Swine Flu outbreak

[Belz...]

Why bother, you just ignore it anyway. Where's your evidence of any flu strain ever that didn't kill thousands?

Honestly, telling someone you won't respond to their request for evidence on the grounds that they won't accept it gives them the impression that your evidence either doesn't exist or is unacceptable.

 

[WildCat]

When I was young the only times when schools were closed was when you couldn't physically get there because of the snow.

Well your father walked to school 6 miles away in snow up to his neck. Uphill, both ways!

 

[alfaniner]

If someone gets this strain of the flu and recovers, then they are forever immune to it, is that right? Is it like the movies where in an emergency the antibodies in their blood could be used to create more vaccine?

 

[I Ratant]

Well your father walked to school 6 miles away in snow up to his neck. Uphill, both ways!

.
Yessir, I remember doing that myself!
Schools didn't have full time sheriffs assigned for each day, the playgrounds weren't enclosed by chain link, the teachers could actually use character-building terms when talking to the wanna-be miscreants...
And during the hurricanes, we went to school!

 

[Undesired Walrus]

If someone gets this strain of the flu and recovers, then they are forever immune to it, is that right? Is it like the movies where in an emergency the antibodies in their blood could be used to create more vaccine?

Should we start having swine flu parties (In the style of chicken pox parties) where infected children play with non-infected ones? What fun!

 

[Kestrel]

Easily. Missing 30 cases for every one that showed up at hospitals is probably an underestimate. It was clearly stated in report after report Mexico was only reporting cases that came to hospitals for care.

That may have been true initially, but the Mexican authorities have been trying to trace the source of this virus. The normal method of doing so is to ask those who had contact with known cases if they had the flu, then testing those that did for the specific virus.

 

[Dymanic]

So how was WildCat's suggestion a "false dichotomy"?

I suppose I might have pointed out that Wildcat was also invoking a strawman argument. Somewhere in between doing nothing and "shutting down every school in the US until 100% of the children are free from all diseases" lies a reasonable and balanced approach to attempting to reduce the severity of a flu pandemic. Here's a nice article on it:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/2/727192/-H1N1:-Why-Do-Schools-Close,-And-When-Do-They-Open

 

[Belz...]

Thanks for not answering my question.

 

[Dymanic]

Thanks for not answering my question.

Wikipedia on false dichotomy:

"The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options."

I've provided a link to an article which examines a full range of options and the guidelines used by public health agencies in issuing recommendations in the face of pandemic events of varying severity. I especially like the specificity with which "severity" is defined.

Did the link work for you?

 

[GreNME]

Wikipedia on false dichotomy:

"The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options."

I've provided a link to an article which examines a full range of options and the guidelines used by public health agencies in issuing recommendations in the face of pandemic events of varying severity. I especially like the specificity with which "severity" is defined.

Did the link work for you?

That wasn't an article, that was a blog post. That's a nitpick for another topic, however.

Considering the link you gave, though, what do you say about the fact that the CDC is considering changing its recommendation for closing schools completely to recommending the same measures in school systems for seasonal flu? Here's a link to a clip. The WHO also seems to now be coming to the conclusion that the problem is less dangerous than early fears presented (another link).

The disconnect at this point seems to be between what maybe-possibly could be and what actually is happening.

 

[Dymanic]

That wasn't an article, that was a blog post.

It was a blog post by one the founders of FluWiki and of the most knowledgeable people on the subject of risk communication as it relates to pandemic influenza that you will find anywhere. (Once you've picked a nit, it's hard to put it back).

Considering the link you gave, though, what do you say about the fact that the CDC is considering changing its recommendation for closing schools completely to recommending the same measures in school systems for seasonal flu?

The main object of interventions is to reduce mortality. Consistent with that, as the case fatality rate of this virus doesn't look like it's going to end up as high as it might have, the change in policy makes perfect sense from a public health (and education) perspective. But, as I think I mentioned somewhere above, I'd like it just fine if they closed schools during the local peak of the normal flu season, mainly because I am at very high risk for complications due to influenza.

 

[Belz...]

Wikipedia on false dichotomy:

"The informal fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options."

I've provided a link to an article which examines a full range of options and the guidelines used by public health agencies in issuing recommendations in the face of pandemic events of varying severity. I especially like the specificity with which "severity" is defined.

Did the link work for you?

You said WildCat's comment that :

Yeah, let's shut down every school in the US until 100% of the children are free from all diseases.

Was a false dichotomy. Of course it was no such thing because he's only proposing one choice in a situation. You seemed to imply that you disagree with his comment. But then:

Did they shut down the school when a kid got any other kind of flu?

If I had my way, they would.

Basically, since somebody is ill at any given time, the schools will be pretty much always closed, which was WC's point all along.

 

[The Atheist]

The figure you used would only be low if you are counting total world population, considering seasonal flu kills nearly a quarter million people a year (which, by the way, is lower than %0.1)

If you check the numbers, I was indeed using the world population.

Not am I not US-centric, I don't even live within 5000km of it, so I don't tend to post US-only data.

We could be (arguing about the meaning of the word). I doubt it, though. I'm looking at the reactions around the world and factoring them into the overall emotional climate, while you seem to be focusing instead on world and government health groups and organizations. I've already stated that at this point I don't have a problem with the health organizations' reactions and measures, and that my complaint is with the overblown reaction of everyone else to the measures those organizations have been taking.

Who is the "everyone else"?

I see lots of talk of panic and have asked for examples, but aside from media panic-mongering, I haven't seen any sign of panic in the general populace.

I doubt that the economic damage will wind up being greater due to the measures being taken. Even if the current strain were to cause every single working adult to lose just a few days of work due to its spread, that damage alone could not only rival the economic damage currently taking place, but it could likely dwarf it quite quickly. That's one of the reasons I believe Mexico's behavior of practically shutting down businesses city-wide in some places was a bad idea.

The trouble is, we don't know for sure at the start whether it's a deadly virus or a mild one, and since waiting would make it too late, I think it's incumbent on authorities to do something.

How do you strike a balance?

 

[GreNME]

It was a blog post by one the founders of FluWiki and of the most knowledgeable people on the subject of risk communication as it relates to pandemic influenza that you will find anywhere. (Once you've picked a nit, it's hard to put it back).

And it's still a blog post. If you want to appeal to authority, I just pointed out the WHO and CDC in my last post explicitly stating that this flu is looking as mild or milder than seasonal influenza with all of the data they have available to them. If given the choice I'm going to pay attention to the organizations who are actively working on the problem in real-time, thanks.

The main object of interventions is to reduce mortality.

No, it's containment and maintenance of public health ^[link].

Consistent with that, as the case fatality rate of this virus doesn't look like it's going to end up as high as it might have, the change in policy makes perfect sense from a public health (and education) perspective. But, as I think I mentioned somewhere above, I'd like it just fine if they closed schools during the local peak of the normal flu season, mainly because I am at very high risk for complications due to influenza.

Trying to re-word things that contradict what you said in the prior sentence to make it sound supporting isn't your forte. From the link I just gave:

CDC continues to take aggressive action to respond to an expanding outbreak caused by novel H1N1 flu.

CDC's response goals are to:

1. Reduce transmission and illness severity, and
2. Provide information to help health care providers, public health officials and the public address the challenges posed by this emergency.

It really doesn't get any more straight-forward than that.

 

[Dymanic]

Of course it was no such thing because he's only proposing one choice in a situation.

Ok, you got me there. I guess I was assuming that the alternative WC was advocating was that there be NO closure of schools. Should have gone with strawman instead. Sloppy of me.

Basically, since somebody is ill at any given time, the schools will be pretty much always closed, which was WC's point all along.

Can't go along with that. The local peak of a seasonal flu epidemic typically last about six to eight weeks. It is reasonable to regard it as very likely that some of the students (or staff) will be contagious with flu during that time (and keep in mind that children have the potential to become superspreaders; they often remain contagious quite a bit longer than adults). It's not easy to predict when that peak will occur, but it is possible to make an educated guess.

On the other hand, it's pretty much a slam dunk that none of them will be contagious with flu during the summer. If mitigating the impact of seasonal influenza were the only consideration, it would make sense to allocate the lowest risk period during the summer to learning and close the schools during the highest risk period. Seasonal influenza is not widely regarded as enough of a threat to warrant giving it that much consideration, but a pandemic influenza has the potiential to make its way to the top of nearly everybody's priority list.

 

[GreNME]

If you check the numbers, I was indeed using the world population.

Not am I not US-centric, I don't even live within 5000km of it, so I don't tend to post US-only data.

Has the number of people who died from this strain broken a hundred yet? What's the current rate of fatality as we know it right now, at this moment, with the available data? As far as I can tell, we're still well below your estimated fatality rate, and you've yet to quantify how you're reaching such a high number outside of guessing.

Who is the "everyone else"?

I see lots of talk of panic and have asked for examples, but aside from media panic-mongering, I haven't seen any sign of panic in the general populace.

Slaughtering whole pig populations, holding Mexican citizens in quarantine against their will, and government public statements urging citizens to stay away from Mexico aren't worthwhile examples? How many do you need and at what severity of the behavior will reach the bar you've set?

The trouble is, we don't know for sure at the start whether it's a deadly virus or a mild one, and since waiting would make it too late, I think it's incumbent on authorities to do something.

How do you strike a balance?

Here, let me help you:
CDC: Maybe Schools Shouldn't Close
Outbreak of Flu is Less Severe Than Feared

My suggestion for starting to have some balance here in this thread is to start re-evaluating your position based on the re-evaluations the major health organizations are doing. The reason I suggest this is because the "we don't know for sure" argument falls way too short-- there is never 100% certainty with things like this pandemic, and waiting until near-100%-certainty will definitely cause problems. That's why these health organizations operate from a "what we know right now" group of data. Not for nothing, but you might want to give it a shot.

 

[rwguinn]

Has the number of people who died from this strain broken a hundred yet? What's the current rate of fatality as we know it right now, at this moment, with the available data? As far as I can tell, we're still well below your estimated fatality rate, and you've yet to quantify how you're reaching such a high number outside of guessing.



Slaughtering whole pig populations, holding Mexican citizens in quarantine against their will, and government public statements urging citizens to stay away from Mexico aren't worthwhile examples? How many do you need and at what severity of the behavior will reach the bar you've set?



Here, let me help you:
CDC: Maybe Schools Shouldn't Close
Outbreak of Flu is Less Severe Than Feared

My suggestion for starting to have some balance here in this thread is to start re-evaluating your position based on the re-evaluations the major health organizations are doing. The reason I suggest this is because the "we don't know for sure" argument falls way too short-- there is never 100% certainty with things like this pandemic, and waiting until near-100%-certainty will definitely cause problems. That's why these health organizations operate from a "what we know right now" group of data. Not for nothing, but you might want to give it a shot.

Lets add this one, too:
Mexico says flu ebbing

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Honestly, telling someone you won't respond to their request for evidence on the grounds that they won't accept it gives them the impression that your evidence either doesn't exist or is unacceptable.

You've been here long enough to know WC constantly asks for evidence after it has already been posted because evidence is not important to him. He's convinced he understands the world around him, evidence be damned.

It takes time to post citations. I bet I come close to posting the most supporting evidence for things I write, of anyone on this forum. I have certainly posted the most supporting evidence of anyone in the swine flu threads.

Your charge is just as uninformed as WC likes to stay.

 

[Dymanic]

And it's still a blog post. If you want to appeal to authority, I just pointed out the WHO and CDC in my last post explicitly stating that this flu is looking as mild or milder than seasonal influenza with all of the data they have available to them.

Had you read that blog post, you might have noticed that Dem (whom I do respect very much) is referencing CDC and WHO data. I don't disagree that this flu appears to be turning out mild, and I'll go one better: I think this wave is going to fizzle in the Northern Hemisphere as the days get longer.

No, it's containment and maintenance of public health

It's not me you're arguing with here. It's yourself. You post the CDC statement:
"CDC’s response goals are to:

Reduce transmission and illness severity, and
Provide information to help health care providers, public health officials and the public address the challenges posed by this emergency."

...and you even bold it. Then you turn right around and say that is says something it doesn't say. I agree that the statement is quite straighforward. Can it be that you don't grasp the difference between "reducing transmission" and "containment"? (Oh and, "maintaining public health" isn't in there either; it says "provide information").

Trying to re-word things that contradict what you said in the prior sentence to make it sound supporting isn't your forte.

Perhaps you misunderstood. I was saying that the change in policy -- from recommending school closures to not recommending school closures -- makes perfect sense considering that the virus is turning out mild. You appear to agree. How can I have a proper argument with you if you insist on not disagreeing with me?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If someone gets this strain of the flu and recovers, then they are forever immune to it, is that right? Is it like the movies where in an emergency the antibodies in their blood could be used to create more vaccine?

Yes, until it drifts genetically or reassorts resulting in enough change of its surface proteins that your immune system no longer recognizes it. CDC will let us know when that happens.