profits on vaccines" arguments was made on the TV show House M.D.

Dr. Gregory House: [examining a baby] No fever, glands normal. Missing her vaccination dates.

Young Mother: We're not vaccinating.

Dr. Gregory House: Think they don't work?

Young Mother: I think some multinational pharmaceutical company wants me to think they work. Pad their bottom line.

Dr. Gregory House: ... You know another really good business? Teeny tiny baby coffins. You can get 'em in frog green, fire-engine red, really. The antibodies in yummy mummy only protect the kid for six months, which is why these companies think they can gouge you. They think that you'll spend whatever they ask to keep your kid alive. Wanna change things? Prove 'em wrong. Few hundred parents like you decide they'd rather let their kid die than cough up forty bucks for a vaccination, believe me, prices will drop really fast!

[Guest TrueMetis]

Ooooo... big bad evil medicine. Big bad evil drug companies. Only testing vaccines on thousands of people.

Big bad... cause for the dramatic decrease in infant mortality and premature deaths. Hygiene plays a part but vaccines may just be the one of the most important, if not the most important reasons for the decline in people dying due to common diseases. How many people die from measles, mumps, or rubella anymore? Unfortunately that number will go up because of all the fear from the tiny bit of mercury that used to be in a few vaccinations.

[bloodyminded]

Ummm... keep in mind that it wasn't just emergency rooms that were being overwhelmed. Hundreds if not thousands of people were admitted to the hospital due to the flu. (Smallc paints a pretty good description of this.) These were people who typically did have H1N1, and needed to be admitted, not just people who "got scared".

Umm.. the H1N1 vaccine was tested. Multiple times. Both for safety, and for its ability to create antibodies. These tests often appeared in peer reviewed journals (or were run by governments). And many of the tests were done before the vaccines were given to the general public.

Here's a study that was done on over 2000 patients: http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa0908535

Here's on that was done on over 100 pregnant women: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00963430

Here are a couple of studies done on over 600 children and adults for the nasal version: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/168418.php

Here's a test involving another 350 people: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2809%2962039-0/abstract

I could go on, but why bother? Just in 5 minutes I've found tests that were done on over 3000 people.

Ooooo... big bad evil medicine. Big bad evil drug companies. Only testing vaccines on thousands of people.

By the way, sarcasm was intended.

I wish I could say this was just "Darwin at work" (i.e. kill off the dumb people, and let the smarter people survive). Unfortunately, as I stated before, individuals who fail to get vaccinated can put other people at risk (e.g. people who can't get vaccinated do to their age, or allergies) by compromising herd immunity

Yup, and by vaccinating the people that they did, they probably prevented hundreds if not thousands of hospitalizations and a bunch of deaths.

I think the best take on the whole "companies earn profits on vaccines" arguments was made on the TV show House M.D.

Dr. Gregory House: [examining a baby] No fever, glands normal. Missing her vaccination dates.

Young Mother: We're not vaccinating.

Dr. Gregory House: Think they don't work?

Young Mother: I think some multinational pharmaceutical company wants me to think they work. Pad their bottom line.

Dr. Gregory House: ... You know another really good business? Teeny tiny baby coffins. You can get 'em in frog green, fire-engine red, really. The antibodies in yummy mummy only protect the kid for six months, which is why these companies think they can gouge you. They think that you'll spend whatever they ask to keep your kid alive. Wanna change things? Prove 'em wrong. Few hundred parents like you decide they'd rather let their kid die than cough up forty bucks for a vaccination, believe me, prices will drop really fast!

A good post, and it inclines me towards another thought: what is the hysteria surrounding vaccines generally? (ie "I wouldn't put that crap in my arm.") There have been problems, in numerous capacities, with vaccines...but that's true for everything you could name, both inside and outside medical science. Does anyone truly not believe that vaccines have done a tremedous amount of good????

Edited August 12, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Sir Bandelot]

Umm.. the H1N1 vaccine was tested. Multiple times. Both for safety, and for its ability to create antibodies. These tests often appeared in peer reviewed journals (or were run by governments). And many of the tests were done before the vaccines were given to the general public.

Unfortunately, as I stated before, individuals who fail to get vaccinated can put other people at risk (e.g. people who can't get vaccinated do to their age, or allergies) by compromising herd immunity

Yeah I'm sure you would lke to see everyone forced to take the cure. Some kinda pharmaco-nazi, or something? You got shares in the company?

- I did not say it was untested. I said it was not tested as thouroghly as it should be, as done with other vaccines. And there were plenty of medical professionals who raised that concern, at the time.

We had this conversation during the pandemic, you and I. Remember? Part of the debate was on how dangerous this really was, based on statistical evidence available at the time from the Southern hemisphere. During the winter in South America and Australia, the level of flu outbreak was very mild. Yes, I remember the conversation, segnosaur. You wlikeere convincethoroughlyd it was deadly and everyone should get the shot. And I remember telling you, we would re-visit it in 6 months, to see who was right.

Well, here we are.

[Pliny]

Well, a negative can't be proven so we will never know how many people didn't die because of the vaccine.

I suggest looking at the statistics of all flu deaths per annum allowing for yearly variability, that is, within the parameters of good years/bad years and see if there is any significant change. If there is no change in total deaths I would conclude that the pandemic was an overly protective medical system replete with alarmists and political/economic opportunists.

Does anyone have those statistics? I know I have researched it before when the bird flu hit and found no difference in annual death statistics.

You would never know that anything was different just looking at that statistic. Maybe the next pandemic we should just let it take it's course.

The boy crying wolf syndrome is a real problem.

Edited August 12, 2010 by Pliny

[segnosaur]

Well, a negative can't be proven so we will never know how many people didn't die because of the vaccine.

I suggest looking at the statistics of all flu deaths per annum allowing for yearly variability, that is, within the parameters of good years/bad years and see if there is any significant change. If there is no change in total deaths I would conclude that the pandemic was an overly protective medical system replete with alarmists and political/economic opportunists.

Its not really possible to judge the effectiveness of a flu vaccine by comparing annual flu deaths for a number of reasons.

First of all, we've been vaccinating against the flu for years. You end up comparing one vaccinated population (e.g. those vaccinated in 2009 against H1N1) with those vaccinated in other years against other strains. In order to do a 'proper' comparison you need a control group (e.g. a totally unvaccinated population, under roughly the same economic/social/geographic conditions)

Secondly, there are other factors (such as the development of antiviral drugs, or improved methods of handling secondary infections) that might skew the results.

You would never know that anything was different just looking at that statistic. Maybe the next pandemic we should just let it take it's course.

Yeah, lets let hundreds if not thousands of people die all in the name of an "experiment".

[segnosaur]

A good post, and it inclines me towards another thought: what is the hysteria surrounding vaccines generally? (ie "I wouldn't put that crap in my arm.")

Well personally I think the root cause is that people are not taught the act of critical thinking in school. They never learn how to judge the credibility of an information source, how to filter out bad data, and how to judge risks/rewards. And they never learn to think logically or apply Occam's razor to any situation.

So, instead of people listening to what respectable scientists write in peer-reviewed journals (possibly the most credible source of information), they listen to anecdotes (not understanding how worthless they are), they listen to quack medical 'experts' (who have no real medical qualifications) and they listen to general idiots like Jenny McCarthy and Alex Jones.

So when some quack posts "vaccines are dangerous" on its web site (even if that person has no proof to back up their claims) they are mistakenly given the same credibility as a study where hundreds of patients are examined in a proper double blind study.