[Peace-discuss] Wasn't even close [flu vs. public health]

[Stuart Levy]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 07:57:52PM -0500, E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
> *<venom>*
>
> If one can set the war aside just for the moment----
>
> The  lies about the so-called A(H1N1) flu virus [aka Swine Flu] ought to be 
> enough by themselves to cause the huddled and befuddled masses to rise up 
> and take torch and manure fork in hand. But, it's only $25 or so for each 
> citizen, so its /very Reasonable/...
> You can't expect our debt-ridden masses to Rise Up for twenty-five bucks.
>
> But seriously, folks, about 35,000 people in the US die every year from 
> P.O.F. (plain old flu) and its manifold complications, every year, year 
> after year after year.  So what so unusual about this A(H1N1)?  Nothing. 
> At.  All.

It does seem to be clear now, but was that clear from the outset?

I'm not sure whether you're criticizing the residual hysteria,
which seems terrifically wasteful to me too, or the early alarm
in the first few weeks, which seemed reasonable.  Wasn't it?

As I understand it, the story has been that...

   - This year's H1N1 is a new variant of a flu virus which has 
	crossed from pigs to humans in the past.

   - Eventually it's expected that *some* animal flu virus,
	to which humans haven't yet adapted and react badly,
	will become transmissible enough among humans to propagate fast,
	and it'll be a big deal.  When that happens, stopping it fast
	will be important.  People today are a lot more mobile than
	in 1918.

   - This year's H1N1 is transmissible between humans.
	Early on it wasn't clear how transmissible.
	
   - This H1N1 was lethal for at least a fair number of people.
	Early on it wasn't clear how lethal.

   - It was more lethal for young healthy adults than among
	the elderly or children, which is unusual among flu viruses,
	but was true of the very serious 1918 H1N1 variant.

Is any of that wrong?  Given that early picture, wasn't it
reasonable for public-health people to raise an alarm at the time?

It's since become clear that this one *isn't* very lethal nor
very transmissible.  It's just a run-of-the-mill flu virus as you say.

So we don't need to hear in today's national news that someone in
such-and-such city has died of this year's variant -- it's unfortunate,
and it's worth tracking in public health circles, but it shouldn't be
news any more than the daily obituaries are.

And so it seems we should be mad if we're going to spend $1.5 billion
on fighting *this* H1N1 outbreak, which was the plan when it was put into
the supplemental in late April (when, given what was known then,
it might have been a real emergency, right?).

If that is still the plan, sure enough, it'll be a ridiculous waste.
We could provide a lot of real public health service, for
tuberculosis or diabetes or drug treatment or whatever, for $1.5 billion.


> About 40% of the cases of P.O.F. are caused by A(H1N1) influenza viruses.
> So that roughly about 35 to 40 deaths every day 24/7/365 are caused by
> Plain Old "A(H1N1)".   While a few odd cases constitutes a Pandemic.
>
> As Costello said, "One of us is NUTS!!!"
>
> So, one might say this whole business of the flu is what is generally 
> referred to as a Fraud,  a Scam, an Artifice.
> It's about the m-o-n-e-y...but, it's only about a $100 for a family of 4.
>
> Plus another $100 or so for the cronies and operatives at the IMF... [ty! 
> :-) ]
>
> &...Enjoy your stimulus...*SUCKERS!!!!*
>
> ****
>
> We now return you to the War, which is already in progress.
>
> *</venom>*