[Peace-discuss] Wasn't even close [flu vs. public health]
E. Wayne Johnson
ewj at pigs.ag
Wed Jun 17 14:12:40 CDT 2009
I think you forgot Researchers and Bureaucrats. I have some idea about
researchers, having been involved on a few disease research grants myself.
I was called a Bureaucrat on one occasion.
I don't think the doctors are much involved, and I am of the opinion
that most politicians simply don't have a clue what is up with this.
The folks listed below are all NIH. Lone Simonsen is not the lone
non-NIH-er but rather she just left NIH a few months ago to simonize
things at GWU.
NIH is all about money, and whether one considers it to be conspiracy or
an opportunity taken at the cusp, the outcome is the same.
My point is not to argue about the certainty of this subterfuge of the
"Pandemic", but to rather point out
the repetitiveness of the paradigm, whether it be the war on terror, or
the propagation of terror in the war on America.
On 6/17/2009 1:20 PM, John Fettig wrote:
> Here is one more
> article. I'm pretty well convinced that you think there is some grand conspiracy between doctors and politicians to steal your money, and that no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise.
>
>
> http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/NEJMp0903906
>
> *The Signature Features of Influenza Pandemics — Implications for Policy*
> /Mark A. Miller, M.D., Cecile Viboud, Ph.D., Marta Balinska, Ph.D.,
> and Lone Simonsen, Ph.D./
>
>
>
> This Article
> - *PDF </cgi/reprint/NEJMp0903906v1.pdf>*
>
>
> Tools and Services
> - *Add to Personal Archive
> </cgi/folders?action=addtofolder&wherefrom=JOURNALS&wrapped_id=nejm;NEJMp0903906v1>*
>
> - *Add to Citation Manager </cgi/citmgr?gca=nejm;NEJMp0903906v1>*
> - **Notify a Friend*
> </cgi/mailafriend?url=http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/NEJMp0903906v1&title=The+Signature+Features+of+Influenza+Pandemics+--+Implications+for+Policy>*
>
> - *E-mail When Cited
> </cgi/alerts/ctalert?alertType=citedby&addAlert=cited_by&saveAlert=no&cited_by_criteria_resid=nejm;NEJMp0903906v1&return_type=article&return_url=%2Fcgi%2Fcontent%2Ffull%2FNEJMp0903906>*
>
>
>
> More Information
> - *PubMed Citation
> </cgi/external_ref?access_num=19423872&link_type=PUBMED>*
>
> Vast amounts of time and resources are being invested in planning^ for
> the next influenza pandemic, and one may indeed have already^ begun.
> Data from past pandemics can provide useful insights^ for current and
> future planning. Having conducted archeo-epidemiologic^ research, we
> can clarify certain "signature features" of three^ previous influenza
> pandemics — A/H1N1 from 1918 through^ 1919, A/H2N2 from 1957 through
> 1963, and A/H3N2 from 1968 through^ 1970 — that should inform both
> national plans for pandemic^ preparedness and required international
> collaborations.
>
> Past pandemics were characterized by a shift in the virus subtype,^
> shifts of the highest death rates to younger populations, successive^
> pandemic waves, higher transmissibility than that of seasonal^
> influenza, and differences in impact in different geographic^ regions.
> Although influenza pandemics are classically defined^ by the first of
> these features, the other four characteristics^ are frequently not
> considered in response plans.
>
> Yet the second feature, the shift in mortality toward younger^ age
> groups, was the most striking characteristic of the 20th-century^
> pandemics.^1 <#R1>^, ^2 <#R2> Exposure to influenza A/H1 subtypes
> before 1873^ may have offered some protection to adults over 45 years
> of^ age during the pandemic of 1918 and 1919. A similar mechanism^ of
> antigen recycling might explain the partial protection against^
> influenza-related death that was observed among people over^ 77 years
> of age during the 1968–1970 pandemic —^ a possibility supported by the
> prepandemic presence of antibodies^ to H3, which were isolated in
> people born before 1892.^1 <#R1> Another^ possible mechanism is immune
> potentiation, leading to an increased^ likelihood of lethal outcomes
> after influenza infection in specific^ age groups. Still other
> hypotheses include the possibility of^ bacterial superinfection due to
> asymmetric carriage rates, given^ that higher rates were found among
> young people in 1918 and^ 1919.^1 <#R1>^, ^2 <#R2> Although the
> elderly frequently have the highest death^ rates during seasonal
> epidemics, their relative sparing during^ pandemics has not been
> generally appreciated. Advance knowledge^ of which subpopulations are
> most likely to be at increased risk^ for death can shape the
> optimization of control strategies.
>
> The third feature, a pattern of multiple waves, characterized^ all
> three 20th-century pandemics, each of which caused increased^
> mortality for 2 to 5 years (see chart <#F1>).^1 <#R1> The lethal wave
> in^ the autumn of 1918 was preceded by a first wave in the summer^
> that led to substantial morbidity but relatively low mortality^ in
> both the United States and Europe. Recent studies suggest^ that these
> early mild outbreaks partially immunized the population,^ decreasing
> the mortality impact of the main pandemic wave in^ the fall of 1918.^2
> <#R2> In the United States, the 1957 influenza^ A/H2 pandemic had
> three waves in the United States, with notable^ excess mortality in
> the nonsuccessive winter seasons of 1959^ and 1962 — the latter being
> 5 years after the initial^ emergence of the pandemic strain.^1
> <#R1> From 1968 through 1970, Eurasia^ had a mild first influenza
> season, with the full effects on^ morbidity and mortality occurring in
> the second season of pandemic-virus^ circulation. The reasons for
> multiple waves of varying impact^ are not precisely understood, but
> they probably include adaptation^ of the virus to its new host,
> demographic or geographic variation,^ seasonality, and the overall
> immunity of the population.^1 <#R1>^, ^2 <#R2>The occurrence of
> multiple waves potentially provides time for^ health authorities to
> implement control strategies for successive^ waves.
>
>
> (rest of article can be read at above link)
>
> John
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:53 PM, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag
> <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>> wrote:
>
> Horsefeathers.
>
> WHO, and indeed we should ask, Who?, is distributing to us a what
> amounts to nothing more than a pack of lies thinly veiled with a
> smidgin of the truth
>
> The virus is always "Different" year after year. If that were not
> so, the virus would burn itself out of any susceptible hosts,
> because flu viruses
> are always highly contagious. These fearmongering tax-eaters are
> using the consistent characteristics of the virus and the disease
> to fool the
> public into thinking that there is really something novel and
> unique going on.
>
> The surrealism of it all is astounding. Who's next?
>
>
> On 6/17/2009 12:34 PM, John Fettig wrote:
>> That's exactly the issue...we don't have "continual year after
>> year experience" with this particular virus. Our bodies are well
>> adapted at fighting the "plain old flu", but have basically no
>> defense against this strain of H1N1. We are lucky that it hasn't
>> killed many people, yet. The fact that it hasn't killed that
>> many people has more to do with the virus than it does with our
>> bodies' ability to fight it. But the worst may very well be yet
>> to come, as was the case with the spanish flu, the asian flu, and
>> the hong kong flu.
>>
>> From the WHO:
>> http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/frequently_asked_questions/about_disease/en/index.html
>>
>> *What is the new influenza A(H1N1)?*
>>
>> This is a new influenza A(H1N1) virus that has never before
>> circulated among humans. This virus is not related to
>> previous or current human seasonal influenza viruses.
>>
>>
>> *Why are we so worried about this flu when hundreds of
>> thousands die every year from seasonal epidemics?*
>>
>> Seasonal influenza occurs every year and the viruses change
>> each year - but many people have some immunity to the
>> circulating virus which helps limit infections. Some
>> countries also use seasonal influenza vaccines to reduce
>> illness and deaths.
>>
>> But influenza A(H1N1) is a new virus and one to which most
>> people have no or little immunity and, therefore, this virus
>> could cause more infections than are seen with seasonal flu.
>> WHO is working closely with manufacturers to expedite the
>> development of a safe and effective vaccine but it will be
>> some months before it is available.
>>
>> The new influenza A(H1N1) appears to be as contagious as
>> seasonal influenza, and is spreading fast particularly among
>> young people (from ages 10 to 45). The severity of the
>> disease ranges from very mild symptoms to severe illnesses
>> that can result in death. The majority of people who contract
>> the virus experience the milder disease and recover without
>> antiviral treatment or medical care. Of the more serious
>> cases, more than half of hospitalized people had underlying
>> health conditions or weak immune systems.
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:22 PM, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag
>> <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>> wrote:
>>
>> In which of the 91 years since 1918 was this scenario not
>> equally plausible?
>>
>> Except for one thing -- the continual year after year
>> experience with the bug.
>>
>> It's xenophobia and deja vu all over again. The modern day
>> equivalent of the Witch Craze.
>> If it ain't the Islamofascists, its the Swine Flu and the
>> Chinese.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/16/2009 10:52 PM, John Fettig wrote:
>>> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/influenza/maps/
>>>
>>> This is one very valid reason why we need a vaccine.
>>> The 1918 virus was mild in the spring, but extremely deadly when the flu season hit.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Stuart Levy
>>> <slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu <mailto:slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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>*
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090617/ba9f7451/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list