PDA

View Full Version : Swine Flu


Corbet
10-20-2009, 10:27 AM
I got it. Its awesome. Really can't tell the difference between it and any other flu. Can't wait to see what the media calls the next flu....

FJBRADY
10-20-2009, 10:30 AM
I got it. Its awesome. Really can't tell the difference between it and any other flu. Can't wait to see what the media calls the next flu....

That's a bummer I hope you feel better soon, I have a Dr friend and he says it is no worse than the typical flu and it is all been sensationalized by the media.

If you have had the Swine flu....no need to get the shot at this point.

Corbet
10-20-2009, 10:35 AM
Ih8themedia

Bikeman
10-20-2009, 10:36 AM
My 3 y.o. got it. It's better than the reg. flu. No puke or messy pants to clean up this time. He is still coughing after 3 weeks tho.

Chris
10-20-2009, 10:50 AM
Not to be contrarian but some folks I know that have had it disagree. Like any flu it varies from one person to the next. I know a couple young, healthy guys who were down for 5 days and miserable. If you do get it get some Tamiflu early on and it won't be too bad.

Hulk
10-20-2009, 11:20 AM
My understanding is that it can mimic pneumonia, especially in the lungs.

Corbet, how do you know you have it instead of some other kind of flu? Is there a test?

farnhamstj
10-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Do you think you can catch it on an airplane? :D
MMM...bacon armrests.

Shark Bait
10-20-2009, 12:04 PM
My understanding is that it can mimic pneumonia, especially in the lungs.

Corbet, how do you know you have it instead of some other kind of flu? Is there a test?

Yes. There is a test. What often happens is it weakens the immune system and bacterial infection comes in right behind it.

It is transmitted airborne. From what I've heard you can get it if you're within 10 feet of someone who has it. I would say you can get it on an airplane.

I'm thinking of getting the shot, since I'm on a plane so much.

DaveInDenver
10-20-2009, 12:07 PM
My understanding is that it can mimic pneumonia, especially in the lungs.

Corbet, how do you know you have it instead of some other kind of flu? Is there a test?
There's a quick flu test that looks for antigens in your snot. If you have the flu then your body will produce an immune response that's easier to see than the virus itself. The problem with this test is it's about 75% accurate, but it's immediate.

They can also do fast lab tests that can tell if it's (1) really flu and (b) if it's A or B, this is an overnight result. They have a more complete test to identify the strain and that takes longer, a week or more. In both lab cases they incubate the virus from the swab the doctor takes.

Due to the doctor's office inaccuracy test it's actually less common than you think to be sick with the actual flu. There are enough false positives that flus are often misdiagnosed. I've only been sick with a real flu once and the level of pain is a definite step up from a bad cold that mimics flu symptoms.

And you are right, the flu creates a lot of respiratory problems, which is why the vast bulk of people do not die from the flu itself but from pneumonia or other complications. So the best defense to the flu is simply to be as healthy as possible so that your body can fight it off.

This is part of the reason why I don't get the flu shot each year. There are no such thing as 'dead' viruses. All viruses are technically dead until they find a host. What they do in flu shots is make inactive the flu virus using heat or UV. Inactive is different than dead for a virus. Inactive just means that it will not reactivate in the host (you), but it's not fundamentally different than the active virus. But like anything it's a manufactured product and nothing is perfect, so there are often what's called hot lots, in which a batch of shots did not get completely inactivated. This is just like bypassing the airplane and injecting the flu right into your blood. You get very sick. Also if the strain does not match the flu shot, then there is no additional immunity in your body anyway. And with everyone getting flu shots the virus mutates faster, so the more people who get flu shots the faster the effectiveness reduces. Thus it's no guarantee and does not change the necessity to (1) eat right & take your vitamins (b) avoid sick people and (3) attack the disease and illness if you do get it (the virus you catch may end up not being the same as the flu shot and you'll be just as contagious and sick anyway). Flu shots should be reserved for medical people who see higher than typical exposure and at risk people. Everyone else should develop natural immunity as they become exposed, this would slow down the mutation of the virus and make inoculations less necessary.

wesintl
10-20-2009, 12:07 PM
I'm pretty sure I had it and soph did too. It was 2 days of a mild fever 100-100.5 and soreness for 5. That was it. IMHO much better than the 5 days of 102+ with the bird variety.

Just like everything it does vary but it seemed to be a lot less miserable.

Hulk
10-20-2009, 12:31 PM
I don't get the flu shot each year. There are no such thing as 'dead' viruses. All viruses are technically dead until they find a host. What they do in flu shots is make inactive the flu virus using heat or UV. Inactive is different than dead for a virus. Inactive just means that it will not reactivate in the host (you), but it's not fundamentally different than the active virus. But like anything it's a manufactured product and nothing is perfect, so there are often what's called hot lots, in which a batch of shots did not get completely inactivated. This is just like bypassing the airplane and injecting the flu right into your blood. You get very sick.

This is not directly related to the flu virus vaccine, but it is worth reading:

Wired Magazine: An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All (http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/all/1)

Here's a small portion:Risk is the idea that fuels the anti-vaccine movement — that parents should be allowed to opt out, because it is their right to evaluate risk for their own children. It is also the idea that underlies the CDC’s vaccination schedule — that the risk to public health is too great to allow individuals, one by one, to make decisions that will impact their communities. (The concept of herd immunity is key here: It holds that, in diseases passed from person to person, it is more difficult to maintain a chain of infection when large numbers of a population are immune.)


Risk is also the motivating idea in Offit’s life. This is a man, after all, who opted to give his own two children — now teenagers — the flu vaccine before it was recommended for their age group. Why? Because the risk of harm if his children got sick was too great. Offit, like everyone else, will do anything to protect his children. And he wants Americans to be fully educated about risk and not hoodwinked into thinking that dropping vaccines keeps their children safe. “The choice not to get a vaccine is not a choice to take no risk,” he says. “It’s just a choice to take a different risk, and we need to be better about saying, ‘Here’s what that different risk looks like.’ Dying of Hib meningitis is a horrible, ugly way to die.”


Getting the measles is no walk in the park, either — not for you or those who come near you. In 2005, a 17-year-old Indiana girl got infected on a trip to Bucharest, Romania. On the return flight home, she was congested, coughing, and feverish but had no rash. The next day, without realizing she was contagious, she went to a church gathering of 500 people. She was there just a few hours. Of the 500 people present, about 450 had either been vaccinated or had developed a natural immunity. Two people in that group had vaccination failure and got measles. Thirty-two people who had not been vaccinated and therefore had no resistance to measles also got sick. Did the girl encounter each of these people face-to-face in her brief visit to the picnic? No. All you have to do to get the measles is to inhabit the airspace of a contagious person within two hours of them being there.


The frightening implications of this kind of anecdote were illustrated by a 2002 study published in The Journal of Infectious Diseases. Looking at 3,292 cases of measles in the Netherlands, the study found that the risk of contracting the disease was lower if you were completely unvaccinated and living in a highly vaccinated community than if you were completely vaccinated and living in a relatively unvaccinated community. Why? Because vaccines don’t always take. What does that mean? You can’t minimize your individual risk unless your herd, your friends and neighbors, also buy in.
I get the flu vaccine every year. My reasons: a) In 2003, I had pneumonia, and I was horribly sick for 3 weeks. Anything I can do to stave off respiratory illness is worth doing (for me). b) Staying healthy is good, but I don't get anywhere near as much sleep as I should. Yeah, I should change my habits, but until I do, I'll get a little help from science when I can to keep me healthy.

Corbet
10-20-2009, 12:39 PM
Corbet, how do you know you have it instead of some other kind of flu? Is there a test?

Went to the doctor and she told me so. But yes there was a mucus test done to confirm.

DaveInDenver
10-20-2009, 12:47 PM
I don't claim I would not inoculate a kid at all for anything, just that I would not give an annual flu shot to anyone who did not have respiratory issues that would make pneumonia more than a serious annoyance. I also think creating a public shot for things that are not actively mutating in the population, like maybe polio or MMR, are fine to keep it from becoming dominant again.

But the flu virus is being pressured to mutate faster because of the shots and so more strains are circulating now than 100 years ago. That just increases the chances of them becoming resistant to neuraminidase inhibiting drugs or finding one that humans are really naturally and dangerously susceptible. Also each shot has enough additional stuff to increase it's response that I think balancing the number of shots I get in my life against the risk for each disease needs to be considered. So I got a few shots as a kid and plan to have a few later in life as I age, so my middle years I figure I will avoid getting an annual dose of mercury and a period of immune system stress and instead just do my best to deal with it. Like I say, it's a conscious decision that I think getting a flu cold once every 10 years is preferred to the alternative exposure to junk. It's like you get an x-ray of your torso every year to minimize the chance of getting stomach or liver cancer, but the increase in x-ray exposure has a measurable increase in risk of getting another cancer in general. So I believe that 40 annual doses of Thimerosal has more side effects long term than a few bouts of flu between 20 and 60. When I'm 75 with COPD, yup probably consider getting a flu shot. Not at 38 and fairly healthy, though.

I think we're over confident in what the flu shot does. It's not like a shot in the arm means you can walk through the flu ward in a hospital with confidence. It just reduces the chance that a handful (which I admit can be judged to be currently dominant) of 10,000 strains will take hold in your body. Your immune system is still fighting off the other 9,995 potential viruses that sees. Also the virus that was in the flu shot will mutate (science tells us that) and find some way to reproduce (sorta like a teenager). That is the difference between the measles virus and the flu viruses, there are thousands more flu viruses and they are much more efficient at finding ways around inoculations.

pmccumber
10-20-2009, 10:02 PM
Yes. There is a test. What often happens is it weakens the immune system and bacterial infection comes in right behind it.

It is transmitted airborne. From what I've heard you can get it if you're within 10 feet of someone who has it. I would say you can get it on an airplane.

I'm thinking of getting the shot, since I'm on a plane so much.

Swine flu is particularly virulent in that it is so easily transmitted airborne.

I saw a quote in The Onion today from a parent who said "No way I'd have given my kid a flu shot. Even if he hadn't died from measles."

I'm getting vaccinated for it. Absolutely. I'm interested in the debate about how the vaccine is developed but quite frankly I cannot figure out anyone who chooses to develop immunities by getting the disease.

DaveInDenver
10-21-2009, 12:22 PM
CDC stopped asking for individual state's results in July, so says CBS.

Swine Flu Cases Overestimated? (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews_investigates/main5404829.shtml)

corsair23
10-21-2009, 12:37 PM
CDC stopped asking for individual state's results in July, so says CBS.

Swine Flu Cases Overestimated? (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews_investigates/main5404829.shtml)


I liked this blog entry :hill:


by ducklivers October 21, 2009 2:14 PM EDT I'm not 100% certain. But I think this is George Bush's fault. He should have anticipated there would be Swine Flu coming out of Mexico and acted early before leaving office to mitigate its deleterious impact on society. Katrina was his fault for not signing the Kyoto Accords. H1N1 is his fault for not building the border fence higher.

H1N1 is a problem and will be Obama's Katrina.

DaveInDenver
10-23-2009, 10:22 AM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19172691

Moro JR, Iwata M, von Andriano UH.

Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA. j_rodrigo_mora@harvard.hms.edu

Vitamins are essential constituents of our diet that have long been known to influence the immune system. Vitamins A and D have received particular attention in recent years as these vitamins have been shown to have an unexpected and crucial effect on the immune response. We present and discuss our current understanding of the essential roles of vitamins in modulating a broad range of immune processes, such as lymphocyte activation and proliferation, T-helper-cell differentiation, tissue-specific lymphocyte homing, the production of specific antibody isotypes and regulation of the immune response. Finally, we discuss the clinical potential of vitamin A and D metabolites for modulating tissue-specific immune responses and for preventing and/or treating inflammation and autoimmunity.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19487109

Fatemi SH, Folsom TD, Reutiman TJ, Abu-Odeh D, Mori S, Huang H, Oishi K.

Department of Psychiatry, Division of Neuroscience Research, University of Minnesota Medical School, 420 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. fatem002@umn.edu

Prenatal viral infection has been associated with the development of schizophrenia and autism. Our laboratory has previously shown that viral infection causes deleterious effects on brain structure and function in mouse offspring following late first trimester (E9) and late second trimester (E18) administration of influenza virus. We hypothesized that middle second trimester infection (E16) in mice may lead to a different pattern of brain gene expression and structural defects in the developing offspring. C57BL6 mice were infected on E16 with a sublethal dose of human influenza virus or sham-infected using vehicle solution. Male offspring of the infected mice were collected at P0, P14, P35, and P56, their brains removed and cerebella dissected and flash frozen. Microarray, DTI and MRI scanning, as well as qRT-PCR and SDS-PAGE and western blotting analyses were performed to detect differences in gene expression and brain atrophy. Expression of several genes associated with myelination, including Mbp, Mag, and Plp1 were found to be altered, as were protein levels of Mbp, Mag, and DM20. Brain imaging revealed significant atrophy in cerebellum at P14, reduced fractional anisotropy in white matter of the right internal capsule at P0, and increased fractional anisotropy in white matter in corpus callosum at P14 and right middle cerebellar peduncle at P56. We propose that maternal infection in mouse impacts myelination genes.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15337163

Beck MA, Handy J, Levander OA.

Department of Pediatrics and Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, NC 27599, USA. melinda_beck@unc.edu

The emergence of new infectious diseases and old diseases with new pathogenic properties is a burgeoning worldwide problem. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) are just two of the most widely reported recent emerging infectious diseases. What are the factors that contribute to the rapid evolution of viral species? Various hypotheses have been proposed, all involving opportunities for virus spread (for example, agricultural practices, climate changes, rainforest clearing or air travel). However, the nutritional status of the host, until recently, has not been considered a contributing factor to the emergence of infectious disease. In this review, we show that host nutritional status can influence not only the host response to the pathogen, but can also influence the genetic make-up of the viral genome. This latter finding markedly changes our concept of host-pathogen interactions and creates a new paradigm for the study of such phenomena.

nakman
12-08-2009, 04:10 PM
Too much ado about swine flu?

Tuesday, December 8, 2009, 1:46pm MST

Colorado employers who worried that a swine flu outbreak might leave their business operations bedridden at the end of the year can breath a sigh of relief through their surgical-filter masks. A report from National Public Radio Tuesday says the flu pandemic is turning out to be much milder than expected.

Largely based on an analysis from the journal Public Library of Science, the report said only 8 percent of the population has gotten sick with H1N1 (swine) flu so far.

Ultimately, between 10 and 20 percent of the population might become ill with H1N1 before the flu season is over— meaning the flu season will be worse than average, but better than expected.

In May, it was projected that the swine flu would kill one out of every 100 people who contracted the virus. But Dr. Marc Lipsitch, a professor of epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health and co-author of the latest analysis, said those estimates were “probably more than 20-fold too high.”

In fact, the death rate from swine flu has been lower than the average flu season, Lipsitch noted. One risk-communications expert told NPR that the Centers for Disease Control has been reluctant to admit the pandemic has been considerably milder than expected because that might mean fewer people would get vaccinated and that more people would die.

That raises question about whether public health officials and the media inadvertently stirred up hysteria with employers and the general population, or if alerting the public has actually kept the virus from spreading.

In May, the Mountain States Employers Council urged Colorado businesses to take special precautions against swine flu — including making special contingency plans to keep operations running and cross-training employees to assume responsibilities of co-workers who are home sick. The council estimated that up to 60 percent absenteeism could be expected during the peak of the pandemic.

But despite the best efforts from public health officials, a Sept. 25 DBJ story indicated that not many businesspeople were taking the pandemic seriously.

Luckily for those local employers, the pandemic isn’t shaping up to be much of a human-resources crisis — knock on wood. But imagine how a serious outbreak might have worsened those company’s situation when combined with a bad economy and the credit crunch.

Likewise, one wonders if employers and the general public will stop taking health officials seriously. Will the public be prepared if something truly catastrophic takes hold?

In the meantime, it probably won’t hurt to keep using the hand sanitizers.

bmook@bizjournals.com


so there you go. from http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/second_opinion/2009/12/too_much_ado_about_swine_flu.html?ana=e_du_pap

Chris
12-08-2009, 04:40 PM
Gosh, you mean to tell me the press on this whole thing was exaggerated? :eek:

Reminiscent of all the calamities from Y2K to last years Bird Flu.

DaveInDenver
12-08-2009, 04:53 PM
Something my doctor recommended, although not specifically for flu in my case none-the-less it has observed some very positive effects for flu.

N-Acetyl Cysteine Thought to Reduce Flu Symptoms (http://swinefluremedies.org/swine-flu-remedies/n-acetyl-cysteine-thought-to-reduce-flu-symptoms.html)

Extreme Flu Fighter: NAC Prevents Flu Symptoms for 75% of Those Infected (http://www.bottomlinesecrets.com/article.html?article_id=49841)

Strong Immunities & NAC (http://www.cfsn.com/nacimmune.html)

In the following "golden" study, people in 20 different locations of Italy were randomnly divided into two groups, patient and control. Neither the patient, nor the physician knew who was in which group.

The patient group was given 1.2 grams of NAC (N-acetyl L-cysteine, an amino acid precursor to glutathione) every day. The control group was given placebos that looked and tasted the same as the NAC.

Over the course of the subsequent flu season, physicians regularly screened blood samples for a particular flu virus that was known to be circulating in the population.

While the number infected with the known flu virus was statistically the same between patients and controls, there was a very large difference between the groups in demonstrating flu symptoms.

The group receiving the NAC had flu virus detected in 29% of patient blood. In the group recieving placebo, 24% had flu virus detected in their blood. There is no statistically significant difference between these two groups in the rate of virus infection.

In the rate of developing flu symptoms, there was a very significant difference. In the control group 79% of the patients who had flu virus detected also had obvious flu symptoms. Only 25% of the group recieving the daily NAC showed any flu symptoms at all, when infected with the same flu.