A great article on CBC.ca has put the H1N1 situation into perspective, something badly needed, especially with all the hype over the vaccine as of late.

You can read the article here

A great interview with a researcher at the University of Victoria which is along the same lines here

I'd have to agree with both of these articles. What do you think?

Thank you, CBC.

And a big middle finger goes out to Global.

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Thank you, CBC.

And a big middle finger goes out to Global.

Man, I really love your posts sometimes :p

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Thank you, CBC.

And a big middle finger goes out to Global.

Haha, that's awesome.

I do think the media has definitely overhyped the risk of H1N1. Just like they overhype the risk of many things because the reporters don't necessarily have a scientific background and they tend to go for "scary" news stories.

However, as a lot of immunologists have pointed out, H1N1 worries them because it doesn't affect the typical "flu" demographic, much like the 1918 Spanish flu. Instead it's lead to complications in younger adults due to their strong immune response (such as IL-6 and IFN-alpha), which ends up producing most of the symptoms.

As mentioned earlier, young adults and the elderly population have different responses to H1N1. The young adults produce more cytotoxic T cells (through Th1) whereas the elderly population produces a weaker response (through Th2 activation).

http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swine.../en/index.html

Regardless of media hype, it's still a good idea to practice proper hygeine like sneezing/coughing into your elbow, disinfecting common surfaces, washing your hands properly and frequently. Let's face it, getting sick during school is a pain.

Originally Posted by Jay

I do think the media has definitely overhyped the risk of H1N1. Just like they overhype the risk of many things because the reporters don't necessarily have a scientific background and they tend to go for "scary" news stories.

However, as a lot of immunologists have pointed out, H1N1 worries them because it doesn't affect the typical "flu" demographic, much like the 1918 Spanish flu. Instead it's lead to complications in younger adults due to their strong immune response (such as IL-6 and IFN-alpha), which ends up producing most of the symptoms.

As mentioned earlier, young adults and the elderly population have different responses to H1N1. The young adults produce more cytotoxic T cells (through Th1) whereas the elderly population produces a weaker response (through Th2 activation).

http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swine.../en/index.html

Regardless of media hype, it's still a good idea to practice proper hygeine like sneezing/coughing into your elbow, disinfecting common surfaces, washing your hands properly and frequently. Let's face it, getting sick during school is a pain.

I find that the media overhypes everything. It's what makes a "good" story.

I also agree, good hygiene should always be practiced whether in flu season or not.

There is something I was wondering about though; purell/hand sanitizer. I know it kills bacteria, but what about viruses? Isn't it completely useless against them?

The point is that swine flu isn't that important/a big deal... it's what I suspected from the start, and now it's starting to come out. People will die, and that's unfortunate, but it's nothing compared to the seasonal flu which we deal with on a regular basis.

Originally Posted by Jay

I do think the media has definitely overhyped the risk of H1N1. Just like they overhype the risk of many things because the reporters don't necessarily have a scientific background and they tend to go for "scary" news stories.

However, as a lot of immunologists have pointed out, H1N1 worries them because it doesn't affect the typical "flu" demographic, much like the 1918 Spanish flu. Instead it's lead to complications in younger adults due to their strong immune response (such as IL-6 and IFN-alpha), which ends up producing most of the symptoms.

As mentioned earlier, young adults and the elderly population have different responses to H1N1. The young adults produce more cytotoxic T cells (through Th1) whereas the elderly population produces a weaker response (through Th2 activation).

http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swine.../en/index.html

Regardless of media hype, it's still a good idea to practice proper hygeine like sneezing/coughing into your elbow, disinfecting common surfaces, washing your hands properly and frequently. Let's face it, getting sick during school is a pain.

Well I can tell you're taking Immunology this year. . H1N1 is actually my PBL question.

Originally Posted by jhan523

I find that the media overhypes everything. It's what makes a "good" story.

I also agree, good hygiene should always be practiced whether in flu season or not.

There is something I was wondering about though; purell/hand sanitizer. I know it kills bacteria, but what about viruses? Isn't it completely useless against them?

As long as it has a certain % of ethanol, I think it was 60%, then it's effective against H1N1.

http://www.journals.uchicago .edu/d...10.1086/595845

Originally Posted by Jay

As long as it has a certain % of ethanol, I think it was 60%, then it's effective against H1N1.

http://www.journals.uchicago .edu/d...10.1086/595845

I see, the lowest amount they used was 61.5%... not sure what the results were saying though. But the conclusion was that they were both (hand washing and alcohol) highly effective. But they didn't test the threshold for the % of ethanol since all 3 of them were effective.

Also, when the Spanish Flu initially circulated, it wasn't so bad. Then it came back with a vengeance. To quote Wikipedia: "The second wave of the 1918 pandemic was much deadlier than the first. The first wave had resembled typical flu epidemics; those most at risk were the sick and elderly, while younger, healthier people recovered easily. But in August, when the second wave began in France, Sierra Leone and the United States, the virus had mutated to a much deadlier form. This has been attributed to the circumstances of the First World War. "

In researching for my PBL question I've found papers describing resistance to Tamiflu and other drugs used in flu treatment. If/When I become eligible for the flu shot (for swine flu), I'll probably get it. Not for me, but so I am less likely to pass it onto people who don't have very good immune systems. I usually don't get the flu vaccine, but that has more to do with forgetfulness.

Originally Posted by Shanel

Also, when the Spanish Flu initially circulated, it wasn't so bad. Then it came back with a vengeance. To quote Wikipedia: "The second wave of the 1918 pandemic was much deadlier than the first. The first wave had resembled typical flu epidemics; those most at risk were the sick and elderly, while younger, healthier people recovered easily. But in August, when the second wave began in France, Sierra Leone and the United States, the virus had mutated to a much deadlier form. This has been attributed to the circumstances of the First World War. "

In researching for my PBL question I've found papers describing resistance to Tamiflu and other drugs used in flu treatment. If/When I become eligible for the flu shot (for swine flu), I'll probably get it. Not for me, but so I am less likely to pass it onto people who don't have very good immune systems. I usually don't get the flu vaccine, but that has more to do with forgetfulness.

Quote from the interview with the drug policy researcher:

Q: But what about the Spanish flu of 1919? Couldn't the swine flu pandemic be a repeat of this massively deadly pandemic?


A: Not likely. It's healthier to think in terms of probabilities, not possibilities.
The Spanish flu had such a high death count partly because it took place in a world without antibiotics and which was much less wealthy and less hygienic than today.


Do we need reminding that in 2005 the World Health Organization predicted that up to 150 million people might die from Avian flu? The eventual death toll was 262 people.

In common usage, an antibiotic is a substance or compound that kills or inhibits the growth of bacteria.
Influenza A (H1N1) virus is a subtype of influenzavirus A and the most common cause of influenza in humans.

Very few antibiotics are used for viruses so I don't know what this guy was talking about.

Originally Posted by Buttle

In common usage, an antibiotic is a substance or compound that kills or inhibits the growth of bacteria.
Influenza A (H1N1) virus is a subtype of influenzavirus A and the most common cause of influenza in humans.

Very few antibiotics are used for viruses so I don't know what this guy was talking about.

When you get sick with one illness, it makes you more susceptible to other illnesses, such as a variety of bacterial infections.

Having antibiotics around matters, since people can suffer from a bad infection as a result of a diminished immune system, or vice-versa, a person with a bacterial infection could catch the flu and be sent over the edge of mortality.

I know what antibiotics are, you don't need to be an ass.

Originally Posted by jhan523

I see, the lowest amount they used was 61.5%... not sure what the results were saying though. But the conclusion was that they were both (hand washing and alcohol) highly effective. But they didn't test the threshold for the % of ethanol since all 3 of them were effective.

I'm pretty sure the 61.5% is the minimum. I think Campus Health will be having an H1N1 table next Friday, so you can always check with them about the % alcohol.

It seems reasonable, 70% EtOH is used to disinfect lab surfaces. So, a less concentrated solution would be fitting for human use.