Page 1 of 1
How widespread is H1N1?
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 4:27 pm
by gchristie
Very unscientific approach here, but curious as to how widespread the virus is.
Right now I know 4 people that have/had it. How many do you know of?
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 7:30 pm
by caranorn
0!
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:14 pm
by Hobbes
One so far - but a friend of a friend. Tibet seems like a hotspot

Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:29 pm
by arsan
caranorn wrote:0!
+1!
Here in Spain next week will start massive vaccination campaign: 10 million people will be getting it
Pharmaceutical companies must be happy... No global crisis for them
Personally i'm not worried at all.
I bet this will not be much worse than any other year's flu.

Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:14 pm
by caranorn
Some people at work already got vaccinated, I'm rather sceptic though. But the problem is that I work with handicaped kids right now, so maybe I'll get innoculated after all as I would not want to spread anything to them...
But mostly I think it's hype, and a lot of money for the big medical companies...
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:01 am
by Le Ricain
Here in Scotland, we had an estimated 19,200 cases of H1N1 recorded at local GP's last week. Of these 176 were admitted to hospital and of these 4 people died.
In England, during the summer the Labour candidate for the Norwich North parliamentary seat was admitted to hospital with H1N1 in the middle of the campaign. He did not get out before election day, but it did not matter as the Conservatives won the election.
As I am considered someone at risk, I get my flu shot on Tuesday.
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:27 am
by Pocus
0 and counting

Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:39 am
by dooya
Le Ricain wrote:[...]
As I am considered someone at risk, [...]
You are pregnant? Congratulations.
Zero flue cases among the people I know (which is, however, also very close to zero

)
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:22 pm
by Jim-NC
I know of 2 from the summer, none this fall.
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:36 pm
by gchristie
Now it's up to 6 people, and sadly one has died. A previously very healthy young man of 27.
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:32 pm
by Mickey3D
1 here (my wife).
Seems the disease is spreading very fast in Switzerland.
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 4:36 pm
by Adlertag
And now, in France, with the vaccination campaign growing, we are beginning to see the first Guillain–Barré syndrome...
The people are upset by the use of additive (adjuvant) to help the vaccine to me more efficient but then we don't understand why pregnant women (for example) may benefit from the version without additive (thus less risky) and others (like common man) will have to take the vaccine with additive...
Probably because, with additive, you can prepare more vaccine and at a lower cost.

Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 7:15 pm
by Cat Lord
The documentation available in Switzerland on the government site is very complete and clear, for anyone with a bit of background in epidemiology (which is my case):
http://www.bag.admin.ch/influenza/06411/index.html?lang=fr
Vaccination will start the 16th of November, and with us having a baby under 6 months old, I will make sure we get jabs as early as possible.
It takes 21 days for your immune system to grow up antibodies with the vaccine. And if the jab is done in two doses (I think it's the case in Switzerland) you get 100% immunity only 21 days after the second jab. That's 42 days, i.e. Xmas time.
If the epidemic peak is at the beginning of next year (which is likely as this is a common pattern for the flu), people will rush to get the jab just after XMas, which would be much too late, and which would seriously desorganise the vaccination campaign.
My advice to anyone here:
- Look at the stats in the document above. The chances to get any very rare side effect from the vaccine are much lower than getting the flu in its most dangerous form (which can kill healthy young person without any medical problem, contrary to the normal flu, however rare the occurence is)
- Get yourself vaccinated as early as you can.
Cheers,
Cat
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 7:53 pm
by dooya
In Germany, it was announced last week that there will be not enough vaccine to vaccinate a large majority of the public right now, but that they expect to get enough of it by March 2010. When do they expect the epidemic peak?

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:56 am
by tc237
H1N1 is the worst pandemic ever!!!
or at least until the Health Nationalization Bill is passed.
There's an app for that...
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:09 pm
by gchristie
Or almost.
Engineers from Google are working on a product known as Google Flu Trends
http://www.google.org/flutrends/. This is a very simple, yet elegant and important application of what might be termed predictive analytics.
The product, which launched last year, works by analyzing searches that have correlated strongly in the past with flu statistics as put out by the CDC and other governmental agencies. The advantage of this is that whereas the CDC typically works on a 10 to 14 day lag before new flu statistics are published, the Flu Trends numbers can be turned around literally overnight. Flu Trends does not predict the future per se, so much as it "predicts the present", as the engineers describe it.
To read more on this go to
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/how-swine-flus-been-spreading.html
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:42 pm
by dooya
gchristie wrote:Or almost.
Engineers from Google are working on a product known as Google Flu Trends
http://www.google.org/flutrends/. This is a very simple, yet elegant and important application of what might be termed predictive analytics.
The product, which launched last year, works by analyzing searches that have correlated strongly in the past with flu statistics as put out by the CDC and other governmental agencies. The advantage of this is that whereas the CDC typically works on a 10 to 14 day lag before new flu statistics are published, the Flu Trends numbers can be turned around literally overnight. Flu Trends does not predict the future per se, so much as it "predicts the present", as the engineers describe it.
To read more on this go to
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/how-swine-flus-been-spreading.html
Ahh, good to know that the flu does not spread in areas with no internet connection.

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:58 pm
by gchristie
Yes, whatever you do do not go online! Or at least make sure you wear a mask.
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:57 pm
by Taillebois
There's a 110% correlation between those scared of Swine Flu and those scared of Global Warming.
I've found that if I go into a crowded bar, such as here in Cheltenham where it's been horse race weekend, a quick sneeze (or fake sneeze) clears the bar queue and makes for rapid drink service. Just do it when the bar staff are out of ear shot.
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:32 pm
by arsan
Taillebois wrote:There's a 110% correlation between those scared of Swine Flu and those scared of Global Warming.
I've found that if I go into a crowded bar, such as here in Cheltenham where it's been horse race weekend, a quick sneeze (or fake sneeze) clears the bar queue and makes for rapid drink service. Just do it when the bar staff are out of ear shot.
Better left if at 99%
At least i am much more scared of global warming than flu

Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:37 pm
by McNaughton
Well one has to then think if we did not 'over-react' then what would indeed happen? Just because there are no massive numbers of deaths reported does not mean that all efforts were wasted (how do you prove either way? Either there was no threat at all, or all efforts done made sure to eliminate the threat!).
IMO, sure, we spent some money, and maybe the money was not 'required', but is it better to be sure that we don't have a pandemic, or take the risk and save a few dollars? To me, this is also the agrument of Global Warming.
We have two choices, and two possible results.
We do nothing, or we do something.
Nothing happens, or something happens.
If we do something, and nothing happens, the worst we are is out money.
If we do something, and something happens, when it does, the effects are not catastrophic.
If we do nothing, and nothing happens, we saved money.
If we do nothing, and something happens, we are in a pickle.
Basically, if we do nothing, the results are extremes. Either everything is the same, or everything is in chaos. If we do something, the results are much less extreme on each end (the good is less good, but the bad is less bad).
Are you a gambler?
Remember, in gambling the house usually wins, and with pandemics and climate change, nature is the house, we are merely the players.
Posted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:48 pm
by caranorn
McNaughton, you are forgetting the possible side effects of innoculation. That means if there is no deadly pandemic and we innoculate everyone, we will not just have lost money but also lives. Not to mention lost trust...
Remember, "cry wolf"...
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:44 pm
by Jamescott
I'm in Minnesota. Back in September/October the flu hit pretty hard. I know of at least 10 people that had the H1N1 flu. Only one case was serious where an 11 year old boy ended up in the hospital for a few days. He had both the flu and bronchitis at the same time. Everything turned out okay. I don't know of anyone getting hit recently.