• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Influeza/MRSA a fatal combination

So, according to Skeptgirl's definition of 'epidemic', which includes "higher than expected": If we expect more cases, then it can't be an epidemic. Therefore, there will never be an epidemic. Oxymoronically anyhow.

'Pan' meaning wide spread, Isn't 'pandemic' just an international epidemic?
I posted the definitions of these terms. Why do you insist on falsely paraphrasing what I posted?

SG, I've got to agree with Mr Larsen here, you haven't shown any numbers for flu/mrsa. Or that there even are any numbers. Without numbers, picking anydam disease with higher recent incidence and calling it pandemic just doesn't make sense. Except for scaremongering.
It's a pandemic. I have been working in the field of infectious disease for 20 years and in health care much longer than that. I have an education, a license to practice, and actually have had a successful practice for the last 18 years which says I am more than qualified to assess the data and draw such a conclusion. The data is there and I posted multiple sources of the data. You and Claus can protest all you want. You're simply sticking your feet further into your mouths.

But a question- is there any immunity acquired? I've already had mrsa once.
No, you are out of luck. If anything it means you are more likely to be colonized or to have the bacteria in your environment which you may in the future contact again.
 
Lots of red flags here.

Repeating that the criticism is all wrong, but never explain exactly why.

Skipping that the evidence was non-existent, and focus on repeating that no more evidence is needed.

Switching between "epidemic" and "pandemic" and pray that nobody notices it as a typical bait and switch technique.

Claiming that critics are just ignorant.

Flapping of arms.

The question still remains: Why? What could someone benefit from scaring people unnecessarily? Someone in the medical field?
 
Lots of red flags here.

Repeating that the criticism is all wrong, but never explain exactly why.

Skipping that the evidence was non-existent, and focus on repeating that no more evidence is needed.

Switching between "epidemic" and "pandemic" and pray that nobody notices it as a typical bait and switch technique.

Claiming that critics are just ignorant.

Flapping of arms.

The question still remains: Why? What could someone benefit from scaring people unnecessarily? Someone in the medical field?
I figured as much. Claus is not really capable of admitting he mistakenly thought the two references he cited applied to all pandemics when they only applied to highly pathogenic influenza.

Notice the url, Claus: avian_influenza/pandemic

http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/pandemicphase1.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_Severity_Index
Which I already pointed out was
proposed classification scale for reporting the severity of influenza pandemics in the United States


As for switching from epidemic to pandemic, this criticism is really bad, even for you. A pandemic is defined as concurrent epidemics on a broader scale. I don't know where your brain is short circuiting on this one but it clearly is.
 
Skeptigirl,
Could you summarise what you are claiming?
Well, I'll let these sources summarize things since I seem to be getting no credit for my expertise here.

(All following emphasis is mine.)
Health advisory: Influenza-Associated Pediatric Mortality and Staphylococcus aureus co-infection January 31, 2008
From October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007, 73 deaths from influenza in children were reported to CDC from 39 state health departments and two city health departments. ...The number of these deaths in which pneumonia or bacteremia due to S. aureus was noted represents a five-fold increase over the 2 previous influenza seasons. ...

The median age of children with S. aureus co-infection was older than children without S. aureus co-infection (10 years versus 5 years, p<.01) and children with co-infection were more likely to have pneumonia and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Influenza strains isolated from these children were not different from common strains circulating in the community, and the MRSA strains have been similar to those associated with MRSA skin infection outbreaks in the United States.



That was last flu season. This year's is just starting. The cases of MRSA are markedly greater than a year ago. The emerging MRSA pandemic continues and has not peaked.

The silent epidemic: CA-MRSA and HA-MRSA; American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
Prevalence of MRSA
The number of hospital admissions for MRSA has exploded in the past decade. By 2005, admissions were triple the number in 2000 and 10-fold higher than in 1995 (see Fig. 2). In 2005 in the United States alone, 368,600 hospital admissions for MRSA—including 94,000 invasive infections—resulted in 18,650 deaths. The number of MRSA fatalities in 2005 surpassed the number of fatalities from hurricane Katrina and AIDS combined and is substantially higher than fatalities at the peak of the U. S. polio epidemic.

Global epidemiology of CA-MRSA; Date: 31/03/2007
Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) were described at the beginning of this decade and since 2003 an impressive worldwide spread of Panton Valentine leukocidin (PVL)-positive CA-MRSA clones have been observed.

Community-associated MRSA strains began to emerge in the 1990s
Slide/page 11 shows current % of hospital cultures of staph went from 0 to almost 80% MRSA from the 70s to present and from 0 to 40% of staph cultures in non-hospital cases.
Slide/page 16 shows the pattern of emergence of this pathogen compared to antibiotic resistant staph infections in the 70s.
Slide/page 20 has a 2003 meta-analysis of MRSA epidemiology showing
CA-MRSA virulence 􀂄 38% of US army soldiers colonized with MRSA developed soft-tissue infections vs. 3% of those colonized with MSSA.
􀂄 The Panton-Valentine leukocidin locus was present in 67% of CA-MRSA isolates, including all wound isolates. Ellis MW, et al. Clin Infect Dis 2004;39:971-9
Panton-Valentine leukocidin
􀂄 Cytotoxin that causes tissue necrosis and leukocyte destruction by forming pores in cellular membranes
􀂄 Associated with skin infections and severe necrotizing pneumonia
PVL prevalence
􀂄 PVL genes were identified in 77% of CA-MRSA isolates in Minnesota
􀂄 PVL was present in all 117 CA-MRSA isolates tested from the US, France, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, and Western Samoa (EID 2003)
 
Further supporting citations (again, emphasis mine):

Discussion of the emergence of MRSA in a quick read format:
CA-MRSA - Myth or Reality; May 2008

Community Associated Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): An Emergent Pathogen; M. Hull MD, FRCPC; September 16 2006
CA-MRSA Epidemiology – Where are we Now?
• CA-MRSA now predominant cause of adult skin and soft tissue infections (SSI) in many centres
– Surveillance of 389 Staphylococcal infections over 3 month period (2003) in Atlanta found that 63% due to CA-MRSA, and of these 99% belonged to USA300 (King et al An Int Med 2005)
...Conclusions
• MRSA is no longer solely a nosocomial agent of disease
Growing role of CA-MRSA in severe skin and soft tissue infections in patients lacking characteristic risk factors for MRSA

Association between Staphylococcus aureus strains carrying gene for Panton-Valentine leukocidin and highly lethal necrotising pneumonia in young immunocompetent patients.
...INTERPRETATION: PVL-producing S aureus strains cause rapidly progressive, haemorrhagic, necrotising pneumonia, mainly in otherwise healthy children and young adults. The pneumonia is often preceded by influenza-like symptoms and has a high lethality rate.

Fatal case of post-influenza, community-associated MRSA pneumonia in an Ontario teenager with subsequent familial transmission
Infections due to community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) are increasing worldwide(1). Persons at particular risk of CA-MRSA include children, First Nations populations, athletes, military trainees, men who have sex with men, intravenous drug users, prison populations and the homeless(1-3).While CA-MRSA is less common in Canada than in the United States, several studies have documented its emergence in Canada(4-6). ..

While most CA-MRSA infections are of skin or soft tissue, necrotizing pneumonia due to CA-MRSA is well described and often fatal, even when it occurs in young, immunocompetent people(8). In one comparison of community and hospital-associated MRSA pneumonia, patients with CA-MRSA pneumonia were younger (14.8 years versus 70.1 years), more commonly had influenza-like illness before admission for pneumonia, high temperatures (> 39o C), heart rate > 140 beats per minute and lower survival rates at 48 hours after admission (63% versus 94%)(8). Other recent studies highlight the association between severe community-acquired pneumonia due to S. aureus and preceding viral infection. It has been proposed that a viral infection preceding S. aureus pneumonia may lead to severe necrotizing pneumonia, resulting in admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), intubation and often death(9,10).

Fatal pneumonia in an adolescent due to community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus positive for Panton-Valentine-leukocidin
This case shows that clinicians in the Netherlands should also be aware of the possibility of CA-MRSA in patients without risk factors for MRSA carriage. Especially in children and adolescents with an influenza virus infection, pneumonia due to PVL-positive S. aureus strains may be life-threatening.



It may look like these are simply cherry picked articles but in reality the reason there are so many is because the problem is indeed an emerging pandemic of MRSA with the PVL gene and numbers of research articles reflect that fact. Influenza/MRSA combined represents only a fraction of MRSA cases but the increase in fatalities and serious disease among otherwise healthy children due to MRSA/flu co-infection has the potential to be increasingly devastating year after year until the MRSA pandemic subsides. We don't know if we will see an additional 5-fold increase in cases or not. We could see more than a 5 fold increase if the trend continues on the same curve.

There is no way to predict what the benefit of flu vaccine for healthy children will be this year. But we can say for certain the benefit of vaccine will outweigh the vaccine risk and is likely to be well worth the cost. I think Canada and Europe may well be wrong not to expand flu vaccinations to all healthy children this year. Maybe this year Canadians will come south for flu shots the way we went north for some of ours a couple years ago during the US vaccine shortage.
 
Last edited:
an Epidemic is simply a SUBSTANTIAL increase in case rate of a particular disease over a given period, that is beyond what is to be expected from recent past numbers or rate.

A Pandemic, is merely an epidemic that spreads or occurs over a wide geographical area (all of North America, or Word wide for instance).

I am only mentioning this, as a lot of the debate seems to be over whether these cases are of an "epidemic" or "pandemic" nature.

TAM:)
 
"The number of hospital admissions for MRSA has exploded in the past decade. By 2005, admissions were triple the number in 2000 and 10-fold higher than in 1995..."

I'd take "exploded" to mean a strongly exponential growth, yet the above sentence implies a roughly linear increase every 5 years. I.e. A prediction made in 2000, based on a linear model and the previous 5 years growth, of the number of hospital admissions in 2005 for MRSA would have be fairly close to what was actually observed.

Not that I'm arguing CA-MRSA is not going to be a significant problem in the near term future, but using the word exploded does seem to be rather more for emotional affect than descriptive purposes.
 
an Epidemic is simply a SUBSTANTIAL increase in case rate of a particular disease over a given period, that is beyond what is to be expected from recent past numbers or rate.

A Pandemic, is merely an epidemic that spreads or occurs over a wide geographical area (all of North America, or Word wide for instance).

I am only mentioning this, as a lot of the debate seems to be over whether these cases are of an "epidemic" or "pandemic" nature.

TAM:)
I already made this clear but it never hurts to hear it from someone else.
 
Last edited:
What I want is a couple of sentences explaining what your claim is.
I did that in post #45. Here it is without the supporting citations under each statement:

CA-MRSA, particularly the USA300 strain, has reached a world wide pandemic threshold. Children are particularly affected. (Emphasis mine in the following quotes.)

The gene responsible for making this organism particularly deadly has been naturally selected resulting in an increase in staph aureus virulence world wide.

Influenza and staph a. co-infection are known to have a synergistic interaction that is dangerous to healthy children and adults. An increase in the frequency of CA MRSA infections, in CA MRSA colonization, and in the frequency of the PVL gene in all strains of staph a. can be expected to increase dramatically the opportunity for these organisms to occur as an influenza co-infection. Because I described an anecdote of a single tragedy in no way means that is the only reason for this warning. If you were not in the medical field you may be unaware of the scope of the emerging MRSA pandemic. Those of us in the field are all to familiar with this growing hazard.

Get your kids a flu vaccination and get one for yourself as well.
 
I got my flu shot a couple of weeks ago. I'll be taking my kids for theirs today. My hubby says he doesn't have time.
 
I'm still waiting for Claus to admit he erred on that pandemic flu definition applying to any pandemic. How about it Claus? It was a pretty straight forward mistake.
 
So, the claim is that CA-MRSA, particularly the USA300 strain, has reached a world wide pandemic threshold.

Yet, no evidence of where this "threshold" is.

And lots of arms flapping, to get around that.

A very obvious example of scare mongering.
 
So, the claim is that CA-MRSA, particularly the USA300 strain, has reached a world wide pandemic threshold.
CFLarsen. I can read. So can you. And if you spend five minutes searching you'll discover that there is no threshold. But then again most people can't be bothered searching the dam freaking CDC website for a definition of a word and they just make one up.
 
Last edited:
"The number of hospital admissions for MRSA has exploded in the past decade. By 2005, admissions were triple the number in 2000 and 10-fold higher than in 1995..."

I'd take "exploded" to mean a strongly exponential growth, yet the above sentence implies a roughly linear increase every 5 years. I.e. A prediction made in 2000, based on a linear model and the previous 5 years growth, of the number of hospital admissions in 2005 for MRSA would have be fairly close to what was actually observed.

You consider tripling every five years to be linear growth? And you're an engineer?
 
So, the claim is that CA-MRSA, particularly the USA300 strain, has reached a world wide pandemic threshold.

Yet, no evidence of where this "threshold" is.

And lots of arms flapping, to get around that.

A very obvious example of scare mongering.
Still can't admit you were wrong, Claus?

If you read the actual definitions of epidemics and pandemics you would see CA-MRSA meets the threshold. But since you are still operating on the erroneous assumptions you have about what qualifies as a pandemic, you continue to put your foot in your mouth. You should just admit you are wrong and move on. It really isn't bad to do so, you know.
 
You consider tripling every five years to be linear growth?

No, though I can understand how you may have got that impression from my post.

And you're an engineer?

Yes.

If there was a forth 5-year interval then it would be possible to determine if the growth is closer to exponential or linear.

For example, the effect of improved monitoring and reporting over time could give an impression of accelerating growth.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom