the "Who has swine flu?" thread

[mrcharly-YHT]

Seems very likely one of my kids has it. Very very mild so far.

[Rapples]

Even wizards get it apparently

Harry Potter star Rupert Grint has swine flu

[rae]

My youngest has had it.  Big deal.  He was ill for two days, I wouldn't have known the difference between this and any other bad childhood cold.  He was worse than normal as it really knocked him flat for two days - normally he sniffles around and wants to play about.  All he wanted to do this time was "go bed".   

If this really is the extent of it, one wonders what the fuss is about.

[border-rider]

one wonders what the fuss is about.

Really ?

How many other flu strains do you recall travelling round the world at this speed and hitting this many people in the UK in July ?

It's mild, for sure, but rather good at propagating.  The concern is that it keeps that ability to spread, takes off for the winter but turns nasty.

[Rhys W]

It even gets nanocelebrities.

[SandyV]

I almost wish I had it instead of the common garden variety I have which has hung around for nearly 2 weeks!  Maybe I'd be over it by now. 
My GP says he has seen a drop in swine flu cases and an upsurge in the one I've got (more of the hacking chesty cough variety).  I suggested it might be "popular" rather than "common" but he didn't seem to agree. 
[I'm in Brisbane Australia and very keen to be well and truly recovered before we leave for UK on the 22nd, preferably without passing it on to the LEL rider, who is not showing me much sympathy for some strange reason]
Someone from my office who went to the GP to get tested for swine flu because a housemate was diagnosed with it was told they're not testing in Australia anymore unless there are strong symptoms or you're in a high risk job.

[rae]

How many other flu strains do you recall travelling round the world at this speed and hitting this many people in the UK in July ? 

It's infectious, but then flu is always infectious.   It has travelled round the world because we all travel round the world.   We clearly have a low immunity to it (because the infection rate is high), but two days of feeling a very crap is hardly the a-pork-alypse.   I last had flu about 10 years ago, and it nailed me for a week.   This is nothing like that.

[border-rider]

How many other flu strains do you recall travelling round the world at this speed and hitting this many people in the UK in July ? 

It's infectious, but then flu is always infectious.   It has travelled round the world because we all travel round the world.   

There's more to it than that or we'd see a permanent pandemic of generic flu.  This is very, very good at spreading.

We clearly have a low immunity to it (because the infection rate is high), but two days of feeling a very crap is hardly the a-pork-alypse.   I last had flu about 10 years ago, and it nailed me for a week.   This is nothing like that.

Sure.  As it stands it's a real threat only to those with an underlying condition that makes them at risk.  What you need for global mayhem is something this spready but with a much worse bite.  There are, as you say, strains with a much worse bite out there in the human infection tank population and in pigs and birds.  As this train gets ubiquitous, the odds of it linking up with a killer-but-not-spready strain get much, much higher.  That's the danger.

There's usually a nasty strain in the wild somewhere; there isn't usually a very spready one.  The lack of spready strain is usually the death-limiting step. Hence the concern.

[rae]

So we're back at "something nasty might happen in the future".  That was always the case.   This isn't it.   The panic about treating this one is hugely overblown, it's out there, just let it go through the population.   Presumably if you get this one, then you'll have some level of immunity to a potential mutant. 

There's more to it than that or we'd see a permanent pandemic of generic flu.   

We have reasonably immunity to most strains.  There is a low level pandemic because every winter lots of people die from flu - hence flu jabs and the like.

[andygates]

Not to this one, we don't, and that's why it spreads so fast.  It's an ordinary flu, but with a much larger target pool, that's why it'll be a pain in the arse.  More people get it, more people die.  The same sickly and old folks, but a sutrprising number of people on this forum are sickly and old too...

[border-rider]

So we're back at "something nasty might happen in the future". 

erm, no

We're at "the rather rare precondition for something truely awful is happening" stage.  The next step is much more common

That was always the case.

No it wasn't.  When was the last summertime pandemic ?

   This isn't it. 

You seem very confident.

The panic about treating this one is hugely overblown

not if you understand what's going on.  There are indeed loads of people suggesting that it's all an aspect of the nanny state wanting to prove how useful it is.  That's just stupidity.

We have reasonably immunity to most strains.

Not to this one, it seems.

There is a low level pandemic because every winter lots of people die from flu - hence flu jabs and the like.

No.That's not a pandemic.  And it's in winter.  That's an illustration of how much more spready this is.

[rae]

There are indeed loads of people suggesting that it's all an aspect of the nanny state wanting to prove how useful it is.  That's just stupidity. 

Did I say nanny state?   I think the media obsession with this is far more of a problem.   Yes, it's flu. Yes, some people will die from flu, they always do.  Yes, it could mutate into something really nasty, it always could.   

Dishing out vast stocks of antivirals to treat this thing is going to look pretty silly if it does mutate....

[border-rider]

There are indeed loads of people suggesting that it's all an aspect of the nanny state wanting to prove how useful it is.  That's just stupidity. 

Did I say nanny state?   

The argument you put is horribly familiar

Yes, it could mutate into something really nasty, it always could.   

We've already done this

To be really bad it needs to be spready and nasty.  Nasty (as you said upthread) isn't uncommon.  Spready is. The rate-limiting step on the road to virulent and nasty is already bypassed.  To get nasty from here requires a not-out-of-the-ordinary step.  The out-of-the-ordinary one has taken place.

Dishing out vast stocks of antivirals to treat this thing is going to look pretty silly if it does mutate....

Indeed.  They've stopped doing so.  It's being left tpo run its course and people aren't being isolated anymore,

[andygates]

Dishing out vast stocks of antivirals to treat this thing is going to look pretty silly if it does mutate....

Indeed.  They've stopped doing so.  It's being left tpo run its course and people aren't being isolated anymore,

And this was always the plan.  It's not as if the professionals have facepalmed, shouted "someone on the internet is right!" and seen the light.  The plan has always been containment while practicable, to buy time for the development and production of a vaccine. 

[clarion]

Absolutely.  Although there are some sticky moments for the folk who have to manage this thing, it's all going to plan.

[rae]

Indeed.  They've stopped doing so.  It's being left tpo run its course and people aren't being isolated anymore, 

Well as of Friday evening they were still dishing it out.

[clarion]

In certain areas.  It's not the same all over.  The action is staged according to local circumstances.

[andygates]

Which is also part of the plan.  Rae, you're criticising people for doing something without knowing what they're doing or why.  It's a sign of internet disease. 

[rae]

And this was always the plan.  It's not as if the professionals have facepalmed, shouted "someone on the internet is right!" and seen the light.  

Read my first post.  Did I mention the word plan?  Did I say the approach was wrong?  I mentioned the word "fuss" - and there is a lot of this in the news.   Fuss about the immediate effects of this illness - which is very mild.   Very little mention of the more esoteric scenarios that MV is talking about.  As far as the public is concerned, there's this killer virus on the loose and it is going to get us all..when actually this thing is like a bad cold for 2 days.

If you want me to be picky about the plan, I would have suggested that they gave up aggressive intervention about a month ago - as soon as it is in schools, it is all over.  But hey, that's details.  

[border-rider]

Read my first post.  Did I mention the word plan?  Did I say the approach was wrong?  I mentioned the word "fuss"

You suggested that the fuss was largely groundless.  It isn't.  This is important, and many people grasp that.  No surprise it makes the news.

more esoteric scenarios that MV is talking about. 

I think you're still not getting  it.  What I'm suggesting isn't esoteric.  It's actually not that unlikely.  It's the thing that the plan is in place to try to manage as best it can.  As a working hypothesis for how the whole of our society could go tits-up in a very short time, it's really worth paying some attention to.

As far as the public is concerned, there's this killer virus on the loose and it is going to get us all..when actually this thing is like a bad cold for 2 days.

I think the media coverage has been quite good on this - stressing that many people have it and that the very few who have died have other problems.  It's hard to see how it could be played any other way.

If you want me to be picky about the plan, I would have suggested that they gave up aggressive intervention about a month ago - as soon as it is in schools, it is all over.  But hey, that's details. 

Where it's more than an isolated case, they did.

[iakobski]

I think the media coverage has been quite good on this - stressing that many people have it and that the very few who have died have other problems.  It's hard to see how it could be played any other way.

Wasn't the position a few weeks back that this flu was a problem because it was killing healthy people? Is the current one here different to the one in the America's?

[rae]

You suggested that the fuss was largely groundless.  It isn't.  This is important, and many people grasp that.  No surprise it makes the news.  

The fuss about the effects of this disease is (based on my experience of it), pretty much groundless.   You have also admitted that it is mild.  

Now, it may turn into something else.  It may not.  At the moment it is a mild illness.  

OK so far?  

So, what I would expect to see is the news saying: this thing is not a big deal, but what it might turn into could well be a big deal.  Do not panic about getting this, it is incredibly unlikely to kill you unless you are very ill already, just like ordinary flu.   Unless you are seriously ill already, just go to bed.   They don't report people dying of "normal" flu....do they?

It spills over in to the real world.  We have "swine flu contingency plans" at work.  Not "son of swine flu", but swine flu.  The plan is aligned for an illness that wipes people out for weeks - and doesn't work at all with something that lasts about 2 days.

[border-rider]

You suggested that the fuss was largely groundless.  It isn't.  This is important, and many people grasp that.  No surprise it makes the news.   

The fuss about the effects of this disease is (based on my experience of it), pretty much groundless.   You have also admitted that it is mild. 

Now, it may turn into something else.  It may not.  At the moment it is a mild illness. 

OK so far? 

No.

The fuss isn't groundless because the fuss is about a flu pandemic.  A flu pandemic of even a mild strain, is the first (and rate-limiting) step towards something very nasty.

So, what I would expect to see is the news saying: this thing is not a big deal, but what it might turn into could well be a big deal.  Do not panic about getting this, it is incredibly unlikely to kill you unless you are very ill already, just like ordinary flu.   Unless you are seriously ill already, just go to bed.   They don't report people dying of "normal" flu....do they?

which is remarkably like the coverage I saw on the BBC 10 o'clock news last night.

  The plan is aligned for an illness that wipes people out for weeks - and doesn't work at all with something that lasts about 2 days.

 Do you not suspect that the detailed implementation of the plan might evolve with the aetiology of the disease ?

[mattc]

  What I'm suggesting isn't esoteric.  It's actually not that unlikely. 

If "esoteric" means:
"way beyond the ability of most news channels to explain lucidly (and possibly beyond the comprehension of most presenters/journos)"

then I'd say it is

[border-rider]

Wasn't the position a few weeks back that this flu was a problem because it was killing healthy people? Is the current one here different to the one in the America's?

it's not killy like it seems to have been in  Mexico.  Which is a piece of luck.