This google map is the one I prefer now. It seems much more updated and active.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=10949661064802 5582911.0004686892fbefe515012&z=3

http://www.scribd.com/doc/14763148/Do-You-Have-Swine-Flu

It obviously does an awful job, though. I wish I knew which government official thought making this was a good idea, since now I'm somehow MORE paranoid!

John Galt wrote:

Well regular flu kills off mostly old people while this kills young healthy adults.

John, do you really concider those people healthy?

People don't just die from flu virus's. There is always something else wrong with an individual, such as poor or weak immune system's. They will have other infection's going on in their bodies, they will have some kind of auto immune disease. The body has to be in an already weakened state to actually die from this or any other flu. Can you still catch it? Yes, but if your immune system is healthy and you don't have some type of infection or are not taking medication that will lower your immune system, you'll just be really sick for a week or so.

I don't have my head in the sand, I'm watching reports, but I'm not going to panic over this and start wearing surgical masks.

The flu season this past winter was aweful here and in the surrounding states. Many people I know, including co-workers, extended family, etc. were struck with it. My family did not get it, thank goodness. We didn't stay inside and hide then and I won't over this.

Di's post is a lot of the reason why I'm not panicking, this isn't the first pandemic.

Lina wrote:

John Galt wrote: Well regular flu kills off mostly old people while this kills young healthy adults. John, do you really concider those people healthy? People don't just die from flu virus's. There is always something else wrong with an individual, such as poor or weak immune system's. They will have other infection's going on in their bodies, they will have some kind of auto immune disease. The body has to be in an already weakened state to actually die from this or any other flu. Can you still catch it? Yes, but if your immune system is healthy and you don't have some type of infection or are not taking medication that will lower your immune system, you'll just be really sick for a week or so. I don't have my head in the sand, I'm watching reports, but I'm not going to panic over this and start wearing surgical masks. The flu season this past winter was aweful here and in the surrounding states. Many people I know, including co-workers, extended family, etc. were struck with it. My family did not get it, thank goodness. We didn't stay inside and hide then and I won't over this. Di's post is a lot of the reason why I'm not panicking, this isn't the first pandemic.

Lina, the reason to be concerned is because they were healthy individuals. With pandemic flus it is healthy people that die the most because of their healthy immune systems. It's called hypercytokinemia or "cytokine storm" where a positive feedback loop makes your body's immune system kill you by drowning in your own fluids. The virus is so virulent that the body makes a huge defense against it and it can go out of control.

So it is flus like these that kill HEALTHY people in large numbers. Like the 1918 flu. Apparently the deaths are looking like this again:

John Galt wrote:

Lina wrote: John Galt wrote: Well regular flu kills off mostly old people while this kills young healthy adults. John, do you really concider those people healthy? People don't just die from flu virus's. There is always something else wrong with an individual, such as poor or weak immune system's. They will have other infection's going on in their bodies, they will have some kind of auto immune disease. The body has to be in an already weakened state to actually die from this or any other flu. Can you still catch it? Yes, but if your immune system is healthy and you don't have some type of infection or are not taking medication that will lower your immune system, you'll just be really sick for a week or so. I don't have my head in the sand, I'm watching reports, but I'm not going to panic over this and start wearing surgical masks. The flu season this past winter was aweful here and in the surrounding states. Many people I know, including co-workers, extended family, etc. were struck with it. My family did not get it, thank goodness. We didn't stay inside and hide then and I won't over this. Di's post is a lot of the reason why I'm not panicking, this isn't the first pandemic. Lina, the reason to be concerned is because they were healthy individuals. With pandemic flus it is healthy people that die the most because of their healthy immune systems. It's called hypercytokinemia or "cytokine storm" where a positive feedback loop makes your body's immune system kill you by drowning in your own fluids. The virus is so virulent that the body makes a huge defense against it and it can go out of control. So it is flus like these that kill HEALTHY people in large numbers. Like the 1918 flu. Apparently the deaths are looking like this again:

OK, then if this is the case, then shouldn't everyone who comes in contact with it die? I mean if it's the healthy people that are dying and, not the weak or the young or the ones living in slums or injesting pig slop, then world leaders would be going underground into bunkers wouldn't they? Seriously, that doesn't make sense to me.

I'm telling you, these people may have seemed to be healthy, but they had some other problem to enhance the symptoms and kill them. IF not, then everyone who comes in contact would not be able to fight it off and will die. If you were able to read their autopsies, you would find other health problems. Most likely thigns they weren't even aware of. Our bodies are constantly battling "secret killers" and just the right combination will take you out.

No, the virus could be less virulent than the 1918 one which is why it's not killing that many people. This doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned. We now have a virus that humanity has not encountered before freely passing between humans. The influenza virus rapidly changes and it could become more (or less) deadly at any time.

Lina wrote:

John Galt wrote: Lina wrote: John Galt wrote: Well regular flu kills off mostly old people while this kills young healthy adults. John, do you really concider those people healthy? People don't just die from flu virus's. There is always something else wrong with an individual, such as poor or weak immune system's. They will have other infection's going on in their bodies, they will have some kind of auto immune disease. The body has to be in an already weakened state to actually die from this or any other flu. Can you still catch it? Yes, but if your immune system is healthy and you don't have some type of infection or are not taking medication that will lower your immune system, you'll just be really sick for a week or so. I don't have my head in the sand, I'm watching reports, but I'm not going to panic over this and start wearing surgical masks. The flu season this past winter was aweful here and in the surrounding states. Many people I know, including co-workers, extended family, etc. were struck with it. My family did not get it, thank goodness. We didn't stay inside and hide then and I won't over this. Di's post is a lot of the reason why I'm not panicking, this isn't the first pandemic. Lina, the reason to be concerned is because they were healthy individuals. With pandemic flus it is healthy people that die the most because of their healthy immune systems. It's called hypercytokinemia or "cytokine storm" where a positive feedback loop makes your body's immune system kill you by drowning in your own fluids. The virus is so virulent that the body makes a huge defense against it and it can go out of control. So it is flus like these that kill HEALTHY people in large numbers. Like the 1918 flu. Apparently the deaths are looking like this again: OK, then if this is the case, then shouldn't everyone who comes in contact with it die? I mean if it's the healthy people that are dying and, not the weak or the young or the ones living in slums or injesting pig slop, then world leaders would be going underground into bunkers wouldn't they? Seriously, that doesn't make sense to me. I'm telling you, these people may have seemed to be healthy, but they had some other problem to enhance the symptoms and kill them. IF not, then everyone who comes in contact would not be able to fight it off and will die. If you were able to read their autopsies, you would find other health problems. Most likely thigns they weren't even aware of. Our bodies are constantly battling "secret killers" and just the right combination will take you out.

You don't seem to understand the virology behind this- these kill young and healthy victims because the virus permiates every bit of tissue it can come in contact with. Someone with a young and healthy immune system, will have that immune system work overtime to kill it. Eventually, it will strip the tissue lining from your lungs, stomach, and other innards in order to destroy the disease- killing the person.

A lot of people have innate immunities, or have already contraced a version of the virus that didn't kill them. Viruses mutate fast, which is why flu vaccenes don't always work.

So then why are world leaders going on with business as usual, if no one knows who's immune to it, partially immune or is not immune at all? It just seems to me that if this was something that could kill anyone, even the healthiest people on the planet, then some very different things would be happening.

Well it wouldn't be wise for leaders to start a panic since there is nothing they can do to stop it short of bringing the world economy to a stop.

http://www.infowars.com/texas-doctor-claims-swine-flu-cases-far-worse- than-reported/

Is this credible?

I hope there is no truth behind it whatsoever.

John Galt wrote:

Well it wouldn't be wise for leaders to start a panic since there is nothing they can do to stop it short of bringing the world economy to a stop.

Point taken. I did find these articles and they eased my mind, maybe they can ease your's too.

The Uk seems to have a very different take on this. Dated yesterday.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/swine-flu/5240390/Swine-flu-Death-ra te-slows-in-Mexico.html

Quote:

A total of 159 people have died of pneumonia that may have been caused by the mutant H1N1 swine flu virus, Jose Cordova, the health secretary, said.

Quote:

Mexican authorities have also revised down the confirmed death toll from swine flu from 20 to seven.

I would think that if this was as bad as our media is portraying it, then media all over the world would be reporting the same stuff we are, not the opposite. That it's slowing down and that less people than they originally thought has actually been confirmed of dying from it.

I also found this one:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090429/ap_on_he_me/med_swine_flu

This article has these quotes buried amongst the hype: "New cases and deaths finally seemed to be leveling off"

"The deaths were already leveling off by the time Mexico announced the epidemic April 23"

"In the U.S. alone, health officials say about 36,000 people die every year from flu-related causes"

This last one is the most disturbing to me. I never knew so many people die from teh regular flu. But the media has the world freaking out over a flu that has only claimed 160 victim's? Of those 160, only 7 have actually been confirmed from this particular strain.

Lina wrote:

John Galt wrote: Well it wouldn't be wise for leaders to start a panic since there is nothing they can do to stop it short of bringing the world economy to a stop. Point taken. I did find these articles and they eased my mind, maybe they can ease your's too. The Uk seems to have a very different take on this. Dated yesterday. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/swine-flu/5240390/Swine-flu-Death-ra te-slows-in-Mexico.html Quote: A total of 159 people have died of pneumonia that may have been caused by the mutant H1N1 swine flu virus, Jose Cordova, the health secretary, said. Quote: Mexican authorities have also revised down the confirmed death toll from swine flu from 20 to seven. I would think that if this was as bad as our media is portraying it, then media all over the world would be reporting the same stuff we are, not the opposite. That it's slowing down and that less people than they originally thought has actually been confirmed of dying from it. I also found this one: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090429/ap_on_he_me/med_swine_flu This article has these quotes buried amongst the hype: "New cases and deaths finally seemed to be leveling off"

But from your first link:

wrote:

Despite the slowdown in deaths, the overall number of people hospitalised with swine flu symptoms has continued to rise By Tuesday night, there had been a total of 2,498 taken into care with respiratory problems believed to be related to swine flu. Of these 1,311 were still bed ridden and fighting the sickness while the others had left after successfully responding to treatment

Lina wrote:

"The deaths were already leveling off by the time Mexico announced the epidemic April 23" "In the U.S. alone, health officials say about 36,000 people die every year from flu-related causes" This last one is the most disturbing to me. I never knew so many people die from teh regular flu. But the media has the world freaking out over a flu that has only claimed 160 victim's? Of those 160, only 7 have actually been confirmed from this particular strain.

Moreover, this quote from the yahoo story:

wrote:

In addition to the 160 deaths, the virus is believed to have sickened 2,498 people across Mexico. But only 1,311 suspected swine flu patients remained hospitalized, and a closer look at daily admissions and deaths at Mexico's public hospitals suggests the outbreak may have peaked during three grim days last week when thousands of people complained of flu symptoms.

Sounds like supposition to me. "May" is by no means an authoritative declaration.

You're not getting the media making opposite claims...they're just trying to get anything and through that confusion info gets tangled. Hopefully I'm wrong but I'm still not optimistic.

John Galt wrote:

No, the virus could be less virulent than the 1918 one which is why it's not killing that many people

In 1918 there were no antiviral & antibiotic drugs available. I think this is the reason there are fewer deaths. Also, public hygiene & containment plans are much better.

Picasso wrote:

John Galt wrote: No, the virus could be less virulent than the 1918 one which is why it's not killing that many people In 1918 there were no antiviral & antibiotic drugs available. I think this is the reason there are fewer deaths. Also, public hygiene & containment plans are much better.

True, but through much of the world conditions are likely worse than USA in 1918. Thankfully there is no trench warfare going on...

Antibiotics are really the only defense against the secondary bacterial infections. There is really nothing they can do about the influenza, or about any reaction by your body.

Lina wrote:

So then why are world leaders going on with business as usual, if no one knows who's immune to it, partially immune or is not immune at all? It just seems to me that if this was something that could kill anyone, even the healthiest people on the planet, then some very different things would be happening.

Sadly, this won't happen. Did you know that within the next 10 years we will have no meds to treat TB? How about the fact that last flu season alone, 65,000 people died of the flu worldwide?

World leaders aren't going on with business as usual- just the widespread coverage of SF shows that.

Off topic, what I wouldn't do for a chance to look into this thing's genes- sorry, I'm a virology-loving college student

TheCreepyApostate wrote:

*Activates Stoneform*

Gonna need it:




http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=50303

This seems like yet another over hyped, go nowhere crisis. When this thing's death toll catches up to the normal flu, then this level of concern might be warranted. Until then, I just don't see what the fuss is about. "it attacks young healthy people" Yeah, almost 200 whole people. Wow. Am I missing something here?

wormwood wrote:

This seems like yet another over hyped, go nowhere crisis. When this thing's death toll catches up to the normal flu, then this level of concern might be warranted. Until then, I just don't see what the fuss is about. "it attacks young healthy people" Yeah, almost 200 whole people. Wow. Am I missing something here?

yeah, incubation period and the amount of time it will take to spread it across the globe.

Kane wrote:

Sounds like supposition to me. "May" is by no means an authoritative declaration. You're not getting the media making opposite claims...they're just trying to get anything and through that confusion info gets tangled. Hopefully I'm wrong but I'm still not optimistic.

I read those quotes you posted, I read the whole article, that is why I specifically put in my post that the quotes I posted were buried amongst the "Oh My GOD, the world is ending" news.

36,000 people die every year from the regular flu and ONLY 7 have been confirmed from the swine flu.

People are getting better, new cases are dwindling, less than 200 people have died from pneumonia that may have been from the swine virus. Why is this information being ignored? The media doesn't want to talk about the 36,000 that die every year because that won't boost the ratings. You add the word "Swine/Pig" to a story about dying and people freak.

I'll start to worry when the President goes underground.