Slashdot Mirror


US Declares Public Health Emergency Over Swine Flu

mallumax sends word from the NYTimes that US government officials today declared a public health emergency over increasing cases of the swine flu first seen in Mexico. Here is additional coverage from CNN. From the Times: "American health officials [say]... that they had confirmed 20 cases of the disease in the United States and expected to see more as investigators fan out to track down the path of the outbreak. Other governments around the world stepped up their response to the incipient outbreak, racing to contain the infection amid reports of potential new cases from New Zealand to Hong Kong to Spain, raising concerns about the potential for a global pandemic. The cases in US looked to be similar to the deadly strain of swine flu that has killed more than 80 people in Mexico and infected 1,300 more." Reader "The man who walks in the woods" sends a link to accounts emailed to the BBC from readers in Mexico. While these are anecdotal, they do paint a picture of a more serious situation than government announcements have indicated so far.

695 comments

  1. Re:first post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Q - What illness caused the pig to fly?

    A - Swine flu.

  2. Is this flu really "special"? by timeOday · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The flu kills thousands of people every year. Why does this one have a special name? I can't decide how scared to be. As if there were anything I could do about it anyways.

    1. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by RsG · · Score: 5, Informative

      Those thousands that die are among hundreds of thousands or more who get infected. This strain has infected far fewer people, yet killed more of them, so the mortality rate is much higher.

      If infection became widespread, as was the case in 1918, then we could be looking at serious losses.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    2. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Trouble is "the flu" isn't really a single entity. There are numerous different strains, with different behavior, different preferred hosts, and different degrees of lethality. This one is rather worse than the usual.

      Adding to the nuisance, is the fact that flu strains can swap components with one another to produce exotic variants quickly. Pigs are excellent for that, because they have their own strains, and some degree of susceptibility to certain avian and human strains.

      It might well burn itself out; but it would be a pity if it were the start of Spanish flu 2.0 (now with high speed air travel!).

    3. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Gerafix · · Score: 0

      This influenza virus is a strain that utilizes pig, bird, and human genetic information. Also this is the first recorded time Swine flu has passed from human to human.

    4. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by etymxris · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, this flu is different. It is primarily killing young healthy adults. It looks to work the same way as the 1918 flu, killing those with the healthiest immune systems through the "cytokine storm".

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:W_curve.png

    5. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Why does this one have a special name?

      a) It is genetically different from the usual flus.
      b) In 1918 a form of swine flu killed millions.

      > I can't decide how scared to be.

      So far it seems to kill only Mexicans. I suppose you could construct a conspiracy theory around that.

      > As if there were anything I could do about it anyways.

      Avoid people. They're dangerous.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Informative

      > This influenza virus is a strain that utilizes pig, bird, and human genetic information.

      This influenza virus is a strain that utilizes pig, bird, and human influenza genetic information.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    7. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by SnowZero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The flu kills thousands of people every year. Why does this one have a special name?

      So far it seems to have a 5% mortality rate, which is above normal. Usually mortality is 5% of those hospitalized, rather than 5% of all. Of course, the stats are from small numbers that are very new, so we'll have to wait for better information. It's certainly worth paying attention to though.

      I can't decide how scared to be. As if there were anything I could do about it anyways.

      If everyone would make an extra effort to wash their hands, cover their nose/mouth when coughing, and stay the f*** home from work/school when you are sick, that would help. If you can slow the spread, researchers can get a better understanding of the flu and how to treat it before everyone gets sick.

      Avian flu still seems much worse though, since it has a much higher mortality rate, in particular among the young. It doesn't seem to be able to spread as fast though, thus the concern about this new flu.

    8. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also this is the first recorded time Swine flu has passed from human to human.

      Nope

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    9. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by knappe+duivel · · Score: 0, Redundant

      that is a new low, even for you, mr coward

    10. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by maxume · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Others have mentioned the rather high (apparent) mortality rate (the numbers are quite thin at this point). Another factor increasing the attention is that the flu season is usually over by now.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Narpak · · Score: 5, Informative
      Quoted from Wikipedia:

      The 1918 flu pandemic (commonly referred to as the Spanish flu) was an influenza pandemic that spread to nearly every part of the world. It was caused by an unusually virulent and deadly Influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1. Historical and epidemiologic data are inadequate to identify the geographic origin of the virus.[1] Most of its victims were healthy young adults, in contrast to most influenza outbreaks which predominantly affect juvenile, elderly, or otherwise weakened patients. The pandemic lasted from March 1918 to June 1920, spreading even to the Arctic and remote Pacific islands. It is estimated that anywhere from 20 to 100 million people were killed worldwide.

      While we, at least industrialized countries, are far better equipped to deal with another major outbreak than in 1918; I feel taking precautions would be the rational thing to do.

    12. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Animaether · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you'd take a little time to read about it... yes, it's 'really' special.

      I'm not saying "ZOMG WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE"-special - we're not, as it is, many of those infected happily survive.

      Let's start with 'the flu', though.. There is no 'the flu'. Influenza is a big ol' family of viruses.

      This one - although it baffles me why the media latched onto 'swine' as their name for it, maybe the pork industry lobbied strongly against naming it 'pork' or 'pig' flu - is one of the mutations of form H1N1 ('bird flu' was H5N1; H and N refer to certain protein types). That only tells part of the story as there's multiple H1N1s with different aminoacids and whatnot, like yea olde Spanish flu (yeah, the proper pandemic one) was H1N1 as well. There's the first 'special' bit; it shares a name with the Spanish flu.

      Won't go into details about how it differs from Spanish flu - suffice it to say that this particular strain of H1N1 influenza appears to be a mixture of porcine, bird and human flu viruses' RNA. From there comes the second 'special' bit. It's 'rare' that the flu jumps species from pigs to humans in general, even rarer for it to thrive, but even more rare that it appears to spread between humans.

      Now for the third special bit... even H5N1 - that other 'big scare' - mostly affected the (really) young, the elderly, and the weak in terms of severity. This one, however, seems to just as happily make young healthy adults sick.

      That's why it deserves its own little name. As for how scared you should be:
      'Swine' flu responds well to the relatively recent anti-flu drug Oseltamivir (marketing name: Tamiflu). That is to say, it gets killed pretty quickly and eradicated from the body if treatment is followed through (yeah, I know, right?). That's good news for the producers of Tamiflu who love having this in the news, and for their shareholders who saw their stock skyrocket as a result. It's pretty special that there's tons of people out there just waiting around to make money off of this kind of thing.
      Oh, and it's also good news for those infected, of course.

      Unfortunately, Tamiflu (and others) are prescribed willy-nilly as seasonal flu drugs (despite the CDC advising against it; like 'advice' matters if there's a mint to be made), making it all the more likely that more resistant strains will pop up in due time.
      At the same time, being a relatively recent drug, not all of the side-effects are fully known and understood yet.

      As for what you can do about it...
      - I wouldn't plan a trip to Mexico and go frolic with any pigs if I were you.
      - I wouldn't swap spit/etc. with any of the students already diagnosed as being possibly infected.
      - If you are infected with any type of flu.. cover your mouth when sneezing/coughing, wash hands regularly. Won't do much for you, but it'll help prevent spreading of it.

      Speaking of the CDC.. they have some pretty decent pages up as well:
      http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/general_info.htm

    13. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was in Mexico for most of March. We all got sick - a bout of D & V, fatigue, sometimes fever or coughing. Everyone has some combination of these symptoms, sleeps a lot, feels better, feels worse again, slowly recovers. Some people get it immediately, some take a few weeks.
      My wife was worried about the children, apparently the emergency departments in Mexico are wall-to-wall children being IV'd for dehydration. I bought a dozen bottles of gatorade and dished them out - nobody wants the stuff when they feel lousy, but when they start to pick up they'll knock it back - I put away two large bottles in half an hour.
      I wasn't ever very concerned - we were all sick, but I'm a parent and I've seen worse. If you're worried call your doctor, but don't panic just because other people are sick. If your kids tell you they feel lousy, comfort them. If they're seriously groggy or unresponsive, have them looked at.
      My best advice is to leave the bathroom door wide open, the light on and the seat up - the younger ones need any help they can get. Keep buckets by the beds, have lots of towels to clean up accidents, stock up on whatever they think is a treat to drink, take your time and don't panic, just ride it out.
      Oh - if someone in your house has it, you all will. If you have kids, have someone who will come and take care of them when you get it. You can do the same for them later.

      Augustus

    14. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by bornwaysouth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I live in New Zealand, which now has (as far as we can test) a Swine flu outbreak among kids returning from a Mexican school trip. Basically, it seems under control due to competent home hygiene, plus intense medical supervision. So, yes it does spread fast. And for those of you who can't find New Zealand on a map. Don't worry about that, a pandemic will find you.

      What is really valuable about this is that it looks to be a fairly safe, almost ideal model for the real thing. A test for how competently a pandemic is managed locally. Listening to the news this morning (we are 16 hours ahead of the US), our authorities seem to have concentrated all their efforts in micromanaging the school threat, and ignored contamination of everyone else on the plane. Provided the officials stay inside the school, they should be safe.

      Personally, I'd prefer a bunch of veterinarians running it who aren't allowed to shoot and burn. At least they have a holistic approach. However, I'm getting old and cynical. Younger people seem to prefer touchy-feely sorry-about-the-megadeaths administrators.

    15. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      china

      There are a few upsides to such locked-down regimes.
      Chiefly: easier to control population movements, so it can't spread as far.

      south america

      Don't they have their own exotic diseases to worry about?

      islamic countries

      Less likely than China. Personal contact is already kept at a minimum.

    16. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Peter+H.S. · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The flu kills thousands of people every year. Why does this one have a special name?.

      Flu usually kills the very old and the very young. From what I have read, this one is different; it kills young and healthy persons, a segment that rarely dies from normal flu. The so called Spanish Flu (or Grippe) from around the first world war had a very similar fatality pattern. Since that pandemic attack killed at least 50 million people around the world it is clear that this new flu must be taken very, very seriously. There doesn't seem to be that much hard evidence around regarding the symptoms though; does it attack the lungs in the same way as the Grippe? It appears that the Grippe turned peoples own immune system against themselves which is why young healthy persons with good immune systems died in such large numbers and often so violently fast.

      From what little info I have seen it appears that this swine Flu attack and kills some young and healthy persons, while other victims have very mild symptoms; that is the exact same pattern as the first major wave of the Grippe. According to some researchers this attack pattern caused the Grippe virus strain to be refined to the extremely deadly strain it was when it attacked again. Some victims died within an hour of having the first symptoms, and people would literally drop dead without warning while walking in the streets, pupils in classrooms would suddenly fall over their desk dead.

      --
      Regards

    17. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Tsiangkun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      wasn't 1918 flu a swine flu ? Isn't this also similar to the 1918 flu in that it overwhelms the immune response in healthy young people, leading to mortality being higher in younger healthier people than the elderly ?

    18. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With this cytokine storm, would intentionally weakening the immune system then increase the chance of survival? From what I've read, it seems both sugar and alcohol would have an immediate weakening effect on the immune system. So if infected: lots of sugar and alcohol?

    19. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by CptNerd · · Score: 4, Funny

      Immediately buy stock in Anheiser-Busch and Dunkin Donuts...

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    20. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful, not funny.

    21. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by jabithew · · Score: 5, Informative

      While we, at least industrialized countries, are far better equipped to deal with another major outbreak than in 1918; I feel taking precautions would be the rational thing to do.

      Don't be so sure about it my friend. My parents work in the NHS. The procedure for a flu pandemic assumes that society will collapse, which will likely be a reasonable assessment. All the preparations have been aimed at H5N1, so though the anti-virals stockpiled will most likely work*, the vaccines will not**.

      I think this one is the real deal. The death rate is high, considering it's in Mexico, which may not be on a par with the UK in medical treatment but isn't sub-Saharan Africa or rural China either.

      The BBC is quoting doctors as saying that this has been around for a week. If people in Mexico City are expressing symptoms, you can bet it's around the world now, by people carrying it during its incubation period. I live in London, and I bet you a tenner that someone, somewhere in this city has this right now.

      *There are some reports that anti-virals are ineffective, I think they're hysteria.
      **They probably wouldn't have anyway.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    22. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by robinesque · · Score: 2

      I had to read those three times before I found the difference.

    23. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Ozlanthos · · Score: 0, Troll

      I don't know that a pandemic or two is such a bad thing...(ie there are too many of us as it is).

      -Oz

    24. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds like you guys just got the shits, which is common for Gringos traveling in Mexico. If you had other symptoms such as fever and/or delirium, then it's probably something else, like this flu...

    25. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is hard here to understand is: how (more) developed is Mexico when compared to the world in 1918?

      Is Mexico so undeveloped to let scary situation like these happen or is the all situation completely out of hand, as in any catastrophic movie of your choice about some virus outbreak?

      But this ain't a movie: it's real people who die, it's real people who travels to all corners of the world within 10 to 20 hours after staying packed in a small airplane with forced ventilation.

      May airport controls now stop this. Hardly: it's clearly too late already if it got to NY and New Zealand.

      Then let me make an example: Amsterdam in the Netherlands has 2 flights per day from Mexico City. No extra controls on the passengers. Many other flights come from CA, TX, NY.
      Flu news hardly reached mainstream news and are almost dismissed in a 'it can't happen here' irresponsible fashion.

      Within three days, more than a million extra people, among which several thousands tourists, will be all packed in the city center and in most case totally drunk partying for Qeensday, the biggest country recurrens of them all.
      What in God's name may then happen after just 2 or three with influenza in the crowds.

    26. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Um, honestly the earth isn't overpopulated in the least and can easily handle a few billion more. Then there is declining birthrates in most of the developed world, so a pandemic really isn't necessary to cut down on the population of the world.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    27. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I was thinking I should quit smoking till the pandemic was over [because I'm unhealthy as hell and always get the worst of a cold]

      Looks like i'll be AOK :D

    28. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      although it baffles me why the media latched onto 'swine' as their name for it, maybe the pork industry lobbied strongly against naming it 'pork' or 'pig' flu

      For what it's worth, I don't think there's a pork industry conspiracy. A member of my immediate family has worked on animal vaccines (incl. swine flu) for a number of years and "swine flu" appears to have been a prevalent term (calling it H1N1 notwithstanding) from it within the industry since long before the most recent activity.

    29. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      stay the f*** home from work/school when you are sick, that would help

      If only it were that easy. Even when I'm ill with things that make me unable to work (such as vomiting every half hour) employers tend to be unsympathetic, even more so when its something where you feel miserable and are sick with something contagious (such as normal influenza), making staying at home little more than a dream. Schools aren't much better and sometimes much worse. For example, school nurses usually have a set fever number where they will not send kids home if they don't reach it (such as 100 degrees) and so even when you are visibly sick, feeling miserable but yet can't hit the magical 100 degree fever, you are stuck in school transmitting whatever you have. And most parents send students to school even with high fevers, when kids are visibly sick, and even when they are vomiting.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    30. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 5, Informative

      *There are some reports that anti-virals are ineffective, I think they're hysteria.

      The US Centers for Disease Control say the following:

      "There are four different antiviral drugs that are licensed for use in the US for the treatment of influenza: amantadine, rimantadine, oseltamivir and zanamivir. While most swine influenza viruses have been susceptible to all four drugs, the most recent swine influenza viruses isolated from humans are resistant to amantadine and rimantadine. At this time, CDC recommends the use of oseltamivir or zanamivir for the treatment and/or prevention of infection with swine influenza viruses."

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    31. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by jabithew · · Score: 1

      There are a few upsides to such locked-down regimes.

      On the contrary, control of people is difficult, and the population is pretty mobile within China. On the other hand, local officials tend to cover up outbreaks for fear of getting into trouble, and if an outbreak spreads successive levels of government deny it to cover their own impotence.

      This is not a crazy anti-government rant, it happened with SARS and H5N1

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    32. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by jabithew · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oseltamivir is the one the NHS has stockpiled, under the brand Tamiflu.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    33. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Ken_g6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This flu kills healthy people by causing fluid buildup in the lungs.

      So, yes, quit smoking!

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
    34. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by DinDaddy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most of the deaths in Mexico were young adults. From the WSJ:

      "Mexican health authorities said the death toll from the new strain of A/H1N1 swine flu remains at 20, and they are continuing to investigate whether more than 1,000 others were infected with the mysterious bug, which attacked in three geographically diverse areas of the country and is taking its heaviest toll in young adults."

      Imagine it's scary for you too. Because it is.

    35. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by powerlord · · Score: 1

      Yes, but as we've seen, the public is now in the position to bypass the government for passing news and information via SMS (of all things), using SARS as the example in that also.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    36. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Cyberax · · Score: 1
    37. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      So stock up on immunosuppressants (I've got mine).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    38. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We don't really know the carrying capacity of the Earth, and at any rate allowing billions to die isn't a valid solution by any reasonable moral standard.

      Continued growth with the current trends is the real problem, but even then there are much more humane solutions than allowing the horrors of history to continue to work their course. Raising the level of development in a region tends to cause a decrease in the birthrate, so much so that Europe is having the opposite problem, so continued efforts to develop poorer states (and, coincidentally, mitigate these kinds of pandemics) is the best way to keep populations under control.

    39. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by SnowZero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good point; I should have added "If your employer has a halfway decent policy, ...". In tech fields, most employers do have a reasonable policy; however in many service fields, the written or unwritten policies are not nearly as accommodating.

      For any employers out there, make sure sick people can stay home, since it is better to lose their (partial) productivity for day, rather than to make the whole office sick.

    40. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by aliquis · · Score: 0, Troll

      [quote]This strain has infected far fewer people, yet killed more of them[/quote]
      O'rly? Source?

    41. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Faylone · · Score: 1

      You must be new here and/or browse at a really high threshold.

    42. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by d_54321 · · Score: 1

      The death rate is high

      From the CDC:
      "as of April 23rd, there were more than 854 cases of pneumonia from the capital. Of those, 59 have died."
      Is 7% a "high" death rate?

    43. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by FictionPimp · · Score: 2, Funny

      Seems like the only solution for a rational government is to outlaw all pigs. I mean think of the children!

    44. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by aliquis · · Score: 2

      Sure it is, off people.

      so a pandemic really isn't necessary to cut down on the population of the world.

      Uhm, from 1 to 6 billion people in 100 years? I doubt less kids here mean less people on the globe.

      It would probably be much better* with just 1 billion people or so, but then most of us don't want to die off this anyway.

      * Unless you consider our intelligence and chance of being the first specie leaving their original home planet and spreading life thru the universe and such things.

    45. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

      Yea, I had a conversation with a taco bell manager about how fucking gross it was that his employee was coughing and blowing his nose every 5 seconds at the register.

      He basically told me he didn't care. I haven't been back.

    46. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > This influenza virus is a strain that utilizes pig, bird, and human genetic information.

      This influenza virus is a strain that utilizes pig, bird, and human influenza genetic information.

      This influenza virus is a strain that utilizes pig-, bird-, and human-influenza genetic information.

      If you want to nitpick, be at least precise.

    47. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by jabithew · · Score: 1

      The information can flow, sure, but the public can probably do little about it.

      I hate to use the analogy, but look at the Corrupted Blood plague. Actually quite instructive in its own way.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    48. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by digitalderbs · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you should bring that up. I went to a talk that studied this curve and the 1918 virus (from exhumed bodies) carefully. The U-curve makes sense because the youngest and oldest are less equiped to fight an infection. The unusual bump -- in the healthiest of people -- coincides with the ages of soldiers. He suggested that this was in part a problem of diagnosis, considering that it was during the end of a World War. i.e. the central numbers might be inflated.

    49. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, 20 confirmed fatalities out of ~1,000 known cases is not enough for me to start panicking. Call me when the mortality rate reaches double digits. And there are things we don't know. First, how old were the people who died? Second, what was their general state of health? If they were all over 60 and already sick with something else, chances are this bug is no worse than any other strain of the flu. And let's not forget - there are over 20,000,000 people in Mexico DF, and so far only 1,000 cases of this new bug have been reported there and far, far fewer than that in the US. Colour me unimpressed.

      It seems like we go through this every year or two. A "new" version of the flu (and they're ALL new; if the bug never changed you'd get sick once and then your body's antibodies would wipe it out every time and you'd never get sick again) shows up and people start to panic and then nothing happens. A few people get sick, a few old or immune-compromised people die and the general population goes about its business.

      I'd like to think we could learn to control our impulse to panic, but I know it's nearly impossible with the media feeding our collective paranoia. Still, I'd like to share some advice I got from a very friendly-looking book one time: Don't Panic. Please?

    50. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats correct, should not be less than 38C/100.4F. Also fever should not be medicated (unless a reason) until person reaches 39-39.5/102.2F-103.1F. This is at least for those who are living in the northern hemisphere maybe its little different for those living in warmer climates. The fever actually does a job, and if you medicate to soon or just to get rid of the symptoms you will be ill longer.

    51. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by palindrome · · Score: 1, Informative

      If it travels through china and south america, we'll all be better off. If it hits the islamic countries, and kills a bunch, I'll start believing in god.

      I'm sorry, did I miss the change in tagline?

      "Slashdot: News for racists. Life for whites who matter"?

      Just when the fuck did this become acceptable as long as it's -1 troll?

      Sorry, I've been away a while, it's a bit of a shock.

    52. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by benjamindees · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's a new strain of "swine" flu (only called that because it originated in swine) that contains elements of bird, human, and swine flu viruses. It is transmitted between humans. Stop spreading misinformation.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    53. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by palindrome · · Score: 1

      That's car crash punctuation, it's giving me nausea.

    54. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by zxjio · · Score: 5, Informative

      Is 7% a "high" death rate?

      Wikipedia has normal flu mortality at 0.1%.

    55. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by inamorty · · Score: 2, Funny

      The only solution is to call al gore. If anyone can kill off the manbirdpig flu, it's him.

    56. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats correct, should not be less than 38C/100.4F. Also fever should not be medicated (unless a reason) until person reaches 39-39.5/102.2F-103.1F. This is at least for those who are living in the northern hemisphere maybe its little different for those living in warmer climates. The fever actually does a job, and if you medicate to soon or just to get rid of the symptoms you will be ill longer.

      He's not saying they should be medicated, you moron. He said they should be sent home. They still have a virus which is transmittable to all the other children around.

    57. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by telso · · Score: 3, Informative

      'Swine' flu responds well to the relatively recent anti-flu drug Oseltamivir (marketing name: Tamiflu). That is to say, it gets killed pretty quickly and eradicated from the body if treatment is followed through (yeah, I know, right?). That's good news for the producers of Tamiflu who love having this in the news, and for their shareholders who saw their stock skyrocket as a result.

      Skyrocket, eh? Gilead Sciences, which developed Tamiflu/Oseltamivir, and Roche, which markets it, haven't moved much since the outbreak started on March 18 (although this was apparently assumed to be regular flu for a few days, so it's hard to tell when people would have noticed this, although there is a weird spike in volume on March 18 even though the price barely moved (there was also a similar spike the last two days this week, but the price dropped 10%)). Further, the price hasn't moved much during any identifiable period I can see; GILD had an 8% bounce over two days at the beginning of April (which it has now lost), but this is much smaller movement than what was seen in January and February.

      On the other hand Zanamivir (trade name Relenza), developped by Biota and marketed by GlaxoSmithKline has seen some movement. GSK, like Roche and GILD, had some movement since March 18 but nothing out of the ordinary (10% max movement and 0% net over the period), especially compared to the previous two months. Biota, on the other hand, has jumped nearly 40% this week, and has had an identifiable volume jump this week. Is this related to the pandemic? Maybe, but the company released a press release Thursday saying its royalties from Relenza for the first three months of 2009 (mostly before the swine flu) were sixteen times greater than the average royalties over the preceding two 3-month periods, and market regulators are wondering if there was some insider trading going on that anticipated the report. That's certainly likely to affect the price independent of the swine flu.

      It's pretty special that there's tons of people out there just waiting around to make money off of this kind of thing.

      Since the price of any of these shares has not skyrocketed as you claimed, and arguably may have gone down, depending when you decide the information could have been reasonably public that people could have figured out to invest in these companies, it seems the opportunity for these people waiting around to make money is still there. Perhaps as someone thinking about these things without looking at any facts, maybe you should just jump right in.

      P.S. Don't forget to check out the next season of The Sarah Connor Chronicles this fall on FOX.

    58. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could it be that you do not understand the meaning of the word "Also?"

    59. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is 7% a "high" death rate?

      Wikipedia has normal flu mortality at 0.1%.

      Which is pretty much the number of people who are always within a few months of death because of age and/or illness.

    60. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Don't be so sure about it my friend. My parents work in the NHS. The procedure for a flu
      > pandemic assumes that society will collapse

      I'd be willing to bet you quite a large amount of money that it won't (think about that for a minute before you answer).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    61. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just when the fuck did this become acceptable as long as it's -1 troll?

      Check the moderation log. It was never -1 troll. It is -1 flamebait. And you fell for it. Welcome back to the internet.

    62. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by flyingfsck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also bear in mind that the population explosion happened after the 1918 flu period. To to put it in perspective, you should probably inflate the numbers by 10 so consider about a billion people dying today.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    63. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      sorry, I don't reply seriously to anyone who says "o'rly". Besides, you could just RTFA for your answer.

    64. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Who said it was acceptable? -1 troll clearly says that it's not.

    65. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      The BBC is quoting doctors as saying that this has been around for a week. If people in Mexico City are expressing symptoms, you can bet it's around the world now, by people carrying it during its incubation period. I live in London, and I bet you a tenner that someone, somewhere in this city has this right now.

      So far, no reports of London. But, there are two potential cases that have become public up in Scotland. So, whether or not it's in your city, it's almost certainly on your island.

    66. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Try this then:

      Whenever you're sick with an unpleasant contagious disease, go to your boss and shake his hand (say something if necessary). If he has his own room, put your germs on the door knobs/handles.

      --
    67. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by interactive_civilian · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't they have their own exotic diseases to worry about?

      And this has an effect on the spread of this particular disease because...?

      islamic countries

      Less likely than China. Personal contact is already kept at a minimum.

      No offense intended, but what the fuck are you talking about? In my experience, people in Muslim countries are more hands on than most western countries: greetings involve long handshakes, several kisses on the cheeks, hugs, and so on. Men are much less self-conscious about hugging, holding hands, or putting their arms over each other's shoulders (all out of friendship, so spare us the "OMG THEY ALL HAVE TEH GAY" comments). All in all, you will probably find much more interpersonal contact. I can only assume that the reason you see it as less is because of the extreme gender divide that exists in those countries.

      Not to defend Mr. Coward's idiotic comments, but yours are equally uniformed.

      --
      "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
    68. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by hazem · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you should bring that up. I went to a talk that studied this curve and the 1918 virus (from exhumed bodies) carefully. The U-curve makes sense because the youngest and oldest are less equiped to fight an infection. The unusual bump -- in the healthiest of people -- coincides with the ages of soldiers.

      It could also be a simple matter than those in their 20's to 40's more often encounter other people. Little kids are more likely to be home-bound and encounter a limited number of people, as do older people. Yet if they encounter someone contagious, they're more likely to die from it.

      People between 20 and 40 are out encountering many more different people while they work, shop, and go about the business of life. With more chances for infection it's possible that many more people in that middle group get infected. Even if a lower percentage of the infected die, there might be many more who were infected; so the overall mortality rate among the entire population in that age range appears higher.

      That's just speculation. We'd need to see the infection rates broken down by age as well to see if this might explain the higher death rate.

    69. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Tyr.1358 · · Score: 1

      What bothers me is how fast it is going. The day before yesterday CNN-dot-com said that, exlcuding victims in mexico, there were only eight (8) confirmed deaths in the US. Yesterday evening there were eleven (11).

      Now there are twenty (20). Those are pretty big jumps, right? OR is it to early to tell?

    70. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          You know the way this works. The smart people will be the worst impacted demographic. The idiots on cell phones who don't realize that their call is less important than their lives, will survive happily. In a short period, idiocracy will become reality, and your sister will be dancing at Starbucks.

          But hey, that's why people call me an optimist. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    71. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      Lucky you, I got full-blown whiplash and a broken rib!

    72. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If it gets a foothold in Madagascar before they close the port we're well and truly screwed.

    73. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Abreu · · Score: 1

      There is a British Airways 747 that flies everyday on weekdays between Mexico City Airport and London Heathrow. My buddies in the airport tell me it usually flies full.

      So yeah, this cat is out of the bag.

      And for what its worth, the first few cases were discovered in Texas and California, and only later detected in Mexico City

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    74. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      TFS mentioned 80 cases in Mexico where it started, the grandparent of my post said thousand o people per year.

      Afaik x k > 80+ where x > 1.

      I don't doubt the mortality though, but killed more?
      Maybe he meant over the latest days in the region or something such.

    75. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Abreu here reporting from Mexico City:

      Small kids and the elderly get the regular influenza vaccine for free every year in November and December*. So this could be a reason why these usually-vulnerable groups are resisting this virus a little bit better than young adults.

      * Because here, like in other civilized countries, we do have (semi)universal healthcare

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    76. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Abreu · · Score: 1

      There is not a single Taco Bell in Mexico. That should be hint enough for anybody looking for Mexican food.

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    77. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by PachmanP · · Score: 0

      and at any rate allowing billions to die isn't a valid solution by any reasonable moral standard.

      The strong/adapted survive the weak/susceptible die. What other moral standard is there?

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
    78. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by DrgnDancer · · Score: 1

      True this. Middle Easterners frown upon physical contact between members of the opposite sex, but between member of the same sex friendship is a very physical activity.

      --
      I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
    79. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Trouble is "the flu" isn't really a single entity.

      We are The Flu. Resistance is futile.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    80. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, almost the same thing was on 4cdhan in a thread stating chans should post misinformation and fan th flames of chaos. good to see ya here working anon.

    81. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by RsG · · Score: 1

      I believe I said "Has infected far fewer people, yet killed more of them" which should be read as "killed more of the people it infects". If that was unclear, let me reiterate; I'm referring to the percentage killed out of the total number infected, not the gross casualty rate.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    82. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      So's the NZ government. The note in our systems attached to it though say it's restricted to infectious disease physicians, so it's not hugely abundant.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    83. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      This one's relatively unique in that the mortality of 20-40 year olds is higher than usual (most influenza strains, the mortality rate is low from 20-40 and high among children and elderly)

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    84. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      It kills more young healthy people than the old and infants and sick.

    85. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Informative

      Mortality rate was -only- 2.5% of those infected during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic. A normal flu is something like .1% of those infected.

      Even with the 'official' death statistics - 80 out of 1380 - the death toll is about 5.7%. That's fucking huge, yet unofficial reports are claiming as high as 2-3x as many as the official death count (such as in the OP's linked article).

      This is almost beyond scary.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    86. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by RsG · · Score: 3, Informative

      That isn't what happened in 1918. Nothing tangible has changed since then in regards to how a flu pandemic affects us; we have a very limited capacity to vaccinate against every strain of influenza.

      Every false alarm is essentially meaningless; the one time it isn't a false alarm, we really do need to react. When that happens, not acting quickly will cost lives. The 1918 outbreak infected a billion (half the population at the time) and killed upwards of a hundred million; a similar outbreak today might kill anywhere from 120-600 million. If the mortality rate does hit the double digits, and we've done nothing up until that point, we're fucked.

      Also, you are badly misinformed about the nature of the casualties this time around. Most flu outbreaks only kill the old, the young and the immune compromised. This one killed healthy adults.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    87. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by kd5zex · · Score: 1

      Yea, I had a conversation with a taco bell manager about how fucking gross it was that his employee was coughing and blowing his nose every 5 seconds at the register.

      He basically told me he didn't care. I haven't been back.

      I thought that was SOP...

      Oh well, what do you expect for "meals" for under $10?

      Although, you can't rule out the cashier having a case of bong cough and just snorting a fat line.

    88. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Informative

      The regular vaccine does not cover this particular strain, so not really.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    89. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      That's not true anymore. Last year they opened some shops in Mexico. That said, they still suck.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    90. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Old97 · · Score: 1

      I've heard the 20 million estimate many times, but not the 100 million. That sounds exaggerated (like the supposed "150,000 missing children" in the U.S. each year - the math doesn't work and it includes child custody disputes, kids who go to a friends house without telling their caretakers and many other fairly harmless incidents. Do you have a real source? Wikipedia is not the most reliable source. That's not to say that I think we are over reacting yet. I don't know, and the death rate among teens and young adults certainly is a cause for concern.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    91. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Listening to the news this morning (we are 16 hours ahead of the US), our authorities seem to have concentrated all their efforts in micromanaging the school threat, and ignored contamination of everyone else on the plane. Provided the officials stay inside the school, they should be safe.

      Yes, well, stop listening to the news. I assure you it's taken a bit more seriously than that.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    92. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by XnavxeMiyyep · · Score: 1

      eight (8) confirmed deaths in the US

      Eight confirmed CASES. None of them died. In fact, they've all recovered.

      --
      I put the 't' in electrical engineering.
    93. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Old97 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We don't really know the carrying capacity of the Earth, and at any rate allowing billions to die isn't a valid solution by any reasonable moral standard.

      That's interesting. So your statement preemptively declares all opposing positions as being "unreasonable". You also assume that "valid" solutions must be moral as you define it and that we must have a solution.

      Why is death by disease immoral? Why is not making extraordinary efforts to treat the diseases of others immoral? By who's standard other than yours?

      If you are a religious person than I can understand your position. If you are not then I wonder how you arrived at it. I don't know where you are coming from here, but I do wonder about the large number of people in the West who renounce or ignore religious faith and yet still have this sense of moral certainty and who freely make moral judgement of one and all.

      I'm not trying to pick on you personally, but /. is full of people who on one hand are quite certain in their moral judgements and yet mock religion and the religious. It's sort of a "mock religion" they seem to follow if you'll pardon the pun.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    94. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by adamchou · · Score: 1

      b) In 1918 a form of swine flu killed millions.

      i know your post was a joke... but actually, the 1918 flu was an avaian variant

    95. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 1

      While our intelligence, strength, speed, agility, resistance to disease and other useful traits are certainly a product of natural selection, it seems that the human ability for compassion, empathy and community is just as important an evolutionary trait.

      Those with childhood diseases, or severe allergies, or even particularly bad near-sightedness can contribute a lot to society; in fact they often contribute more intellectually since their troubles prevent them from developing more physical skills. The elderly, while no longer providing any physical labor are valuable for their experience and knowledge. A healthy sense of responsible communal living allows all of the specialization and development that have given humans an evolutionary advantage. While these developed at a very local scale, that doesn't mean that the same values don't apply at a larger global scale. In other words, our compassion and humanity make us better adapted and we should make use of them.

      That, and of course that the scariest thing about this particular flu strain is that it hits the young, strong, and adapted.

    96. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Funny

          If a billion died, that would be a bad thing. There are 6.77 billion people on earth (Apr 2009 estimate), so if 15% of the world died (1 billion), it would be catastrophic.

          We haven't even begun to understand what happens when modern bodies decompose. It won't be pretty. For most of the 100 billion people that have lived and died on earth, most have been "all natural" people. They've eaten from the land, and haven't had any modifications done. In more recent years, that's changed. We have ingested more heavy metals than should even exist in nature. We have teeth filled with toxic materials; capped with toxic materials; bones reinforced with metal implants; cosmetic alterations done with synthetic implants; poisons injected throughout our lives (vaccines, medications, etc). On top of this, when we die we are filled with more dangerous chemicals, placed in a coffin inside a vault, which are made to last for at least 100 years. What would happen if 15% of the population died in rapid succession? The 100 year safety net would disappear. We probably wouldn't embalm our dead. Mass grave sites would take the remains, and let them rot in the ground. In a relatively short period of time, the toxins that we currently vault away in the ground would leach into the ground quickly, contaminating the drinking water.

          But hey, I'm the eternal optimist. Maybe most people aren't all that toxic. ha.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    97. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Qzukk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which is pretty much the number of people who are always within a few months of death because of age and/or illness.

      Which is the difference between the "normal" flu, which kills infants and old people, and any of the historical "pandemic" flus, which killed young and middle-aged adults.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    98. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "If you are a religious person than I can understand your position. If you are not then I wonder how you arrived at it. I don't know where you are coming from here, but I do wonder about the large number of people in the West who renounce or ignore religious faith and yet still have this sense of moral certainty and who freely make moral judgement of one and all."

      Religion was invented to explain and exploit our existing "morals". "Thou shall not kill" did not come from God it came from a man who was expressing what billions of years of evolution has made him think. Sure you can attempt to rationalise these inate morals away but if you manage to that then you will probably be classified as a phycopath or at the very least a sociopath.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    99. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It does cover similar H1N1 strains, but I'd like to think the CDC or WHO came out and said that no, it shouldn't be providing protection against this one.

      More likely is that it kills via the immune system overreacting (cytokene storm, or cytokene feedback loop) and affects people with stronger immune systems more potently. Incidentally, this is also how H5N1 is speculated to kill. I'm never one to make light of tragedy, but if this gets serious it'll be a chance to test new treatments that have been underway to prevent cytokene feedback from killing patients, which could give us a huge advantage in the long run. (Especially if H5N1 becomes efficiently human-to-human transmissible.) While it can take months to develop a vaccine, if a drug can be produced that counteracts the most lethal symptom of the disease until it naturally runs its course, that could save countless lives and -be ready any time we need it-.

    100. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by bornwaysouth · · Score: 1

      The person I listened to on the news was not some TV actor paid for voice and face quality. I listened to radio, and the person talking was a senior health official. They did radiate concern. No problems about the 'serious bit'. They had reacted rapidly and effectively and had stomped on the immediate problem. My wife (PhD Microbiology) and I had a particular interest. Our daughter lives and works in the area the affected school is in.

      What concerned us was that the response seemed to have drained the capacity of Health to broaden its concern to other potentially affected people. Having a new government committed to depleting the Civil Service will not have helped them. Our epidemic response group came across as in severe danger of being overwhelmed. Not enough people, not enough authority.

      As for my reference to veterinarians. I am moderately aware of plans for coping with Foot and Mouth or similar animal epidemic in this country. That would trigger a well defined response with rings of army controlled movement rights. That is treating it seriously. Britain has been through it. Whereas on that same news programme, a teacher who had been on the same flight from Los Angeles near the school kids was asking whether he should go to school that day. He wasn't stupid. I think he was being deliberately provocative to underscore a lack of effective follow up.

      A real pandemic will overwhelm the professionals. I am somewhat optimistically assuming that this is just another scare. I would like to see it used to develop a network of competent volunteers. It is the sort of thing that Japan and China do quite well. I am not optimistic enough to think that will happen.

    101. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      People laughed at poor old Charles Manson, but it turns out he was actually spot on.

      Helter Skelter has arrived and it is time to KILL THE PIGS!
      [Guitar Solo]

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    102. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by gzipped_tar · · Score: 1

      That's why I don't recommend "vdiff" as a replacement of the vanilla diff.

      --
      Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
    103. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by SwineFlu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thanks for this useful information. You get special treatment once I am victorious.

    104. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Tyr.1358 · · Score: 1

      Good thing I asked, I've heard a lot of stuff on fox news with my grandfather. Do you guys think I should buy some relenza or tamiflu?

    105. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Jared555 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about a couple hundred gold bars and a gun arsenal? (Of course if I had that available I would be in an underground bunker somewhere typing this)

    106. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're sick. Do you realize how much misery and death you just wished on the world? If so, please go see someone, you really do need help.

    107. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by nametaken · · Score: 1

      At least /. will be unfazed.

    108. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I agree. As long as it doesn't affect me and my friends and family.

      Hmmm. Doesn't sound much like a pandemic, does it.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    109. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you j3wi$h?

    110. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by anagama · · Score: 1

      You mean "taco hell" right?

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    111. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by anagama · · Score: 1

      I'm an employer and let me tell you this, I get pretty ticked off when people I hire come to work sick. I give paid personal days for this exact reason, not to save them up for an extra vacation. The nature of my work involves things that are often calendared six months in advance between numerous parties on tight schedules, and involves deadlines that are immobile and devastating if missed. I really hate to work while I'm sick and I'd rather avoid the unneeded exposure -- I have no problem telling someone to go home if they can't figure that out on their own.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    112. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by saxoholic · · Score: 2

      Deal, as long as "money" is defined by "the most common medium of exchange." I'm assuming it will either be gold, food, or anti-virals. All of which I could use if society collapses.

    113. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by VernorVinge · · Score: 1

      Extrapolating mortality rates from accounts of hospitalization ignores the entire population of exposed but otherwise healthy/mildly sick people. When the media furor died down over SARS, no one bothered to report that the actual infection rate was many times higher, but most people had mild to no symptoms. Of course, there are no juicy headlines, research grants, or lucrative govenment contracts for people who practice common sense. We'll just have to bend over and hand what little remains of our deplated tax coffers to those who can cry the loudest.

      --
      Stay skeptical, my friends.
    114. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by smchris · · Score: 1

      "heaviest toll in young adults." Remember this was mentioned in a lecture I attended on the Spanish flu too. Something about the complications of too strong a reaction to infection. Sort of the opposite of the very young and very old who die from compromised immunity.

      If the deaths are all in Mexico (are they still), doesn't that say something about the crappy public health and medical facilities in Mexico as much as it does the lethality of the virus? And the NYT article says they are still evaluating the effectiveness of current flu shots, so this might not be the end of the world.

    115. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by kklein · · Score: 1

      So they open up with machine gun fire if you head to the car? Please.

      I am so sick of hearing this excuse. You come to work or school when you are sick? You are a fucking sociopath. And no, it doesn't make it better to point out that you'll lose money or points if you don't; it makes it worse. It means you are willing to trade my health (and in this case, maybe my life) for a day's wages or a better grade in a course.

      Everyone, stop coming to work or school when you are sick. It's not a "day off" that you feel like you don't deserve; it's quarantine.

    116. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Brett+Buck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >Don't be so sure about it my friend. My parents work in the NHS.
      >The procedure for a flu pandemic assumes that society will
      > collapse, which will likely be a reasonable assessment.

            Uh, "society will collapse" is a "reasonable assessment"?! Did society collapse in 1918? I don't recall reading about it. Why is it any more likely now, with far better supportive care, and far better understanding of the causes? This is ridiculous, "society" in some form has managed to exist for at least ~8000 years, through a lot worse epidemics than this.

                Brett

    117. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

      Hey, when you have 30 minutes to find food, your choices are burger king, mcdonalds or taco bell because of the waits at the other places, and you have 5.00 cash. What do you do?

      I know, go hungry...but damn I needed something.

    118. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by LBt1st · · Score: 1

      Someone mod parent up!

    119. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by endymion.nz · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot. It arrived in NZ with a group of students who had been to Mexico on a school trip.

      --
      mediocrity rules, man
    120. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      One scary thought: if the current working theory is correct---if the fatality rate is higher than normal due to cytokine storms in otherwise healthy individuals---then a lot of common flu treatments (e.g. elderberry extracts) have the potential to make things worse instead of better. Of course, until this particular strain is isolated and somebody does (at minimum) tests in lab mice with this strain and such an extract, no one can really say for certain. This is more speculation than anything else.

      There are, however, a couple of commonly available OTC products that might well reduce the cytokine storm significantly, and with relatively few/minor side effects and drug interactions. I'd be curious to hear the thoughts of someone with a medical background on this subject after reading the relevant studies. Here are the two that seem the most promising to me:

      • Cimetidine (Tagamet) boosts proinflammatory cytokines, so for ordinary flu it would make you get well sooner. More interestingly, it also suppresses the anti-inflammatory cytokines. I'm not completely clear on the details, but I get the impression that a cytokine storm involves excessive levels of both pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines. I don't know what research has been done in this area, but at least one study seems to corroborate that theory:

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3112984

        I have no way to guess whether this would be true for other causes of ARDS, though.

      • Curcumin (a Turmeric extract) also inhibits TNF (in large doses) and may have similar benefits in preventing or diminishing a cytokine storm. More info here:

        http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6943

        Ironically, curcumin diminishes the effectiveness of cimetidine (an acid reducer) by increasing stomach acid.... :-)

      Thoughts?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    121. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by endymion.nz · · Score: 1

      Little kids are the worst, they spend six or so hours a day in a room with about thirty other kids, with breaks to go outside and touch things and each other. Most of the time a cold or a flu strain gets into my work it's from one of the staff members who have kids.

      --
      mediocrity rules, man
    122. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Just a follow-on, that study of pigs with ARDS showed that cimetidine (Tagamet) has a significant effect, but the best efficacy involved combining it with diphenhydramine (Benadryl) and Ibuprofen (Advil). For you folks playing at home, the allergy medication is an H1 histamine blocker, the heartburn medicine is an H2 histamine blocker, and Ibuprofen reduces inflammation.

      I think it is rather fascinating to read about such beneficial side effects in these three common over-the-counter medications. :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    123. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      There doesn't seem to be a "-1 Batshit insane" moderation option, can anyone help?

    124. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 3, Informative

      Which is the interesting part because this flu is most deadly to those with a good immune system because it triggers an overreaction which is what causes the damage. Those with a poorer immune system are not as badly affected!

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    125. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      Plus the vaccine was made from blood plasma of monkeys so both would be true if that theory is correct.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    126. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Society is in many ways a lot more vulnerable now then it was in 1918 - its reliant on much more formal structures then it used to - if a disease manages to frighten people (it doesn't even have to kill many for this to occur) into not rocking up to work there will be a massive breakdown very quickly.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    127. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by endymion.nz · · Score: 1

      So, for the average worker in my country (New Zealand, kinda topical I guess) who receive five paid sick days a year, we can afford to be nice to our co workers the first time we get sick each year. Because the transmittable period is about 5 days, maybe longer. That leaves no sick days for hangovers, no sick days for the broken arm or whatever. And if you get sick again in that year, you have to either go to work, spread the sickness, force others to take their time off, or go without pay for 5 days. If you earn a low wage and live paycheque to paycheque you would then be fucked, get behind on rent / utilities, not be able to buy cold medication or food. Thank god we have a decent social welfare system or else we'd probably be looking like the US in terms of homelessness.

      --
      mediocrity rules, man
    128. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by msormune · · Score: 1

      The graph shows it was killing far more very small children (1 year old).

    129. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by margaret · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's worse among doctors. It doesn't surprise me that the BBC article contains reports about residents and interns dying. I wonder how many patients get infected via sick doctors?

      Large teaching hospitals are dependent on residents who work 80 hours a week to barely cover the workload. If someone calls in sick, then it means your already overworked and fatigued colleagues will have to cover for your "weakness." Oftentimes the onus is on you to find your replacement. And so the culture discourages it - either through active hostility or feelings of guilt and/or machismo on the part of the sick person. This culture is learned in med school and residency then gets carried forward.

      I'm a resident physician and every year I have to do some online training for all hospital employees that says to stay home if you're sick, and we residents just laugh. The idea of calling in sick for a low grade temp and a cough is so out of the realm of possibility, it's absurd. I'm not saying this is a good or noble thing - there's a lot of things about the culture of medicine and residency (such as work hours) that are fucked up and end up adversely affecting patient care.

    130. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > So far it seems to kill only Mexicans.

      That's like saying that atomic bombs only kill Japanese.

    131. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try +1 Insightful, that usually does it.

    132. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Plutonite · · Score: 1

      Good points. Note however that among poorer classes of people (where religious following is at a higher rate in some ME nations) the performing of rituals like washing for prayer (which they do 5 times a day) can keep things like this pretty low, compared to the poor in other cultures that don't use as much water/as frequently.

    133. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Move to a larger city where better (but equally inexpensive and fast) food options are in great abundance -- and they have their latest health score posted visibly.

    134. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      face it dude, those people are sub-human and a drag on the real people of the planet. slants, niggers and sand monkeys along with the dot-forehead people are little better than animals, and serve no real purpose. Let them all die, and hopefully the white fundamentalists and theists will go too.

    135. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      It's a bit premature to say "no".

      This years vaccine protects against influenza A, the outbreak is also a strain of influenza A, but because it's a new strain it will be weeks/months before they can say with certainty wether the vaccine is effective.

      IMHO if it is a major pandemic then they don't have weeks/months to run tests and the most prudent course of action would be to take whatever is on offer.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    136. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by richardellisjr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've lived in the are of Mexico hardest hit (just moved back to the states last year), and I visit regularly still. A couple of notes, first of all Mexico isn't as undeveloped as you may believe. In my experience the big difference between Mexico and the US is the standard of living. Mexico has everything the US has, and medically may be a bit better off since I believe it has a more socialized medical system. There are however two big issues, first the fact that penicillin and other antibiotics are readily available over the counter, and just like in the US it isn't uncommon for people to take medication until they feel better and then stop. Doing this with antibiotics causes a really big concern for drug resistant strains to show up. Also as some others have pointed out the flu virus actually spreads better in colder climates. Some of you may not be aware but not all of Mexico is warm like Cancun or Acapulco. Mexico City and especially Toluca are pretty high up in the mountains (7,349 and 8,790) and they do get downright chilly at night even in the summer.

      My guess as to why this got bad so quick is the government trying not to panic everyone. You have to remember that parts of Mexico are completely dependent on tourism, and with the bad economy and the drug violence already going on I'm not sure the government didn't want to make matters worse by announcing a pandemic as well.

      I've been following Mexican news and talking to family in the area and the situation is now completely out of control. The government has shut down all the schools in the affected areas, business, and restaurants are all closed. To put this in perspective imagine the whole state of New York shutting everything down for ten days because of the flu. The military is handing out what masks they have (everywhere is out of of them now). Major sporting events are being played without an audience (literally the stands are completely empty). What businesses are open (like banks) are rotating their staff every couple of hours to keep the number of people in one area at a time down. According to my relatives in the area the streets are deserted and even the grocery stores are empty. There is full on panic there.

      BTW, the running joke down there is that Obama brought the virus with him, since the outbreak coincided with his visit. Obviously not true, but amusing.

    137. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by rusl · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be simpler to assume the soldier population was in ill-health? Lots of injuries, trenchfoot, psychological damage, tired, etc?

      I think the revealing fact would be to compare gender since (I'm assuming) most of the soldiers were male. If this death rate bump was among males but not females that would point to it being a soldier related phenomenon. On the other hand if it was both genders then one would consider the theories about it attacking "healthy" immune systems as more plausible.

      Either way, this is a scary bit of news. Fear is dangerous.

      --
      Stupidity is its own reward.
    138. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by muridae · · Score: 1

      Potentially 420 million people at "Just 7%". I'd say that's pretty high.

    139. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by muridae · · Score: 1

      Your sig is strangely apropos. Anyways . . .

      Good. We're past due for another big shake up. When was the last time a major nation-state was shaken up? Not elections that happen to pick the opposing party for once in 10, 20, or 30 years. But an actual revolution? The "White Western World"* is due for a good upheaval.

      WWW* borrowed from a cyber feminist.

    140. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

      At this point I think it's best to lose productivity and have the employee return than to possibly die (or kill the whole office).

      To put it in terms that management can understand; you'll have to train a whole new workforce which will cost a ton of money.

    141. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With some luck, it'll even get you rabid anti-theists as well so us atheists can be left in peace.

    142. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      "Slashdot: News for racists. Life for whites who matter"?

      This says nothing about comments. And, as far as I know, racist speech in comments has never been censored on /. - why bother, when the moderation system takes care of that, anyway?

    143. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by khallow · · Score: 1

      I doubt health officials are reporting all infected people, but only those sick enough to see a doctor. It's possible that it's killing the usual fraction of people. The real warning sign is the age of people who are dying from the disease.

    144. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by SnowZero · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

    145. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is 7% a "high" death rate?

      Wikipedia has normal flu mortality at 0.1%.

      Yeah, but just after I edited the article.

    146. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kagura · · Score: 1

      There is not a single Taco Bell in Mexico. That should be hint enough for anybody looking for Mexican food.

      Who goes to Taco Bell for Mexican food? I go to Taco Bell for good food, and I'm sure most Taco Bell-goers agree. I'm tired of everyone saying "Taco Bell is not authentic" like they are the first people to come up with that original line. *eye roll*

    147. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really doubt your "most parents send students to school even with high fevers, when kids are visibly sick, and even when they are vomiting" statement. Everybody I know keeps their kids home when they have fever, vomit, or have other serious symptoms. Also, in the countries I've lived the teachers will send home kids that vomit or otherwise exhibit bad symptoms.

    148. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Xest · · Score: 1

      "So far it seems to have a 5% mortality rate, which is above normal. Usually mortality is 5% of those hospitalized, rather than 5% of all."

      So surely all we need to do is just send everyone to hospital to make it drop to a normal mortality rate?

      Sorry, couldn't resist :) Percentages - fun for all the family.

    149. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Sir+Network · · Score: 1

      In 1918 is that people were still shell shocked by 15 million casualties because of the largest war in recorded history at the time. Massive armies were still in the process of demilitarization, pacifying an already demoralized populace in which submission and civil liberties were not a concern.

      Societal upheaval is more than possible in a time of worldwide financial turmoil and food shortages: where world leaders are viewed as the cause of the issues of the common man. Having those same leaders stepping up to reassure the populace of their safety in a global pandemic will be met with outright distrust.

      --
      Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid. --John Wayne
    150. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Apparently they have just over 30million doses of Tamiflu in their stockpile so hopefully that would be enough to be going on with if it does hit here.

    151. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by magpie · · Score: 1
      >Avoid people. They're dangerous.

      You must be new here to think people round here ever leave their parents basement and interact with real people?

      There is a zero risk to you average slashdotter if they just do what they normally do.

    152. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by xaxa · · Score: 1

      There are two suspected cases in Scotland and another in Northampton.

      The BBC interviewed the man in Northampton. The filmed him through a window in his house, with him talking on a phone. Contrast that with the interview of some people in Texas for an American TV channel, who were "wearing masks to protect the camera crew". I know which TV company I'd rather work for...

      The World Health Organisation has said Britain and France are the best prepared countries for a flu outbreak, so I'm not going to worry just yet.

    153. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by True+Grit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's interesting. So your statement preemptively declares all opposing positions as being "unreasonable".

      If the only opposing position we're talking about is deliberately standing by and allowing millions of people to die from a relatively easily preventable cause, then yes, I don't have a problem with preemptively calling that immoral.

      Why is death by disease immoral?

      Its not, but a large number of deaths by an easily prevented disease is (or should be).

      Why is not making extraordinary efforts to treat the diseases of others immoral?

      This entirely depends on how we define "extraordinary".

      By who's standard other than yours?

      If enough people agree with it, then it doesn't *matter* who originated the "standard". Why did you even bother to ask this? You know darn well the GP's attitude is, in general, held by a lot of people. If this attitude wasn't widespread, the world wouldn't have nearly as many aid organizations as it does (Red Cross, CARE, Doctors Without Borders, et cetera ad nauseum).

      If you are a religious person

      I'm not religious, I'm just a rather ordinary member of that very social species we call "homo sapiens", who, when he sees or hears of another member of the same species dying a pointless death, has the guts to think of more than just himself and ask himself the question "What if that was me?".

      You don't need "religion" to see the GP's point of view, you just have to have the ability to "put yourself in someone else's shoes", so to speak.

      Of course, I'm also a realist, and I know that despite my opinion, "immoral" behavior such as standing by while others are lost to easily preventable deaths will continue, for all sorts of reasons, with, I suspect, the main reason being that for every person who asks themselves the question "What if that was me?" in the above situation, there is at least one other person who doesn't think about anything beyond their initial reaction of "Whew! Glad that wasn't me!". Well, no one has ever accused humanity of being homogeneous. :)

    154. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > even more so when its something where you feel miserable and are sick with something contagious (such as normal influenza), making staying at home little more than a dream.

      You're part of the problem. If you cant even recognize what a flue is, how can you expect less educated people to do so? Influenza doesnt leave you feeling miserable, it leaves you with 40 degrees celsius of fever, very very weak and hallucinating sometimes. Its pretty lethal by itself already. It is NOT the common cold, which yes can leave you miserable.

      But thats not what bothers me. The worst of it is: people take antivirals to combat the common cold, making damn sure that when we actually HAVE a pandemic, the effectiveness of the onliest thing we have to combat it, is reduced.

    155. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

      "What concerned us was that the response seemed to have drained the capacity of Health to broaden its concern to other potentially affected people."

      The health system isn't set up to cover pandemics. To do so would bankrupt the country. Our hospitals get overwhelmed by normal outbreaks. We just can't afford to have that many resources tied up in health.

      "Having a new government committed to depleting the Civil Service will not have helped them."

      Dear gods man. The government has only been in power since October? I haven't heard of any large scale lay offs in the civil service yet. The previous government happily squandered surplus's on stupidity while we were the second or third most in debted country in the world (per capita). Don't blame National. They may be a bunch of idiots but the situation isn't of their making.

      "A real pandemic will overwhelm the professionals."

      Yes. And then we go back to basics.

      Anyway. We have no idea how big or small this will be and we can't shut down the country for every scare. Isolating population centers would collapse our economy at the present time and a lot of people would die from the indirect consequences of that.
      Look on the bright side. Your daughter may be in the affected area but it is close to a hospital and is in a high socio-economic neighbourhood. The chances are if it does get bad then it will get much worse elsewhere where hygiene isn't as good and more people are crowded into homes with poorer nutrition.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    156. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's good news for the producers of Tamiflu who love having this in the news, and for their shareholders who saw their stock skyrocket as a result. It's pretty special that there's tons of people out there just waiting around to make money off of this kind of thing.

      Please think this through a little bit. If they didn't stand to make a bundle of money off of it, I really doubt they would have bothered developing it...

      There are other options, like government-sponsored "prizes" for this sort of development, but they're far less efficient than a market-based approach.

    157. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

      You find me a good IT job where I'm important, have control over the direction of the company AND get paid enough to live a upper-middle class lifestyle (such as buying macbook pro's and 24inch apple displays yearly) and I'll do it.

    158. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Those thousands that die are among hundreds of thousands or more who get infected. This strain has infected far fewer people, yet killed more of them, so the mortality rate is much higher. If infection became widespread, as was the case in 1918, then we could be looking at serious losses.

      Maybe hundreds of thousands _are_ being infected, but it's so mild they don't notice. With little immune response a mild bug could become deadly.

    159. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      When was the last time a major nation-state was shaken up?

      Twenty years ago? Does the acronym "USSR" ring any bells?

    160. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I'm going to say [citation needed] here. Where? I'm in Mexico City and there is not a single one

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    161. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      We (including the adherents of the closest thing to the faith I believe to be objectively correct) still are a LONG way from living up to "thou shalt not kill." We tolerate and even encourage murder as long as it is done by states, and to people we do not closely identify with. Frankly, we have no consistent morals other than acting in ways calculated to make others like us. We are horrifically selfish beings (myself included, unfortunately). We've simply invented tons of ways to convince ourselves otherwise, religion included. We still have yet found a way to change ourselves.

    162. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 1

      The "White Western World"* is due for a good upheaval.

      WWW* borrowed from a cyber feminist.
      Yeah, b/c all those brown people dependent on food aid from the white western world really need help losing weight.
        Good. We're past due for another big shake up. When was the last time a major nation-state was shaken up?
      Before most of the major nation states had massive nuclear arsenals capable of rendering significant portions of the earth's surface uninhabitable for people. Tell your cyber feminist friend to stop playing fallout3, watch mad max instead to see just how much fun post apocalyptica is for feminists.

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    163. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      One of my favorite parts of "Atlas Shrugged" was when the Marxist economy went down the toilet and someone replaced the illuminated clock on the side of a tall building with a sign which read "Brother, You asked for it" (something like that).

      When the society in the SCReW goes down the toilet (from hyper inflation, disease outbreak, armed insurrection, economic collapse or whatever) I hope the sign is going to read:

      "That could never happen here."

    164. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by maxume · · Score: 1

      What happens when you factor in better public health systems and the much higher rate at which information travels (for instance, we probably have more information about this outbreak than public health official in 1918 did at a similar point).

      If you figure that those factors operate on the transmission rate, you could easily be looking at a lower number.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    165. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've lived in the are of Mexico hardest hit (just moved back to the states last year), and I visit regularly still.

      How about you take a few days off, m'kay? Just kick around the house for a week or so.

    166. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by joelmax · · Score: 1

      Swine' flu responds well to the relatively recent anti-flu drug Oseltamivir (marketing name: Tamiflu). That is to say, it gets killed pretty quickly and eradicated from the body if treatment is followed through (yeah, I know, right?). That's good news for the producers of Tamiflu who love having this in the news, and for their shareholders who saw their stock skyrocket as a result. It's pretty special that there's tons of people out there just waiting around to make money off of this kind of thing.

      And that is called disaster capitalism

    167. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by zookie · · Score: 1

      It's pretty special that there's tons of people out there just waiting around to make money off of this kind of thing.

      I don't know if you were being sarcastic, but it actually is pretty special that these drug companies had the profit motivation to develop a drug like this. You have to ask yourself if these drugs would've been developed under a socialized drug development system. Would government researchers have been funded to develop these drugs? I can imagine that politicians would have found "better" things to spend taxpayer money on than the "remote" chance of a pandemic flu.

    168. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Spatial · · Score: 1

      If you are a religious person than I can understand your position. If you are not then I wonder how you arrived at it. I don't know where you are coming from here, but I do wonder about the large number of people in the West who renounce or ignore religious faith and yet still have this sense of moral certainty and who freely make moral judgement of one and all.

      It's almost as if morality has nothing to do with religion, isn't it? Perish the very thought!

    169. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freedom of speech has always been acceptable. You don't have to agree with it. If it offends you that much, you don't have to read this forum. Would you prefer that he be censored? That seems a little fascist to me.

    170. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      that's 20 to 100 Million people at a time when the population as a whole was 2 Billion, so significant % of the population in deaths alone, of course today things are better but if the same % were infected things would quickly get out of control. I could certainly see mass rioting, "liberating foodstuffs" and all sorts of bad things breaking out.

      IMO, from my vast Zombie Apocalypse experience, I think hunkering down with your family for a month would probably be the safest thing to do. Then emerge blinking into the daylight and get a as funeral pyre efficiency expert.

      Let's hope the outbreak occurs in the northern hemisphere spring, and is over by summer's end.

    171. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Society is in many ways a lot more vulnerable now then it was in 1918 - its reliant on much more formal structures then it used to - if a disease manages to frighten people (it doesn't even have to kill many for this to occur) into not rocking up to work there will be a massive breakdown very quickly.

      On the bright side, a large portion of population dying helps the unemployment rate.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    172. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people in Muslim countries are more hands on than most western countries: greetings involve long handshakes, several kisses on the cheeks, hugs, and so on. Men are much less self-conscious about hugging, holding hands, or putting their arms over each other's shoulders (all out of friendship, so spare us the "OMG THEY ALL HAVE TEH GAY" comments). All in all, you will probably find much more interpersonal contact.

      Have you ever visited any of the Mediterranean countries? Italy or Greece for example? I found similar, although not as emphatic greetings in Eastern Europe and ex-soviet countries.

      Maybe its all the more noticeable as a prudish Brit, but those on the continent seem extremely 'touchy-feely'.

    173. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      "Is 7% a "high" death rate?"

      Yep. Multiply that by the entire population of your country. Flu spreads very well, it is nothing like most other disiases.

    174. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by jpvlsmv · · Score: 1

      But if you get rid of the pigs, the Terrorists Will Have Won (TM).

      Proper Merkian religions allow you to eat pork.

      --Joe

    175. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      "Did society collapse in 1918?"

      In a sense, yes. Stores closed, people stooped working... That is probably the same sense that collapse was used by the GP

    176. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Ozlanthos · · Score: 1

      The whole "carrying-capacity" ideology is something akin to trying to find out how many people you can stuff into a telephone booth as far as I am concerned. I have no desire to eat ever-synthesized food, and live in smaller and smaller boxes just so there can be "more of us". Population of a species is not a sign of success or progress. If that were the case E.coli will always win.

      The question to ask yourself is: if electricity, and gas were no longer available, would you have enough "food", "water" and "shelter" to keep you and those around you alive? If the answer is no, then you have exceeded "carrying-capacity". Besides, I for one, believe other animals have more a point to "their" existence than to end up on my plate.

      -Oz

    177. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      For a short while in the affected areas, yes society did collapse. The reason you never read about it is that folks don't like to admit to themselves, much less to their children reading history books, that this kind of thing can happen.

      I wouldn't be thinking a Road Warrior style collapse, but Katrina-style would not be out of the question. From Wikipedia's article:

      Even in areas where mortality was low, those incapacitated by the illness were often so numerous as to bring much of everyday life to a stop. Some communities closed all stores or required customers not to enter the store but place their orders outside the store for filling. There were many reports of places with no health care workers to tend the sick because of their own ill health and no able-bodied grave diggers to bury the dead. Mass graves were dug by steam shovel and bodies buried without coffins in many places.

    178. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by apostrophesemicolon · · Score: 1

      The BBC is quoting doctors as saying that this has been around for a week. If people in Mexico City are expressing symptoms, you can bet it's around the world now, by people carrying it during its incubation period. I live in London, and I bet you a tenner that someone, somewhere in this city has this right now.

      ..and 28 days later..

    179. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      I really doubt that we can make flu spread slowly enough to contain it.

      Anyway, we may see much lower mortality rates simply because that virus is less lethal than the 1918 one. Also, we still have the hope of seeing it mutate into something that is quite less lethal and will vaccinate most people against its worse version.

    180. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Dude, this is Slashdot. We all have seen LotR. Thus, we all know where NZ is: Middle Earth.

    181. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For any employers out there, make sure sick people can stay home, since it is better to lose their (partial) productivity for day, rather than to make the whole office sick."

      The problem is many employers have switched to using a "timebank" system so your vacation and sick days are all in one bunch. Miss too many days sick and it eats into your vacation. So naturally employees will straggle in sick as dogs and spread their illnesses to their co-workers. The American employer mindset seems to be calling in sick = playing hooky. Unfortunately, it may take a pandemic to fix this mindset and finally get nationalized health care.

    182. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      >employers tend to be unsympathetic

      Not that this helps your case -- because believe me, I've worked in situations where if you called in sick with bubonic plague you'd probably still get fired if you didn't come in to work -- but my current department manager has said repeatedly that we are so busy, as a group, that we don't have time to be sick. As such, anyone who comes in sick, threatening to infect other people, will be immediately sent home, and possibly fired if this is repeated behavior.
      It's a nice change from previous jobs.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    183. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Based on what? (not in the spirit of attacking your statement, but in the spirit of wanting to understand your reasoning)

      I doubt that the public health response will be completely impotent, but there isn't much behind that (just a belief that basic measures can be effective). To an extent, containment appears to have failed already (poorly sourced reports of cases all around the world), but I'm not sure that means that more local measures will be completely useless.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    184. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by manifoldronin · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, did I miss the change in tagline?

      "Slashdot: News for racists. Life for whites who matter"?

      Just when the fuck did this become acceptable as long as it's -1 troll?

      Sorry, I've been away a while, it's a bit of a shock.

      Ironically while OP has been buried by -1 Troll, people can still see the offending words you quoted in your +2 Informative reply.

      --
      Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
    185. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      How about a couple hundred gold bars and a gun arsenal?

      What will you do with gold if society collapses? It's a pretty metal; do you think anyone cares in that situation?

      Not that society will collapse, anyway; even the Black Death, which killed 1/3rd of Europe, didn't manage to do that. This will kill some people, the rest will continue their life, and it'll be business as usual.

      (Of course if I had that available I would be in an underground bunker somewhere typing this)

      Quite useless, since viral particles stay in the air far longer than you can live on supplies there.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    186. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by palindrome · · Score: 1

      Fair point, I apologise. I guess I should never post with an equal amount of anger and disbelief.

    187. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by TheSync · · Score: 1

      The death rate is high, considering it's in Mexico

      The funny thing is that the swine H1N1 cases in the US have been mild. I wonder if the form of the virus that goes from swine to human (which you would expect people in rural Mexico to get) is slightly different than the human to human virus (which you would expect American tourists to get).

    188. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by palindrome · · Score: 1

      If that's how I came across then I obviously phrased myself badly. I have no right to be offended. If I don't like something that someone says I certainly have no right to block it so that no one else can see it.

      I do, however, have a right to stand up and say "that's bollocks!". I will, endeavour not to give any more trolls/flamebaiters the oxygen of publicity in future, though, and instead pour on the carbon dioxide of ignoring.

    189. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      To back you up--

      Just imagine what would happen to the stock market if 5% of all houses were now empty.

      If you thought the housing bubble bursting was bad, imagine what piling all these extra empty houses on the market would do to the banks.

    190. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Spanish Flu from 1918 was actually another version of the swine flu. The new theory is it was passed from the pigs in the camps to the soldiers. The reason the are calling it the swine flu is to give it the sense of urgency as anyone over 30 knows the stories of the 1918 epidemic. Birds are not as close genetically to us as pigs are, much bigger chance of world wide disaster from this one compared to the avian flu. Which is why you are seeing govt's around the world actually get off their asses and do something now. And believe me this is much more serious than they are letting on. Wait a week...

    191. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Did anybody died of it outside of Mexico?

    192. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Hey, when you have 30 minutes to find food, your choices are burger king, mcdonalds or taco bell because of the waits at the other places, and you have 5.00 cash. What do you do?

      Bring food from home? It's cheaper and healthier.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    193. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      I am so sick of hearing this excuse. You come to work or school when you are sick? You are a fucking sociopath.

      A sociopath is someone who's unable to feel empathy for others, not someone who simply puts his own needs before those of others. The word for that is "selfish.

      And no, it doesn't make it better to point out that you'll lose money or points if you don't; it makes it worse. It means you are willing to trade my health (and in this case, maybe my life) for a day's wages or a better grade in a course.

      In this economy I'd risk a lot more than just a days wage. I'd risk my job, my entire income, and personal bankruptcy. To put it bluntly, I value my own life more than yours. If you don't like that, then vote a socialist government into power and have them build a social security network which allows me to survive and be reasonably comfortable even unemployed. Until then, I'll drag my carcass to work every day, since I have little choice.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    194. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Old97 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      So you say that "if enough people agree with it, then it doesn't matter ...". For centuries most people accepted slavery. Did that make it moral? It was a handful of "religious nut cases" starting in Britain that started in motion the end of slave trading in the west. At other times large majorities have favored imperialism, war and genocide. I suppose that made it moral. You are in favor of throwing Gays into prison I suppose. The fact is that societies have continuously redefined what is moral and what is not. My point was that if that's how morality is defined - by tribal, national or cultural consensus, then how can anyone be so certain about their own moral judgements - certain to the point where they condemn or those who do not share their views?

      It's interesting that you ended up with what is also known as the "golden rule" as your principle test. It's a good rule. Someone named J. Christ is often credited as the author though he credited his "dad". Other religious nuts (aka prophets) have preached similar things. Oddly enough, these guys always seemed to belong to what at the time was a small minority.

      My original post was intended to chide the author of the post I was responding to and the rest of the readers about the tendency to groupthink and to attempt preemptively discount contrary opinions by taking the stance that the author and the like-minded had a monopoly on truth and morality. When there is a disaster in the world, it isn't a given amongst mankind that we should all rush whatever assistance we can. Some cultures are a bit more fatalistic and see natural disasters differently. Some folks are more - well what I would call selfish though they would differ (inward looking?) - and others think that it's a waste of precious resources to react to disasters instead of preventing them. I don't think we should assume that holding these points of view necessarily makes someone less moral or immoral.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    195. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      What will you do with gold if society collapses? It's a pretty metal; do you think anyone cares in that situation?

      Absolutely correct, it's obvious we'll resort to bottle caps as our new post collapse monetary deity.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    196. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

      Everyone missing a few days of work won't necessarily destroy society, and I know enough stubborn mules who won't miss work even should their limbs be hacked off.

      --
      "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
    197. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      Good. We're past due for another big shake up. When was the last time a major nation-state was shaken up? Not elections that happen to pick the opposing party for once in 10, 20, or 30 years. But an actual revolution? The "White Western World"* is due for a good upheaval.

      I can't believing that you are actually advocating the death of 7% of a country's population in the hope that it will change the power balance.

      Do you really think that the people in power will be the ones to preferentially suffer the effects of the virus? I don't. They will be the ones stockpiling Tamiflu and enjoying military protection while the rest of us die. Events like this will only serve to solidify their power.

    198. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1


      I think this one is the real deal.

      Based on what information, exactly? Death rates from Mexico? Rates vs. what: infected? Seriously ill? Compared against what? You don't have any data, because no one does. I'm glad your parents work in the NHS and not you.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    199. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      They are only in Monterrey as far as I've heard.

      [citation].

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    200. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Absolutely correct, it's obvious we'll resort to bottle caps as our new post collapse monetary deity.

      "Money" is a tool for greatly simplifying logistical problems related to trading. You won't have money in a post-collapse society, because there won't be trade. By the time society begins to get rebuilt, whoever does the rebuilding gets to decide what's money. Since having gold as an actual, tangible object in your hands is so rare nowadays, it is very unlikely that it would work as a medium of exchange; the existence of some huge piles of gold (bank vaults and such) should further discourage anyone from using it, since the discovery of any of them would throw the economy into a total chaos.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    201. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by perilandmishap · · Score: 1

      Is 7% a "high" death rate?

      The CDC says this about the 1918 Flu pandemic:
      Case-fatality rates were >2.5%, compared to 0.1% in other influenza pandemics

    202. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Taibhsear · · Score: 1

      I'm almost 30 years old and I'm considered a young adult??? I assumed young adult meant like 18-20.

    203. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      I appreciate that you're trying to advocate an open-mind towards understanding morality and how we choose what to value, but I have to point out an extremely poor choice by framing it against the idea of "allowing billions to die".

      A more appropriate situation to request reevaluation of morals is suggesting that maybe the Chinese people don't want or care for US democracy and are comfortable with someone else making all the decisions for the national community. Or perhaps that some women really are ok with being housewives their whole life instead of having a career.

      However, I think everyone is on board with the idea that billions of dead people is a "bad" thing. The situations where billions of dead people would be a preferable choice are so far afield that no one will be able to imagine such a doomsday scenario happening to them. Then the attempt to get them to rethink their values will fail. That's getting into the territory of "World War Z" and Cuba becoming the new world power and only allowing the useful people to enter their zombie-free zone.

      It's easier to appreciate and discuss the differences between apples and oranges...as opposed to apples and alien invasion. When the comparison being made is ludicrous it hinders rather than encourages discussion.

    204. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Ah, that makes sense...

      Silly regios who think they are gringos just because they go shopping in McAllen twice a month

      Thanks for the link, though

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    205. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Do you have a real source? Wikipedia is not the most reliable source.

      Except that Wikipedia cites "Patterson, KD; Pyle GF (Spring 1991). "The geography and mortality of the 1918 influenza pandemic". Bull Hist Med. 65 (1): 421. PMID 2021692."

      Whether you consider that to be a real source is up to you, but there's no issue of unreliability from Wikipedia's point of view.

    206. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      So you say that "if enough people agree with it, then it doesn't matter ...".

      For centuries most people accepted slavery.

      I said it didn't matter who originated the "standard", not that the standard itself didn't matter.

      Once any idea, good or bad, achieves sufficient popularity, it becomes pointless to try to personalize the argument by singling out the person you are talking with, since most people will just recognize this as the "if you can't attack the message, attack the messenger" tactic.

      My point was that if that's how morality is defined - by tribal, national or cultural consensus, then how can anyone be so certain about their own moral judgements

      I don't believe there is such a thing as an absolute morality, at least not outside of fundamentalist religions, and I don't believe either the GP or I were implying that. We were just stating our opinions.

      It's interesting that you ended up with what is also known as the "golden rule" as your principle test. It's a good rule. Someone named J. Christ is often credited as the author though he credited his "dad".

      So? If an idea makes sense to me, I don't care where it originated. Besides, a lot of those Christian "rules" existed before Christianity. I think it was Hannarabi in Babylon that started that whole "murder-is-bad-don't-kill" idea, along with the rule of law concept, and that was a few *millenia* before Christ. The Christians just did what I'm doing now: adopting ideas that I like, regardless of their origin.

      about the tendency to groupthink and to attempt preemptively discount contrary opinions by taking the stance that the author and the like-minded had a monopoly on truth and morality.

      No, I think you just assume anyone who shows compassion towards their fellow man, or even just uses the word "morality", can only possibly be doing so for religious reasons. You're basically just looking for a fight with one of those "religious nuts" you keep referring to.

      You do realize that the concept of "morality" is also one of those things that existed before any of the major religions appeared, right?

      When there is a disaster in the world, it isn't a given amongst mankind that we should all rush whatever assistance we can.

      Yet a lot of people do just that, and yes, its not a "given", or some kind of requirement, nobody said it was.

      Some cultures are a bit more fatalistic and see natural disasters differently. ... and others think that it's a waste of precious resources to react to disasters instead of preventing them.

      Not everyone agrees with me, well duh, I knew that already, and alluded to that at the end of my post.

      I don't think we should assume that holding these points of view necessarily makes someone less moral or immoral.

      And I *do* think we should, especially with viewpoints that exhibit a callous disregard for human life. Those who hold such ideas are free to continue thinking callously, I'm free to continue calling it as I see it, immoral, and you're free to continue to disagree. We're now back to square one.

      I'm now wondering what bothers you the most at this point: the fact that I don't agree with your viewpoint, or the fact that religion is not my reason for disagreeing with you? :)

    207. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by SchmellsAngel · · Score: 1

      What made this outbreak stand out was not how many people died from the flu, but: WHO died - young healthy people aged 20-40, not olds or babies. WHEN they died - after the end of the normal flu season. HOW FAST the disease spread to other regions. It's on at least three continents by now, probably all of them by week's end. It is hard to say how many mild cases there were. The 1000 estimate (now over double that) was just people sick enough to see a doctor. Most likely there were 10 or even 100 times this number who stayed home and recovered. World Health Organization has now raised the worldwide alert level. This has not happened since 1968. No panic is required but national response networks need to kick in. Those bird flu stockpiles will come in handy.

      --
      We must repeat.
    208. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      You mean those idiots playing hippedy-hop music and walking on my lawn? And those punk traffic cops that lecture you about safe speed on roads you have been driving for forty years? And the smart-alec young doctors?
      Oh no! However will I cope without them?

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    209. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by socz · · Score: 1

      Well let me tell you something... where i work (soon to be worked) we had a little bronchitis going around. Ya you'd think after the first few cases someone would have said something. Oh you know, the incessant coughing up phlegm and blood would have been a good thing to point out but no, eventually almost EVERYONE in at least 3 locations (within 2-3 miles of each other) got it.

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    210. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Old97 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I'm now wondering what bothers you the most at this point: the fact that I don't agree with your viewpoint, or the fact that religion is not my reason for disagreeing with you? :)

      Neither. You haven't actually responded directly to what I was asking. That's fine because I don't believe you've really pondered much on how you've arrived at whatever sense of morality you may have.

      You wrote "if enough people agree with it ...". I was asking how you determined what the moral standard was so I assumed that you were answering that question. Your response says you were not.

      Many of the arguments about what makes something moral has more to do with self-interest than morality. Obviously I want to prevent murder for the sake of myself and family. I don't want murders out there endangering us. I want to help fight disease so neither myself nor my family will fall victim to it. This is all self-interest. It's no different than intervening in one country committing crimes against humanity because it is next door while ignoring (or standing by) while worse crimes are committed in some country in Africa e.g. Kosovo and Rwanda. I'm not saying that this is your position, but I think we often delude ourselves into thinking we are good and moral when we are just acting in what we see to be our self-interest.

      BTW, I gave credit for the golden rule to those others than just Christians. My term "religious nuts" was sarcasm since I see so much religion bashing around here. I'm perfectly fine with the vast majority of religious people. The few extremists are another matter, but I don't equate religion with extremism.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    211. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I see that it is now considered to be of avian origin. It did used to be considered a swine flu, though.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    212. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > So far it seems to have a 5% mortality rate...

      Among Mexicans. Nobody else has even gotten really sick. Which his very strange. The numbers are getting large enough to make it unlikely that that is coincidence, but what else could it be?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    213. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So far it seems to kill only Mexicans. I suppose you could construct a conspiracy theory around that.

      If Bush were still in office, I can guarantee that story would already be in the media.

    214. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      Many of the arguments about what makes something moral has more to do with self-interest than morality.

      Yes, some behaviorist theorize morality positions like mine, are ultimately self-interest motivated, just at a higher, more abstract level.

      Example 1: being concerned about the well being of others beyond my own relatives is actually a desire to maintain order within the society, i.e., if bad things are happening somewhere, those things might get out of hand, cause things to go from bad to worse, and the situation ends up spreading back to affect me.

      Example 2: A negative response to any hostility or discrimination being directed at some other group is ultimately a desire to see that that kind of hostility doesn't end up getting directed at my group.

      So if it makes you feel better to believe its all ultimately just about "self-interest" then go for it.

      However, you're right about one other thing: this isn't something I spend any time *thinking* about. My reaction to the OP suggesting we let millions of people die just to solve the currently nonexistent "problem" of excessive population, was instant and visceral, just as I suspect it was for the poster you originally responded to.

      So if you believe anyone claiming some moral point has consciously and deliberately thought the whole issue through, knowingly starting from some position of self-interest, then you'd be wrong, and I have no idea how to explain that to you.

      Perhaps it comes from some recent human evolutionary trait that originated as our social behavior and interactions began to get very complex, perhaps when we began to congegrate together in groups larger than the prehistoric "tribe", or simply a learned trait acquired from the environment, e.g. parents, but whatever the origin, for some, its just *there*, builtin.

      I don't know if any of this is an acceptable answer, but its the best I can do.

    215. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by chainsaw1 · · Score: 1

      The news article I read indicated that most of the deaths were in the 25-60 age group, which make me a hell of a lot more worried as that puts in in a similar boat to the 1918 Spanish flu

      --
      - Sig
    216. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      Australia has 9 million doses of Tamiflu stockpiled for just such an emergency. Thanks goodness for socialized medicine.

    217. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Falconhell · · Score: 1

      Regretably, racist trolls have become common here. Of course Obama's election sent their paranoia meter of the scale, to my vast amusement.

    218. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      I'm from Mexico; I work in a datacenter for the state power company. The orders that came from the top level officers were that all the personnel working in key facilities like data-comm centers, power plants and powerstations are that if you feel even a little bit sick you sould go to the doctor and skip job. It's more important to have a clean and safe workplace and provide people energy at this moments of fear than care what would say a foolish PHB. Thanks to electricity and the web people are in their homes, not outside. People, specially in Mexico City are in enough fear with a plage and a earthquake; real panic would spread at the moment of a blackout.

      In other order of ideas, today my city, Guadalajara, that still havent been hit by the disease, felt really empty, almost like a city after the attack of the "12 Monkeys". Surreal, even for our standards.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    219. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Animaether · · Score: 1

      Try a little foresight :)

      http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/business/global/28drug.html?_r=1

      Btw, a few percents for the big medicinals -is- skyrocketing. They'll come back down, but the people playing these markets will already have their gains. /nokarmabonus

    220. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "we have no consistent morals other than acting in ways that support others most like us"

      Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with what you say, others have said it before but none with such insight and humour as found in the monkeysphere We do have a moral code that applies to "us", some of "them" may share it but who cares? ie: the reason it's inconsistent is that our brain is designed to see 99.99999% of humanity as something that is inferior to our family and friends.

      "We are horrifically selfish beings (myself included, unfortunately)."

      I don't think recognising you are part of the monkeysphere is unfortunate, in fact I think it has the potential to enumarate a more rational set of mores and let go of the bronze age ideals of genocide, murder, slavery, etc, as enshrined in holy scriptures and innumerable legal codes.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    221. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by niktemadur · · Score: 1

      While we're in the subject of fast food in Mexico, whatever the hell happened to Burger Boy?

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    222. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by blueskies · · Score: 1

      The 5% mortality rate and the very high infection rate? Say it infects 2x as many people because they couldn't prevent it from infecting them and the mortality rate is 20x higher than normal flu.

    223. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by blueskies · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be ironic if you now got infected and died? Or like if it rained on your wedding day?

    224. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by blueskies · · Score: 1

      A 2% mortality rate is not alarming to you? Are you fucking retarded? What happens when it infects 2 billion people?

    225. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Trikki+Nikki! · · Score: 1

      If it travels through china and south america, we'll all be better off. If it hits the islamic countries, and kills a bunch, I'll start believing in god.

      I'm sorry, did I miss the change in tagline?

      "Slashdot: News for racists. Life for whites who matter"?

      Just when the fuck did this become acceptable as long as it's -1 troll?

      Sorry, I've been away a while, it's a bit of a shock.

      +1

      --
      i r in ur /.s girling up ur storiez
    226. Re:Is this flu really "special"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You spelled Anheuser-Busch wrong LOL. Plus, they sold out to a Belgian company and forced us good Americans to sell our stock out as well.

      http://www.anheuser-busch.com/press/2008/Nov/AB_De_List_From_NYSE.html

      Good call otherwise though :)

  3. OMG! We're all gonna die!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Possibly sooner now!!!

  4. God damn... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Mexican swines!

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:God damn... by spiffmastercow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...Mexican swines!

      Isn't 'swine' both singular and plural, like 'deer'?

    2. Re:God damn... by denzacar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not if you want god to damn them all.

      You want them all damned - you say swines just to make sure.
      Or he might damn just one swine and then where would we be? Back at square one, that's where.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    3. Re:God damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do we need those exceptions? It's never too late to fix arcane English idiosyncrasies.

    4. Re:God damn... by spiffmastercow · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not if you want god to damn them all.

      You want them all damned - you say swines just to make sure. Or he might damn just one swine and then where would we be? Back at square one, that's where.

      GCC (God's Communication Compiler) Compiling...
      Error Line 1: Unrecognized token 'swines'

    5. Re:God damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      capitalist pigs should have extra care!

    6. Re:God damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they got the human influensa virus probably because those drug gangs decided to kill off junkies and feed them to the pigs. Fucking morons.

    7. Re:God damn... by irchs · · Score: 1

      ...Mexican swines!

      Isn't 'swine' both singular and plural, like 'deer'?

      And horse...

      --
      Jan
  5. Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can't wait till someone comes in my pharmacy and coughs this all over me. /pharmacist

    1. Re:Wonderful by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can't wait till someone comes in my pharmacy and coughs this all over me. /pharmacist

      Did you take a job as a pharmacist only expecting to talk to healthy and attractive people?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:Wonderful by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      But you can say the same about the people who don't want to be pharmacists: "Do you shun the practice of medicine because you want to live among the sick?"

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    3. Re:Wonderful by bFusion · · Score: 1

      That's what it said on all the pamphlets!

    4. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you take a job as a pharmacist only expecting to talk to healthy and attractive people?

      Yes. My pharmacy only sells birth control pills. Not only are my customers healthy and attractive, they put out too.

    5. Re:Wonderful by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      But you can say the same about the people who don't want to be pharmacists: "Do you shun the practice of medicine because you want to live among the sick?"

      I can speak for myself: A big reason I didn't pursue being a doctor is because I don't want to be around sick people. Not out of worry of being sick, but because it's depressing.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  6. Not necessarily over-reacting by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be easy to think that the government is just over-reacting to this swine flu, and they might be (that was my first impression), but it is better to over-react than to under-react and end up with a huge world-wide influenza epidemic such as occurred in 1918. Making the public slightly paranoid can help prevent the spread of the flu.

    1. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by chuckymonkey · · Score: 1

      You have a good point, but remember the boy who cried wolf.

      --
      "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    2. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by gordguide · · Score: 1

      " ... but it is better to over-react than to under-react and end up with a huge world-wide influenza epidemic such as occurred in 1918. ..."

      And that epidemic was caused by ... wait for it ... swine flu.

    3. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by maxume · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I caught a few minutes of a press conference on CNN. Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of Homeland Security started it by saying something to the effect of 'this makes things sound worse than they are, but it allows us to activate public health resources'.

      So perhaps the vocabulary is poor, but the reaction doesn't really resemble crying wolf.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by LordNimon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      but it is better to over-react than to under-react

      Not always.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    5. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > ...remember the boy who cried wolf.

      You mean Gerald Ford?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no wolf. In this case there is a wolf, we're just unsure if he wants to eat the boy or not.

    7. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      They are hardly reacting at all. People crossing the border are asked if they feel sick and wish to be quarantined? Sounds like the beginning of every disaster movie...in 3 months soldiers in respirator suits will be mowing people down from helicopters whether they're sick or not

    8. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by Grave · · Score: 1

      Bingo. The only common link among worldwide cases is Mexico City. Until a transmission method is determined, I really don't think that shutting down travel in and out of that city and the entire country would be overreacting. Sure, the cases in the US have thus far been non-fatal, but that could change. and 80+ dead in Mexico itself is not something to ignore.

      Seems to me that the WHO and other organizations are treating this as a potentially catastrophic situation in the way they are reacting, yet the statements coming from officials are meant to downplay it. I really think that, as a whole, the people of the world are entitled to the honest truth about this sort of thing and would be best served by knowing the full details. Maybe it really is nothing. But it is spreading really fast and all over the world, and due to international travel, we can't always use the models that worked in 1918 or any other previous pandemics.

    9. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      it is better to over-react than to under-react

      False dichotomy and not necessarily true even if you do accept it.

      The best result is to correctly react because needless over-reaction has a cost. Maybe the cost is just boy-who-cried-wolf price, or maybe its more direct and all the resources expended on the needless over-reaction end up siphoned away from some other use that actually needs those resources to save lives.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    10. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

      Until a transmission method is determined

      It's the flu.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    11. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by macbuzz01 · · Score: 1

      Similar to the boy who cried Confiker!

    12. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by 0racle · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_flu -

      "The 1918 flu pandemic (commonly referred to as the Spanish flu) was an influenza pandemic that spread to nearly every part of the world. It was caused by an unusually virulent and deadly Influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H1N1

      "The Spanish flu, also known as La Gripe Española, or La Pesadilla, was an unusually severe and deadly strain of avian influenza, a viral infectious disease, that killed some 50 million to 100 million people worldwide over about a year in 1918 and 1919"

      It has since mutated (several times) and there is a H1N1 variant in swine today. However, the Spanish Flu was an avian flu and that specific strain no longer exists in the wild.

      We now return to your regularly scheduled unsubstantiated fear mongering.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    13. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by jra · · Score: 1

      It's a lose-lose situation.

      On a lighter note, my local DOT in Florida put out an alert last week, that the northbound Interstate through Tampa would be miserable all weekend due to a lane realignment.

      Their hope, which panned out, was that they'd scare enough people people off the street to mitigate the lane closures and such.

      And it worked so well that, again, they might hear some "boy cried wolf" noise.

      In such cases, you just have to hope that people are smart enough to take the next step, mentally.

      I know they're generally not, but those will be the people who get bitten next time when they ignore a good warning, so it's self-limiting.

      Especially if it's this flu epidemic.

      You act like the warnings are "sky falling", and you might not be around to think that next time...

      Darwin was right!

    14. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by jra · · Score: 1

      (No, I have no idea why I thought each of those sentences needed it's own graf...)

    15. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      So you'd prefer to learn lessons from fairy tales than from actual history? Interesting approach. :)

      --
      I do not have a signature
    16. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by uberjack · · Score: 1

      Gerald Ford was mauled by a lion in a convenience store today.

    17. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I caught a few minutes of a press conference on CNN. Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of Homeland Security started it by saying something to the effect of 'this makes things sound worse than they are, but it allows us to activate public health resources'.

      So perhaps the vocabulary is poor, but the reaction doesn't really resemble crying wolf.

      I think the key part of her language is "allows us to activate public health resources."

      To me, it sounds similar to the way 9/11 "allowed us to active public security resources," and look where that led.

      Any time the government uses a supposed crisis to "allow them to activate" some portion of their bureaucracy, "just in case," it usually ends up restricting freedoms or privacy, or both.

      At a guess, I can see this being used to forward the national health database. Let's look at a probable scenario:

      1) Government promotes the crisis, causing fear amount people that they'll catch swine flue.

      2) Media obediently spreads the fear.

      3) Demands are placed by tame front groups that "everyone must be vaccinated against this threat, for the good of the 'American People.'"

      4) This gets pushed through as part of some sort of omniscient health database, where every piece of personal medical information you have must be readily available to the Department of Health (and thus all other government departments.)

      Call me paranoid (many will) but I don't see this as too far-fetched. It may not happen, but if it doesn't, they'll just wait until the next appropriate crisis and try again.

    18. Re:Not necessarily over-reacting by gordguide · · Score: 1

      I'm aware of the current thinking regarding the origin of the 1918/1919 Pandemic as originating from Avian Flu. However, for all of the 20th century it was believed to be swine flu, the strain is active in swine today.

      The easy confidence of Wikipedia contributors notwithstanding, the recently proposed link to avian flu is currently considered viable, due to the somewhat recent exhuming of a 1918/1919 victim, but un-proven in the current literature. As such, you can go with what the textbooks say (swine flu) or add the disclaimer (but recent information casts doubt and it may be avian flu, but nobody can say for sure at this point).

      Someday, one or the other will be proven correct. Not today, though.

  7. Google FluTrend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    According to Google flutrends (http://www.google.org/flutrends), Flu activity is still LOW.

    1. Re:Google FluTrend by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      At this time, it is low. OTH, if the current vaccine does not work against it, then we are likely to see that trend change. And most likely this week.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Google FluTrend by Ronald+Dumsfeld · · Score: 1

      At this time, it is low. OTH, if the current vaccine does not work against it, then we are likely to see that trend change. And most likely this week.

      Vaccine? I get flu shots, they are a cocktail of bits to stimulate your immune system to resist the predicted common viruses of the year. This? It's new. Not covered.

      --
      Where's the Kaboom?
      There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
    3. Re:Google FluTrend by Grave · · Score: 1

      Yes, but this story broke mostly over the weekend. Interest is going to start climbing fast on Monday.

    4. Re:Google FluTrend by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I get flu shots, they are a cocktail of bits to stimulate your immune system to resist the predicted common viruses of the year. This? It's new. Not covered.
      That is absolutely NOT TRUE. Flu is considered an unstable virus. Its outer outer sheath of proteins are different all the time. BUT, this particular strain had to get its input from a number of different strains. It is POSSIBLE that a few of the genes that it picked up were from ones that CDC (and other experts) picked to be the likely strains. IOW, it is POSSIBLE that it has proteins from what was the suspected strains. At this time, it is not known EXACTLY what strains this came from.

      What is more interesting, is this one has elements of Avian flu. It is possible that doing a vaccine directly against it MAY be what causes the issues, since it is current suspected that an immune storm is causing the issues.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:Google FluTrend by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      But FluTrends just tracks looks for flu stuff on google. If large number of people start googling for flu stuff, looking for info about swine flu, won't that throw the numbers off by a large margin?

    6. Re:Google FluTrend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, this is about the time of year that the CDC decides on the predicted strains and tells the vaccine companies to start production. Nobody is taking a flu vaccine in April. They took it 6 months ago.

  8. Options by oldhack · · Score: 1

    Once again, the viagra + hooker idea seems a sensible plan.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  9. What's next? by ingo23 · · Score: 3, Funny
    First it was bird flu, now it's swine flu.

    What's next - flying pig flu?

    1. Re:What's next? by maharb · · Score: 1

      Well this flu does have an avian part to it already. So I think the next one will be even crazier. Maybe we can get some sort of fish flu?

    2. Re:What's next? by gordguide · · Score: 4, Informative

      Chickens, Pigs, and Humans. In some parts of the world, they are in close proximity to each other.
      The influenza variants that can attack either of these three animals are very similar to each other, but not identical.
      So, normally a bird flu only affects birds, for example.
      However, flu viruses are extremely mutagenic, and in reality mutate constantly.
      A problem with flu vaccines is they must be made from a strain that exists in early summer (to have time to make enough) but there is a strong chance that the virus will have mutated enough by the winter that the vaccine is not as effective, or has no effectiveness.
      Every once in a while, because of the similarity, a mutation will happen that allows that particular strain to cross a barrier; a bird flu might mutate into one that can infect pigs, for example.
      Or a swine flu may mutate to one that can infect humans. Since it is a new strain, no-one has antibodies to fight it.
      The 1918/1919 strain killed between 2 and 20% of those infected. A normal flu fatality rate is about 0.1%.
      Similarly, the 1918/1919 strain tended to fell healthy adults under 65 with a majority between 20 and 40, and not those under 2 or over 70 who comprise the majority of more ordinary strains' fatal victims. It is this tendency that is most alarming with the current outbreak.
      A mutation of the 1918/1919 variant is called "swine flu" and is common in pigs today. That particular strain cannot infect humans. It was previously believed that the 1918/1919 strain was originally a swine flu, but recent research suggests it mutated from a bird flu. No one really knows for sure, however.
      The country that best handled the risk in 1918/1919 was Japan, who issued strict travel limits, and had a mortality rate of just over twice the normal at 0.425%. Island nations who did not do so suffered fatality rates of 5% and more.

    3. Re:What's next? by bughunter · · Score: 1

      Seal Flu.
      Bark, bark!

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    4. Re:What's next? by Auraiken · · Score: 5, Funny

      Probably Kung-flu.

      Thanks, I'll be here all week, DON'T try the pork!

    5. Re:What's next? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > What's next - flying pig flu?

      Since this strain includes both swine flu and avian flu genes, yes.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spider-pig flu!

    7. Re:What's next? by chudnall · · Score: 2, Funny

      A pig flu over the cuckoo's nest.

      --
      Disclaimer: Evolution comes with NO WARRANTY, except for the IMPLIED WARRANTY of FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    8. Re:What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You jest but this is avian-swine hybrid flu. The first thing I thought the other day when I read about it was this...

      Bastard 1: We need something to distract a global public from the 'recession' we engineered.
      Bastard 2: Pigs might fly.
      Bastard 3: As it happens, our fellow bastards in big pharma may be able to help with that.

    9. Re:What's next? by JuzzFunky · · Score: 1

      I got home last night and my wife was saying something about a pig that flew or something, Im not quite sure exactly what she said. It took me a while to figure out that she wasn't talking about a flying pig. Seriously.

      --
      Unexpect the expected!
    10. Re:What's next? by ajlitt · · Score: 1

      Well, at least we'll be distracted and entertained while we wait in lines.

    11. Re:What's next? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      ha ha charade you are

    12. Re:What's next? by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      The prevailing theory is that the flu rapidly evolves to be infectious to different species so if it can jump from Tweety or Porky to man, then it can jump from Porky to Tweety to lots more man. Usually a flu bug stays in species but kaboom there are lots of cases of swine flu, and vaccines might not have been prepared against it because no one was expecting the flu to come that way. Usually vaccines are prepared in advance for what's coming down the pike. This would mean immunity is low and people will have to not breathe other people's breath.

      What can one say? HEPA filters? Stay away from Tweety? If there's anything that is looking for stimulus spending, it's medical research.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    13. Re:What's next? by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      That will happen when ...

      It's on! A pig just flu by.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    14. Re:What's next? by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

      [...]DON'T try the pork!

      You're most likely joking, but just to be safe: the swine flu is not transmitted by pork (unlike the bird flu which was transmitted by chicken meat).

      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    15. Re:What's next? by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Right after they fly out of my ass

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    16. Re:What's next? by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      Chickens, Pigs, and Humans. In some parts of the world, they are in close proximity to each other.

      BINGO! Someone please mod the parent up, just for this.

      There are *vast* stretches of poor and under-developed Asia and Africa where you find these three species very close together, including finding pigs in human dwellings with the chickens pecking on the ground just outside the front door. It is because of this that the vast majority of new strains of influenza that originate every year come mainly from Southeast Asia.

      Also, please no more flying pig jokes, folks. From our (human) perspective, the only avian species we need to worry about is the lowly (non-flying) chicken, which is the only avian species that (in large parts of the world) is in close, constant proximity to pigs and ourselves. Although avian strains of influenza do infect other birds, it is *very* likely that the avian influenza RNA found in this latest H1N1 strain originated in chickens, was passed to pigs, then came to us.

      However, flu viruses are extremely mutagenic, and in reality mutate constantly.

      A problem with flu vaccines is they must be made from a strain that exists in early summer (to have time to make enough) but there is a strong chance that the virus will have mutated enough by the winter that the vaccine is not as effective, or has no effectiveness.

      They mutate so much every year that the CDC basically has to "restart" its influenza program every year. They "restart" by looking for any new strains coming out of Southeast Asia, plus any known (dangerous) mutations of last year's common strains still out in the wild, and then try to formulate vaccines to counter the most *likely* strain to show up later in that flu season.

      This explains why CDC's existing stockpile of vaccine might be useless in the face of a sudden, unexpected outbreak of a new influenza strain (like this one?). There is no such thing as a vaccine for all strains of influenza. Because this multi-headed hydra mutates so quickly, we currently can't create a single silver bullet that can deal with (all the different versions of) it.

      A mutation of the 1918/1919 variant is called "swine flu" and is common in pigs today. That particular strain cannot infect humans. It was previously believed that the 1918/1919 strain was originally a swine flu, but recent research suggests it mutated from a bird flu. No one really knows for sure, however.

      The only part of this text that I'm absolutely sure of is where you say no one really knows for sure, and thats especially true of the comparisons to the 1918 strain, as influenza mutates so much and exchanges RNA between the major strains so frequently that its virtually pointless to compare a modern strain to an ancient one. It doesn't really tell you anything *for sure*. :)

      Keeping in mind that the connection between humans, pigs, and chickens is a *very* old one, thus so is influenza, then, for example, its just as likely that the 1918 strain, like strains today, picked up a lot of avian influenza RNA while in pigs before getting passed to us. So what would you call it then: Avian flu, or Swine flu? In other words, how much avian RNA can a "swine flu" have, and still be called a "swine flu" (or vice versa)?

      "swine flu" is just a reference to any one of the influenza strains that are endemic in pigs, just as "avian flu" refers to all influenza types found in birds. Unfortunately for "swine flu" though, this is not only a large list, but a list thats starting to overlap extensively with both humans and avians, because, for example, it now includes H1N2 and H3N2 which are strains that include *avian* influenza RNA.

      In fact, once you start reading about these subtypes, its easy to get confused. Consider this statement referring to "avian flu":

      All known viruses that

    17. Re:What's next? by mhelander · · Score: 1

      Human flu genes, too.

      I guess it's man-bird-pig flu - half man, half bird, half pig!

    18. Re:What's next? by rthille · · Score: 1

      You fucker! I crashed Mtn. Biking last week and it still hurts when I laugh.

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
  10. Pigs in Spaaaaccceeee! by volxdragon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why is it that every time I hear "swine flu", I think this is nothing more than a really old rerun of the muppet show....maybe Gonzo will show up and save us all!

  11. Bring out your dead by CrAlt · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The end is near!

    --
    I have to return some videotapes...
    1. Re:Bring out your dead by avm · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not dead!

    2. Re:Bring out your dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not dead!

      That can be fixed easily.

    3. Re:Bring out your dead by TheUz · · Score: 1

      I feel happy!

      --
      ^..^
    4. Re:Bring out your dead by A+non-mouse+Coward · · Score: 1

      Whoever rated the parent "informative" must think Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a historical documentary, or they're new here.

      --
      libertarian: (n) socially liberal, financially conservative; neither left, nor right.
  12. Yawn.....Seriously by Neptunes_Trident · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Here are my thoughts and actions. No I will not spend money or take your vaccine. No I am not afraid of a "pandemic" to many idiots here anyway. No I will not buy into this psychological fear mongering everyone loves to push on people. I don't believe in what anyone says much anyhow. Now how many takers do I have who in spite of what I think and feel are angry and want to control me somehow? Write a law, call the karma police? Lets see.

    1. Re:Yawn.....Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What vaccine?

      From the article:
      "The truth is that anti-viral treatments and vaccines are not expected to have any effect, even at high doses."

      What fear mongering?
      It's not as though the tens of millions of people who died last time were faking it.

    2. Re:Yawn.....Seriously by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Now how many takers do I have who in spite of what I think and feel are angry and want to control me somehow?

      Paranoid much?

  13. Google mashup? by mork · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So how long before we see a mashup of Google Maps and flu stats showing outbreak areas?

    1. Re:Google mashup? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=p&msa=0&msid=106484775090296685271.0004681a37b713f6b5950&source=embed&ll=17.14079,-45.175781&spn=114.994624,178.59375&z=3

    2. Re:Google mashup? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=p&msa=0&msid=106484775090296685271.0004681a37b713f6b5950&ll=32.639375,-110.390625&spn=15.738151,25.488281&z=5);

    3. Re:Google mashup? by Rigrig · · Score: 4, Informative

      Something like this you mean?

      --
      **TODO** [X] Steal someone elses sig.
    4. Re:Google mashup? by spacefight · · Score: 2, Funny

      I love how they try to scare the adblock users :) http://www.pigflumap.com/images/adblock.png

    5. Re:Google mashup? by SOOPRcow · · Score: 1

      Oh nice, the three san diego ones are 10min from my house.

    6. Re:Google mashup? by slashqwerty · · Score: 5, Informative

      For goodness sakes, how did this get modded up? At least post a real link.

    7. Re:Google mashup? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaand... Blocked this picture.. :)

    8. Re:Google mashup? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      I'm safe. I don't use Adblock. I use Privoxy.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    9. Re:Google mashup? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how, being Google Maps, it offers you directions to each outbreak location.

    10. Re:Google mashup? by raaum · · Score: 1
    11. Re:Google mashup? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Well golly gee wizz wack willackers batman!

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    12. Re:Google mashup? by skeeto · · Score: 1

      What did they do? The image is gone now and my curiosity about it is driving me crazy.

    13. Re:Google mashup? by spacefight · · Score: 1

      It said something along the line "Adblock users get the pig flu first"...

    14. Re:Google mashup? by SonnyDog09 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try this link. It tracks news stories about infections from various sources. http://www.healthmap.org/en

      --
      Your "fair share" is NOT in my wallet.
  14. Bacon: the viral killer by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Funny

    OVER 60 MILLION GOT SERVED, Mexico, Friday (NNN) — A new strain of swine flu, H1N1, has killed up to 60 people in Mexico.

    The virus is a mixture of swine, bird, human and computer viruses. Symptoms include fever, fatigue, lack of appetite, popup ads, coughing, sore throat, a slow connection and an urge to throw one's computer out of a high window. The disease is thought to have started as a Windows virus on 4chan, a CIA entrapment message board for online activists, and can spread using the current Windows 7 beta.

    Center for Disease Control officials looked at their huge stockpiles of H5N1 bird flu vaccine and said, "... shit."

    Citizens have panicked at the prospect of bacon being put into quarantine and substituted with some soy-based shit. "Damn that Conficker!" shouted R. MacDonald of San Bernardino, California. "Damn it all to Hell!"

    "This comment from me looks photoshopped," said Bruce Schneier, an American computer security expert safely employed over in the UK. "I can tell by the pixels and having seen a lot of shops in my time. I suspect this is the work of a viral botnet spider agent replicating Trojan comments across news services until their functionality is completely destroyed. WHATEVER YOU, DO DON'T LOAD OR READ MY COMMENT. p.s.: I love you."

    Insufferably smug Macintosh user Arty Phagge was sanguine. "We know how to use condoms. And I'm a vegetarian." The Free Software Foundation announced the launch of OpenSwine, a disease generation and detection kit available for all to use and develop in perpetuity.

    Britain will be protected from the swine flu virus by comprehensive filtering of the British internet, shutting it down entirely as needed. "Would you want your husbands, your servants, accessing the Internet?" asked Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. "I put it to you that you would not."

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
    1. Re:Bacon: the viral killer by maxume · · Score: 1

      Do these things actually drive an appreciable amount of traffic?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Bacon: the viral killer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incredibly bad taste, David. No wonder you whine about being "in the radar", what the hell do you expect when you write things like these? Would you be laughing it up and making parallels to your obsession with Microsoft if someone you knew had been affected by this problem? Just fucking bad taste, no other way to say it. And alas, no sycophants to laugh it up with you.

      -G.M. (posting AC because I have no intention of letting BoycottBoy's attack poodles hound me to death here)

  15. Captain Trips! by Tihstae · · Score: 4, Funny

    It has arrived. Evil people start moving toward Vegas. Good people will be found in Colorado.

    Who has been talking to you? The Old Lady or the Walking Man?

    1. Re:Captain Trips! by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      Funny, my wife and I had been thinking about moving to Boulder..

    2. Re:Captain Trips! by maxume · · Score: 1

      I dream of Jeannie.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:Captain Trips! by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, but those of us in Colorado are stilling trying to push the bad ppl out of here. And yet, those damn lawyers WILL NOT LEAVE.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:Captain Trips! by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Don't forget who the true hero of that book was.

      The Trashcan Man.

    5. Re:Captain Trips! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I heard they go well with telephone sanitizers. Maybe if you build a ship for them, and tell them some bullshit story about a great adventure...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    6. Re:Captain Trips! by Dmala · · Score: 1

      Don't forget who the true hero of that book was. The Trashcan Man.

      In that case, I think our #1 priority should be determining the whereabouts of Matt Frewer.

    7. Re:Captain Trips! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shazbot!

    8. Re:Captain Trips! by maxume · · Score: 1

      The also go well with a nice Chianti.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    9. Re:Captain Trips! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither. Just this weird old guy named "Cowboy Neal". He keeps telling me I should stay in the basement.

    10. Re:Captain Trips! by myrdos2 · · Score: 1

      No one. I guess it's curtains for me...

    11. Re:Captain Trips! by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

      Such a sweet old lady. I'm leaving for Hemmingford Home in the morning...

      --
      Huh?
    12. Re:Captain Trips! by ajlitt · · Score: 1

      Last I heard he was working at Network 23.

    13. Re:Captain Trips! by Tony+Freakin+Twist · · Score: 1

      I can't believe I'm a Stephen King nerd too, but it's the Walking Dude... c'mon!

    14. Re:Captain Trips! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has arrived. Evil people start moving toward Vegas. Good people will be found in Colorado.

      Who has been talking to you? The Old Lady or the Walking Man?

      Isn't it the Walking Dude?

    15. Re:Captain Trips! by khelms · · Score: 1

      M.O.O.N., that spells Flu!

    16. Re:Captain Trips! by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Wilbur Mercer!

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    17. Re:Captain Trips! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who has been talking to you? The Old Lady or the Walking Man?

      I'm a deaf mute, you insensitive prick. No one has been talking to me.

    18. Re:Captain Trips! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Eeewww... But some all-natural European babes... I'd like a piece of *that* :)

      Now if they are lawyers too... *head explodes*

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    19. Re:Captain Trips! by Flaming+Cowpie · · Score: 1

      Pokerize the swine, Lloyd! Pokerize him, good buddy!

      --
      Sigs? We don't need no steekin Sigs!
  16. Not terrible surprising by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Interestingly, it appears to be expressing more of the Avian flu, than the swine. In particular, all the deaths as of yesterday eve where ppl in 20-40 range. ONLY Avian had that characteristic. What has been interesting is the number of posts here in America that say that we should shut down all traffic to Mexico on south. Of course, many of these posts mention illegal aliens. Now, the question is, how many other nations are going to say that they want to shut down all traffic between all nations in the (north|central|south) Americas and themselves?

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Not terrible surprising by Mex · · Score: 1

      A couple of countries have already moved to ban all meat related items from Mexico and the USA citing this outbreak.

      Even if it has been proven the virus is not spread this way. People will take advantage whenever they can, even in the middle of a crisis.

    2. Re:Not terrible surprising by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, that is the funny thing. What should be banned is LIVE pigs, avians, and possible humans. I have commented several times in other site that I think that this will be used as a pretext to stop American imports esp. food. The argument will go that even the ship crew can be contaminated. Yet, these same countries will not have cared one BIT when China and Indonesia had 100+ die from PURE AVIAN FLU.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Not terrible surprising by Fafnir43 · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, pure avian flu wasn't spreading rapidly from human to human. It might be an over-reaction, but I think it's a stretch to call racism the primary motivation. (Of course, I don't live in the US...)

      --
      To know recursion, you must first know recursion.
    4. Re:Not terrible surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, it appears to be expressing more of the Avian flu, than the swine. In particular, all the deaths as of yesterday eve where ppl in 20-40 range. ONLY Avian had that characteristic.

      Actually, the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918 also had that characteristic.

    5. Re:Not terrible surprising by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918 also had that characteristic.
      That flu WAS avian flu.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  17. Souvenir by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 3, Funny

    And there I was wondering what to bring back from the US as a souvenir when I go there next week...

    1. Re:Souvenir by maxume · · Score: 5, Funny

      Herpes will last longer.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Souvenir by TheLink · · Score: 3, Funny

      Clap, clap, clap.

      --
    3. Re:Souvenir by nametaken · · Score: 1

      And the process of catching it is more fun.

    4. Re:Souvenir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fap, fap, fap.

      Fixed that for you.

    5. Re:Souvenir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Herpes will last longer.

      plus it's so much more fun to get ;)

  18. Multivitamins? by Sybert42 · · Score: 1

    I've been taking double or triple dose liquid multivitamins and withstood several bugs around work and with wife. I just like the thought of using chemicals instead of chi.

    1. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      This virus is killing healthier people. Clearly the solution is to eat terribly and weaken your immune system.

    2. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been taking double or triple dose liquid multivitamins and withstood several bugs around work and with wife.

      Although I take a daily multivitamin, I've found the only thing that consistently reduces the severity and duration of a cold is Echinacea.

      But maybe that's just me.

    3. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you are FAR from the only person taken in by that particular placebo.

    4. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I am so prepared for this.

    5. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you are FAR from the only person taken in by that particular placebo.

      I guess that's something I don't understand.

      Drug companies spend tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars testing plants, fungi, molds, etc for drug, medicines and treatments for human diseases.

      But apparently they're only effective if they can be sold for big bucks by a drug company. Buying the same thing made directly from the plant itself is merely a placebo.

    6. Re:Multivitamins? by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      There are fairly good studies dismissing Echinacea's impact on colds.

      There are plenty of herbal remedies which are shown to be effective at some things. Ginko, Feverfew, Ginger, Garlic, etc.

      In many of these cases, we can even show the mechanism. At the same time, I have to admit that the studies dismissing Echinacea's effectiveness in the normal recommended approaches are pretty good. This does NOT mean it is ineffective at everything (I would be surprised it it is), but it is ineffective as a general immune stimulant and cold remedy.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    7. Re:Multivitamins? by bentcd · · Score: 1

      This virus is killing healthier people. Clearly the solution is to eat terribly and weaken your immune system.

      Or perhaps the Pope was right all along: just say no to condoms.

      Somewhat less tastelessly though, if this flu really is killing people with good immune systems then it's not as if we haven't invented immunosuppressants, or are afraid to use them.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    8. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome, America and India are the last lone survivors. That's gonna work out well.

    9. Re:Multivitamins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time for the obligatory xkcd.

      http://xkcd.com/574/

      (It's in the mouse-over.)

  19. bathroom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, yo, go into the bathroom and stare into the mirror. See that? That's an idiot. You and that other idiot, that alleged epidemiologist from yesterday who thought it wasn't a big deal and it is just "normal" and that people are just "fear mongering" need to get together and have your own idiots fan club. I predict both of you will be crying like little girls and shitting your pants when you finally realize it's real and it isn't just some "normal" little joke flu.

  20. Sanitary Conditions in farming animals by failedlogic · · Score: 0, Redundant

    As with the Avian Flu virus I'm wondering if the problem is linked to poor sanitary conditions where swine, bird and more generally farming animals. If this is the case, would it not be beneficial to WHO and UN to increase the sanitary conditions in these areas. We also have to consider that some of the North American food supply is coming from China and Mexico among other countries and we should work to increase the food safety in any case.

    1. Re:Sanitary Conditions in farming animals by stimpleton · · Score: 1

      Just ensure you scrub your swine thoroughly before handling them.

      --

      In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    2. Re:Sanitary Conditions in farming animals by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      This is a respiratory virus. It is not transmitted via food. You can eat that pig. Just don't kiss it.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  21. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we should shut down the non-essential Federal government agencies for a few weeks until this blows over.

    Hey, there's the money you need Mr. Barak Hussein Obama. Just shut us down for a few weeks. . .not like we do that much anyway.

  22. Re:Yawn by Daswolfen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it may be 'disaster of the week' for you, but to those of us who can pay attention for more than 5 minutes will see the direct correlation between this and the 1918 epidemic that killed 50 million people world wide.

    The 1918 flu was theorized to have started in Kansas around March 4th. By March 11th it was spread as far as New York City. In weeks, it had mutated into a more virulent strain that went on to kill more people than WWI had. It had killed an estimated 20 million people in 25 weeks, and that was without global air travel.

    I hope that this is just a minor incident and a false alarm, but since it has already proven to be resistant to the first two of the four major flu anti-virals (the neuraminidase inhibitors - Tamiflu and Relenza are the ones that seem to be effective so far), that in and of itself is cause for concern.

    And if 80+ dead in 1000+ cases worldwide so far(and they are mostly healthy and young) are not more than 'nervous hand wringing' to you, then you are a fool. Add to that, is the fact that it has spread globally in a few days, spreads person to person rather easily and the chances of finding patient zero in a place like Mexico is going to be near impossible, makes this appear to be something that is more than 'nervous hand wringing by the talking heads'

    --
    Don't rush me, Sonny. You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.
  23. Max Brooks was right by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mexico hovers on martial law and the US declares emergency. Government responses will be increasingly strong before they admit the truth of the zombie uprising.

    Swine flu, my butt. It's the Solanum virus and we won't know until it's too late to contain.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:Max Brooks was right by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      It's OK though. All you have to do is stand in a corner and elbow the zombies repeatedly. They won't be able to hurt you then.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    2. Re:Max Brooks was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until it gets updated, then you get eaten alive as you scream "WTF!".

    3. Re:Max Brooks was right by swb · · Score: 1

      Now's the time to get to that remote northern compound, top off your fuel & food, and lock it down.

    4. Re:Max Brooks was right by mike260 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Things are falling apart pretty rapidly here in Arnette TX. Yesterday in the supermarket there were two guys fighting over the last can of tinned pineapple. They started shoving, then one smashed the other in the face with the tin, grabbed his basket and left him on the floor clutching his bloody face.

      The national guard finally arrived this morning, but they seem more interested in keeping control of the food than in protecting anyone from the rioters.

      I've got that old saying stuck in my head, the one about the world only ever being three missed meals away from anarchy. By my count we're at around 1 1/2 right now...God help us all.

    5. Re:Max Brooks was right by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      All we wanna do is eat your brains! We're not unreasonable: no-one's gonna eat your eyes.

    6. Re:Max Brooks was right by flitty · · Score: 1

      [left4deadjoke]
      Now there's a fatigue timer after a couple of swings. I thought the programmers put it in for balance sake, but now I think that Zoey had Swine Flu and *somehow* all of the other survivors got it.
      [/left4deadjoke]

      --
      Whether or not there is some sort of god, I'm not supposed to say/god is a word and the argument ends there-Smog
    7. Re:Max Brooks was right by vlm · · Score: 1

      Mexico hovers on martial law

      Nothing new there. Their government is paid for by their oil fields, which have been in decline for years, thus they have no money to pay for government service any more. The drug trafficers have the money, and the military has the guns. Only question is, will one side win, or will there be a merge?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    8. Re:Max Brooks was right by kalirion · · Score: 1

      We're at an impasse here, maybe we should compromise.

  24. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds like the one thing you didn't do was to loosen the tin-foil hat a bit. You know, sometimes, Shit Happens. It's not always an Illuminati Conspiracy.

    And no, it's not "just the flu". It is a little early but it is looking eerily like the beginning of pandemic spread (late season, high mortality rate among generally healthy, H1N1). It may not be much, but the easiest, safest, cheapest method of dealing with it is rapid isolation. Like closing borders.

    It may well be jumping the gun a bit, but since we are not likely to get good quality epidemiological information for weeks to months, it makes sense to potentially overreact.

    Work on your tin-foil breathing mask while you have time. You can paint it black and look like Darth Vader!

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  25. I wouldn't particularly worry by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do all the normal prudent things like wash your hands plenty, try not to stand next to the guy coughing up a lung, etc. Keep up on the situation on the CDC's website, not on random places like Slashdot. The reason is that the Internet has a LOT of doomsdayers, if you haven't noticed. They are always after the next thing that's going to fuck us over. The one I remember most recently was when there were stories of cable cuts in mid east, doomsdayers said this meant the US was going to invade Iran in a couple days, Bush would declare marshal law, and the election would be suspended. Ya well, we all see how much of that happened.

    So get your info from a reliable source. The CDC is interested in keeping people safe and stopping the spread of this (and all other) disease. They are also staffed with experts. People on random forums often have no idea what the fuck they are talking about, like to blow things up, and predict the end of the world every other month.

    Only thing special to do maybe is make sure you've got flu food. By that I mean things like chicken noodle soup and such. If you get sick you probably aren't going to feel like shopping (and shouldn't go shopping since you don't want to spread your sickness) and you also aren't likely to feel like eating pizza and such.

    1. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Miamicanes · · Score: 2, Funny

      Cashflow permitting, it probably wouldn't be a bad idea at this point to begin stockpiling cat food. No, seriously. Everyone with a feline child/companion knows they don't take kindly to changes in their diet. If a real, honest to god pandemic emerges, there will probably be supply-chain problems, and stores running out of things. Do you REALLY want to go on a hundred-mile quest to visit two dozen Petco and PetSmart stores until you find the one that still has ${your cat's food} in stock, and multiply your own potential exposure by ${number of stores you have to visit}?

      Think about it. Your cat's food probably has an expiration date sometime next year. It's a safe thing to stockpile, because you're going to use it one way or another. If no pandemic emerges, well, at least that's one less thing you'll have to worry about shopping for until a few months from now. Don't forget the kitty litter, catnip, and flea medication. Figure out all the stuff you'd have to buy over the next 6 months anyway, and buy it now so it's one less thing to worry about. Just don't forget to keep it replenished as you use stuff until next year. Remember, the 1918 flu emerged early in the year, but didn't actually peak until October (and in October, it REALLY peaked).

      Ditto, for hurricane supplies (if you live in Florida). You're going to have to buy the crate of batteries and nonperishable food in a month or two anyway. Go to Sam's club now, and get it over with. God forbid a hurricane hits in the middle of a Florida pandemic, sending millions of people who ought to be staying home foraging through Publix and Wal Mart for last-minute hurricane supplies... or worse, throws hundreds of strangers (at least a few of whom are probaby sick) together in a gymnasium for a day or two.

      Buy a bread machine. The ingredients for making bread are cheap and have a long shelf life, and it'll come in handy if you find yourself really not wanting to leave the house for a while... but desperately wanting something to eat besides breakfast cereal, frozen pizza, and junk food. Just don't get into the habit of inhaling half loaf of freshly baked bread for breakfast unless you want to emerge from the pandemic alive, but 50 pounds heavier. Before you ask, bread uses NON-self-rising flour. While you're at the store, buy a jar of wheat gluten to add to the flour if the bread ends up being too dense (gluten makes the dough "stretchier" and more capable of rising).

    2. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by elguap0 · · Score: 1

      After swine flu pandemic, cat IS food.

    3. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by twostix · · Score: 1

      "The reason is that the Internet has a LOT of doomsdayers, if you haven't noticed."

      You could swap the title "Swine Flu" for "Bird Flu" and the comments are *exactly* the same. It's a little disturbing, either people have very short memories or they don't learn a goddamned thing from history. I mean even the same "solution" is being offered - Tamiflu. Seriously WTF http://www.smh.com.au/world/science/tamiflu-linked-to-abnormal-behaviour-20090420-ac3y.html If I was more cynical I'd think the makers of Tamiflu might just have the best marketing department in the world.

      Oh but *this time* it's different so says the self entitled 'elite'. It's got x, y and z, SARS was *childs play* compared to what this is going to be! Better to overreact than not act at all! (Try posting that in an article about anything else).

      I'll make a prediction, I predict that there will be a pompous overuse of the word "vector" in the comments here.

      In general there's a high incidence of people on these boards whose lives are so boring that deep down they long for some sort of drama. That and they are just as prone to fits of hysteria as the "sheeple" that so many around here deride so much.

      And when none of it comes to pass, just like it didn't with Sars, just like it didn't when Bush was meant to call Marshall law and cancel the election a dozen times, there will be silence.

      Until the next Big Thing(TM)

    4. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by XnavxeMiyyep · · Score: 1

      Marshall law

      Yes, everyone knows that the best way to fight terrorists is with Heihachi Mishima.

      --
      I put the 't' in electrical engineering.
    5. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Buy a bread machine.

      Yeah, but what good is the bread machine going to do for you once the solar flares knock out the power grid?

    6. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Guido+von+Guido · · Score: 1

      Buy a bread machine.

      Yeah, but what good is the bread machine going to do for you once the solar flares knock out the power grid?

      Gas stove. My dumbass cousin got his electricity shut down recently, but trust me, he can cook quite well in the dark.

    7. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by zobier · · Score: 1

      People on random forums often have no idea what the fuck they are talking about, like to blow things up, and predict the end of the world every other month.

      ISWYDT

      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    8. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by paganizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have a better suggestion: Beer Bread.
      get a case of cheap beer and a couple of bags of cheap flour. doesn't even matter if it's self rising, but you'll get more of a traditional bread if it is.
      Using the very simplest method, mix 3 cups of flour with a can of beer; don't stir it until smooth, just get the biggest lumps out.
      put it in a backing container. I've used everything from breadpans to tinfoil bent to approximately the right shape and hot coals from a fire.
      Oven at 375f for about an hour.
      Eat. freak out at how good it tastes, smells. Watch your friends drool uncontrollably at the smell.
      it gets better if you it "properly", but as stated it's damned good.
      Properly would be: add anything from 1 Tablespoon to a 1/2 cup sugar; type of sugar makes the taste highly variable, I like a little Turbinado ("Raw" sugar).
      Butter. grease the pan with it. some people say pour some melted butter over the loaf when you 1st put it in, I wait until it looks like the top of the loaf is starting to split then pour about a 1/4 stick, melted, on top. it lets the bread continue to rise and makes the sides touching the pan get extremely tasty.
      After you get jaded with the basic product, you can try changes; different beers make different tastes, (Guinness Beer Bread is unbelievable), you can add cheese to the dough, nuts, whole wheat flour, fruit, etc. Makes really interesting cinnamon rolls.
      Looking at things in the context of the thread, put your flour in a airtight container in a cool place, and it'll last forever; put your beer alongside of it, the same. and you can always find other used for the beer in the post-flu apocalypse world. and making your own beer isn't hard, making your own flour just involves an extreme amount of hard work, which you can trick someone else into doing in exchange for beer.
      In conclusion, here are suggestions for A Smart Geeks cheap survivalist Shopping list for Monday, April 27th, 2009: 2 SKS rifles, 1000 rounds of ammunition, 20+ lbs of flour, 8+ cases of beer, lots of multivitamins, a variety of over-the-counter drugs, Toilet Paper, feminine hygiene products (yes, even if you are a single guy. The female Mutant survivors will think you are a god) and waterproof containers for everything. If you live near a Military base, hit a surplus store and buy a couple of cases of MRE.

      How was THAT for a weird post?

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    9. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. There are just people out there who seem to like castrophizing. The world is always coming to an end, we are always fucked, etc, etc. For some people they get fixated on a particular set of things, diseases, big government, etc, others will jump on any and every thing. Well, the Internet gives these people voice, and lets them find others like them. So for any crisis you'll see people telling you how totally fucked we are. They even do it when a real problem happens. During Katrina there is no question a lot of people had real problems. However there were plenty of doomsayers talking about how much worse it was gonna be. In some cases it was that all sort of additional hurricanes would hit, in others it was that FEMA would start killing survivors, and so on.

      This is just one of many things for them to fret over. Another funny one is the 2012 "Mayan end of the universe," bit. There is plenty of doomsaying going on over that, but they are having trouble getting that worked up since it is still a few years away. However there are already all sorts of amusing non-facts getting spewed. My favourite is the fact that the Earth, Sun and centre of the galaxy will align. That one is true... But meaningless. Why? Because it happens EVERY year. Just part of the natural rotational cycle of the Earth.

    10. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Curity, I'm impressed with your typing skills, but shitting in my bed was enough of a hint.

      Yes, I'll pick up some extra Fancy Feast and litter on my way home from work. And stuff to make fresh bread so I'll leave the butter out.

      I never knew you read /. too.

    11. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by JeanPaulBob · · Score: 1

      Another pair of recommendations:

      1.) After you've put the dough in the pan, sprinkle sugar on top of it before you put it in the oven.
      2.) If the top crust of your bread tends to be too dry, then cover the baking bread pan with tinfoil part-way into the process. Maybe... 10 to 15 minutes before you're ready to take it out of the oven.

    12. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Samalie · · Score: 1

      This appears to be where I need to comment.

      Now, for the record, I agree with Parent...that overall, we probably do not need to panic over this strain.

      Now, to give my affiliation, I previously was an elected member of a city council in Canada. I'll leave it at that. Part of my duty was serving on the "Disaster Services Comittee". Effectively, the DSC (or whatever it happens to be called in your juristiction) are the people who are in charge when the shit hits the fan. We're the poor bastards running the show.

      Now, pandemic flu is something we've been worrying about for a number of years now. I know I did at least 2 or 3 tabletop exercises regarding a pandemic in my time on the DSC.

      Now, the problem is, when a real pandemic hits, we're really in a bad bad situation. I noticed in this thread that Tamiflu is allegedly a successful treatment of this strain of flu going around. The problem though is that there are a limited number of doses of Tamiflu to go around, even with the production and stockpiling going on. And in a real pandemic...I can tell you bluntly that there will NOT be enough to go around, especially since all major pandemic planning that I know of requires that the front-line emergency workers get dosed with anything effective automatically, regardless of whether or not they're actually sick. So the police, medical practicioners, EMT's, fire services, utility services (thats right, Joe at the power company gets Tamiflu before you), politicians....hell, there's probably not enough Tamiflu for even these people. So you, plain old you, are pretty much fucked if you hope that the magical Tamiflu will be there for you if you get sick. Imagine hockey arenas being used as temporary morgues to handle the dead. Imagine the economy grinding to an absolute halt in the worst case scenario, because poeple are either dead/dying or refusing to leave their houses.

      A real actual Pandemic is fucking scary, and I'm REALLY hopeful that when it does it the strain has a low morbidity rate...at 5% morbidity we've got a serious problem. At 30% (which was the maximum number we ever used for our tabletop exercises), society damn near grinds to a halt for months or even years, and probably would take decades to recover completely.

      Seriously, think about it for a moment...imagine a flu strain being passed unchecked from person to person...lets estimate an infection rate of 50% (copying the 1918 Spanish Flu). So, in a true pandemic, thats a GLOBAL figure. Over the course of 6-18 months, 3 Billion people will become sick at some point. Now tack on a 5% morbidity rate. That is 150 Million people dead globally. The estimated population of the United States is 303 Million, give or take a few. Thats 151 Million people sick, and 7 1/2 million dead. Now contemplate the lost productivity in the economy. Contemplate how to handle 7 1/2 million bodies accross the USA. And thats at 50% infection and 5% morbidity.

      I'm not scared about this outbreak yet. But pandemic influenza in general scares the hell out of me.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    13. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only on slashdot would someone add baking pro tips to a post about post-pandemic survivalism.

    14. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

      I must be doing it wrong. My flour didn't really mix with the beer all that much. I had to move the flour around a bit. Only after I did that did I get it down below maybe 2 cups of flour: 1 cup flour+beer foam. I tried not to stir---the end result was a doughy substance. Is this correct?

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    15. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

      nevermind, it worked beautifully. Bread was a little crunchy, but otherwise DELICIOUS. I added too much butter, and by too much I mean a DELICIOUS amount of butter. A+ would eat again.

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    16. Re:I wouldn't particularly worry by Myopic · · Score: 1

      That sounded like a challenge to me, good sir, so I took you up on it! I mixed three cups of all-purpose white flour with a 12-ounce bottle of Alaskan Summer Ale, a local brew here in Juneau. I stirred until combined and plopped the lump into a square pyrex dish. I didn't let it rise. I sprinkled the top with sugar. I put it in an oven at 375 degrees. After 45 minutes it was not cooked, but after one hour it was. Near the end I melted butter over the crust.

      The resulting bread was dense and chewy, but very tasty with butter and honey. The most appealing part was that it was hot and crusty.

      So as an independent party I can corroborate this recipe. Thank you for putting hot bread into my Monday nite.

  26. Actually... by denzacar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Making the public slightly paranoid can help prevent the spread of the flu.

    You would get your resources wasted and your hospitals swarmed with everyone who feels a bit tired or has a cough.
    And there is no better place to catch a disease than a crowded hospital.
    Well... except maybe going for a swim in the local sewer.

    From the TFA:

    Officials said they had confirmed eight cases in New York, seven in California, two in Kansas, two in Texas and one in Ohio, and that the cases looked to be similar to the deadly strain of swine flu that has killed more than 80 people in Mexico and infected 1,300 more.

    So far, there have been no deaths from swine flu in the United States, and only one of the people who tested positive for the disease has been hospitalized, officials said.

    19 people out of 306 million found to have something like the disease that has killed 80 in Mexico.
    1 of those 19 was actually kept in the hospital while others were sent home.

    Also...

    In the United States, the C.D.C. confirmed that eight students of a high school in Queens had been infected with swine flu, the first confirmed cases in New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said at a news conference on Sunday. Mr. Bloomberg said that all of the cases had been mild and hospitals in the city had not seen more patients with severe lung infections.
    .
    .
    About 100 students at St. Francis Preparatory School in Fresh Meadows, Queens, became sick in the last few days, and some family members have also taken ill. Mr. Bloomberg said the school would be closed on Monday, and that officials would then reassess whether to reopen the school.

    Yes... those 8 cases are all from that school.
    Note the numbers.
    8 people actually sick. 100+ immediately think that they are going to die. 0 of them hospitalized.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Actually... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      These viruses have a history of changing during the course of an epidemic. One of the ways they can change is by becoming much more deadly. Can you explain why the Mexicans are suffering a 5% fatality rate? That is quite high for influenza.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Actually... by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Can you explain why the Mexicans are suffering a 5% fatality rate? That is quite high for influenza.

      It's not (just) flu though, it's Swine Flu, so there's no real reason for surprise in this regard.

    3. Re:Actually... by denzacar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IANAV (I am not a virologist) but...

      As at least 15 out of 20 confirmed swine flu deaths were reported in Mexico City my guess is that is primarily due to population concentration and the lack of proper health care.
      When you put 6000 people per square kilometer at one place you will probably have problems with epidemics and with providing proper and timely health care.
      Add to that the fact US has about 4 times the per capita GDP of Mexico and about 13-14 times bigger GDP in total - my guess is that that should at least indicate the potential reason for the higher fatality in Mexico.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    4. Re:Actually... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > It's not (just) flu though, it's Swine Flu, so there's no real reason for surprise in
      > this regard.

      The surprise is that the fatality rate is high in Mexico but in the USA people don't get very sick from it (though the sample is small so far here).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    5. Re:Actually... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      It isn't that in the US the victims pulled through due to proper and timely health care: they didn't get very sick at all. The 1918 version was deadliest for healthy young adults, like the teenagers who brought this virus to the US. Yet most of them were only slightly ill.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:Actually... by TheTurtlesMoves · · Score: 2, Funny

      Its bird flu all over again. xkcd already got this news story wrapped.

      --
      The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
    7. Re:Actually... by Pentagram · · Score: 1

      IANAV (I am not a virologist) but...

      As at least 15 out of 20 confirmed swine flu deaths were reported in Mexico City my guess is that is primarily due to population concentration and the lack of proper health care.

      It doesn't seem like the people infected in the US have received much health care, so I would guess that's not the reason.

      IANAV either, but it seems to me that there are several other potential explanations.

      The most obvious one (to me) is that the strain that was "exported" to the US was a related but slightly different strain to the one responsible for the deaths. For example, the "exported" strain may have appeared first and been present for some time in Mexico before the more lethal strain evolved from it.

    8. Re:Actually... by denzacar · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem like the people infected in the US have received much health care, so I would guess that's not the reason.

      It is not how much care is delivered but its quality.
      If their doctors gave them Tamiflu and/or Relenza (CDC approved and confirmed as "effective against the new strain") and sent them home they would probably have better chances of fighting off the disease then if they were given a handful of aspirins and then had an x-ray, CAT scan and an MRI.

      From the article I linked above:

      The CDC says two flu drugs, Tamiflu and Relenza, seem effective against the new strain.
      Roche, the maker of Tamiflu, said the company is prepared to immediately deploy a stockpile of the drug if requested.

      Both drugs must be taken early, within a few days of the onset of symptoms, to be most effective.

      Cordoba said Mexico has enough Tamiflu to treat 1 million people, but the medicine will be strictly controlled and handed out only by doctors.

      From the same article:

      Closing schools across Mexico's capital of 20 million kept 6.1 million students home, as well as thousands of university students.

      So, the entire country has enough medicine for 5% of its capital.

      That is if and when they come to the hospital/doctor in time.
      And most people don't go straight to their doctor whenever they cough or sneeze.
      But they do share their square kilometer of living space with 6000 other Mexicans. Well... in Mexico City at least they do.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    9. Re:Actually... by Threni · · Score: 1

      That's probably down to there being less poverty and better access to clean food, water etc in more advanced countries. Have a quick look - does the US have higher ligh span, lower child mortality, better literacy etc?

  27. Be concerned by WindBourne · · Score: 0

    U do not have to be scared. It would not help anyways. But be concerned. Why? This virus is a new one. It has genes from Swine, Human, AND AVIAN. The swine part is NOT that big of a deal. The problem is the human target (ease of spreading between humans) combined with the AVIAN. Right now, the ppl that have died are ALL between 20-40. ALL have been healthy. Only the avian flu has such characteristic. If this spreads amongst nations, things could get "interesting".

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  28. "Public Health Emergency" - burocratic for now by Animaether · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just to note... declaring a 'Public Health Emergency' sounds all kinds of doom&gloom-y, but doing so simply enables measures to be taken more quickly, more easily, etc.

    "We are declaring today a public health emergency," Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said today at a White House news briefing. That declaration is "standard operating procedure," Napolitano said. "It is similar to what we do when we see a hurricane approaching a site. The hurricane might not actually hit but allows you to take a number of preparatory steps. We really don't know ultimately what the size or seriousness of this outbreak is going to be." - webmd.com

    It's when the CDC starts issuing emergencies, quarantining local communities, ordering a halt to any and all traffic into / out of certain areas, etc. that you should start raising eyebrows.

    1. Re:"Public Health Emergency" - burocratic for now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know someone at the CDC... a director level.

      Its not bureaucratic... he's freaked out and I've *never* seen that before. He's the calmest guy I know.

      I was thinking yesterday this was like SARS.

      Today, I'm scared.

    2. Re:"Public Health Emergency" - burocratic for now by SonnyDog09 · · Score: 1

      "We are declaring today a public health emergency," Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano said today ... What will she declare tomorrow to be?

      --
      Your "fair share" is NOT in my wallet.
  29. business question by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

    Does food irradiation kill viruses? If so, does anyone here know the names of any companies that produce food irradiators?

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:business question by maxume · · Score: 1

      Irradiation probably does kill viruses. So does cooking.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:business question by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Does food irradiation kill viruses? If so, does anyone here know the names of any companies that produce food irradiators?

      Umm, why are you asking? Are you planning on irridiating every one you might come in contact with? This is a respiratory virus - droplet transmission. Unless you're some sort of closet cannibal, I can't see why you are interested...

      On second throught don't reply. I'm pretty sure I don't want to know....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:business question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Informative and Funny, you made my day! =)

    4. Re:business question by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      You're much more likely to catch this from a doorknob than from food.

      Irradiation kills some, but not all, viruses.

      You cannot buy a source of radiation powerful enough to irradiate food without major regulatory paperwork. We're talking about doses of multiple kilograys (kGy).

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    5. Re:business question by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Well, I was thinking about the Mexicans who prepare my burritos at Chipotle. The food is cooked before they handle it. But cannibalism works, too.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    6. Re:business question by maxume · · Score: 1

      If you are in the U.S., brown skin and Mexican origin aren't going to be particularly important indicators of infection.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:business question by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You could always dump your burrito is some Clorox. That would work. (Irradiation might, Influenza isn't all that hardy of a virus, but I just can't see your local Mexican restaurant picking up a gamma or x-ray source and sticking in the kitchen with a bunch of undocumented aliens).

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    8. Re:business question by Guido+von+Guido · · Score: 1

      If you are in the U.S., brown skin and Mexican origin aren't going to be particularly important indicators of infection.

      No kidding. I know a number of people who just came back from vacation in Mexico, so I personally would watch out for the tan and the relaxed looking.

    9. Re:business question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he's asking because he doesn't understand bacterial versus viral spread in food. Maybe he works in the food industry/restaurant business. Maybe he knows that viral spread via food is quite prevalent in the US, but doesn't understand the general picture. Maybe he is afraid of getting it from anyone who handles pork or thinks such an approach might reduce the spread.

      And usually a response like yours is because you don't know any answers either.

      I don't know much myself, but:

      Food irradiation generally does not kill viruses.

      Most food irradiation has to be tuned to kill whatever agent you want to kill (which in turn is usually dependent on the food you are irradiating).

      Most food borne viral spread occurs due to human handling of the food, i.e. restaurants. Food irradiation would do very little in this situation, since the food would be irradiated, then handled by the preparer, which would make irradiation, if it worked, pointless as the contamination occurs post-irradiation.

      Food irradiation is usually quite regulated, I believe, so not only would you be unable to procure an irradiation device, if one were available, it likely would be very unsafe for you operate, expensive, and large.

      Prep the food yourself, buy from reputable sources, and know the chain the best you can.

      And bitch at all the fuqin idiots (doctors, public health folks, and those that agreed with them) that said private batch and individuals buying of Tamiflu and the like would hurt the public health system, tried to suppress it, and if and when government and the system's demands were met, didn't advocate private stocks. Shitheads don't understand how to prioritize or how to use general interest to the benefit of the public health system. Damn people could have taken such private interest, and instead of fearing this would make a run on antivirals, put the private interest in a queue and charged double, so that not only private stock was gained as a backup and there would be more confidence in the available stocks, but the payments would have increased public stock and covered the underserved and first responders extremely well first and foremost before private stock was even sent out. Plus pharm production would have been boosted in the event of a major outbreak.

      Now, if there is a Tamiflu shortage or the like, we'll see all the financial pressures come full to bear on a limited stock supply with an overwhelmingly demand burden, which was the argument against a "run" during the early shortages so that it would be "fair."

      And before people suggest this is because we are looking at the face of a potential pandemic now, this was discussed and suggested when the government started stocking Tamiflu for outbreak and other reasons. Hell, the quite unrelated OLPC project shows this sort of private-public thing can work. This is what happens when people with degrees and bureaucrats make decisions on a government regulated area.

    10. Re:business question by tb3 · · Score: 1

      So irradiate the doorknobs!

      Geez, it's a simple solution!

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

  30. In one word: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wait a few months before buying real estate. you may be getting a very good deal then.

  31. Immune system overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here's a question for somebody who knows the immune system:

    Apparently this flu is so deadly because the immune system overreacts (cytokine storm) and destroys more than just the virus. Would intentionally weakening the immune system then increase ones chances of surviving? From what I've read, it seems both sugar and alcohol would have an immediate weakening effect on the immune system. So to increase the chance of survival if infected: lots of sugar and alcohol?

    1. Re:Immune system overreacting by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Finally, a use for margaritas.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    2. Re:Immune system overreacting by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      That's horrifying; a cytokine storm was also associated with the deadly Spanish Flu, and is exactly what caused it to kill so many young, healthy people with strong immune systems.

    3. Re:Immune system overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The answer is both "yes" and "no", and for odd reasons.

      Cytokines are signaling proteins. They're used by cells to tell the body that the cells in the area are inflamed, which causes the immune system to react in those areas. In a cytokine storm, the immune system scrams and releases proteins to counter the feedback, but overcompensates, causing the cells to release more. The levels eventually reach critical mass, to the point that it disrupts many other cellular activities, which eventually leads to death.

      In individuals who are immunocompromised, a cytokine storm can still happen, and it is more often lethal. Instead of the storm being a positive feedback loop, it's just a feedforward system; the body just produces so many cytokines that it disrupts ordinary function, and the immune system is not able to overcome the level of cytokines to stop the cascade.

      However, there are drugs that exist that directly effect the creation and level of cytokines in the system, which is where intentionally weakening the immune system will help. Many drugs that work to prevent damage done by chronic inflammation will help, e.g. steroids, ACE inhibitors and anti-TNF-α drugs. [Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha is a cytokine]. Given along with influenza viral inhibitors (oseltamivir, zanamivir), these drugs should reduce mortality rates.

      Sometime in the (Star Trek) future, we will find out which proteins are part of these Flu viruses are causing this cytokine action, and we can target it directly to stop a cytokine storm in flu cases. We already have leads on some of them, including genes PA, PB1 & PB2 in relation to nucleoproteins found in some flu viruses, including the Spanish Flu. Drugs like it may eventually become so common place to where it will be used to reduce the symptoms of the common flu in moderate to severe cases.

    4. Re:Immune system overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Margaritas?

    5. Re:Immune system overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You intend to fight swine flu with beer and candy? That is awesome.

    6. Re:Immune system overreacting by blhack · · Score: 1

      So to increase the chance of survival if infected: lots of sugar and alcohol?

      I'll be staying home from work tomorrow and drinking margaritas all day just to be sure.

      Everybody come to my house to get "immunized"! :-D!

      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    7. Re:Immune system overreacting by bFusion · · Score: 1

      A cytokine storm already sounds like something that would come from Star Trek.

  32. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we should shut down the non-essential Federal government agencies for a few weeks until this blows over.

    Best idea I've heard so far. :)

  33. News flash! by ZosX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We are all going to die.

    1. Re:News flash! by The+Redster! · · Score: 5, Funny

      YOU all are going to die. I'm moving to Madagascar.

    2. Re:News flash! by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, people die in Madagascar same as everywhere else. :( Even those endangered species Douglas Adams went looking for.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:News flash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're too late! They closed the ports last month, after people in Mexico started sneezing...

    4. Re:News flash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you seriously miss the joke...?

    5. Re:News flash! by MozzleyOne · · Score: 1

      Hah! Not likely.

      I've done MANY simulations, and Madagascar ALWAYS survives.

      --
      Ayjay on Fedang
    6. Re:News flash! by AioKits · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that or Greenland... I could never get my pandemic to reach those two countries unless it started there...

      --
      "Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted." -Groucho Marx
    7. Re:News flash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll never get there, fool. They shut down everything last week.

  34. How are those open borders now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahh the Open Borders crowd much be thrilled.

    Well now we have Mexican viruses infecting people American viruses won't infect.

    1. Re:How are those open borders now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If immigration were legal, then there wouldn't be as big a problem. The Mexicans looking to come to the US would go through legal checkpoints and could be stopped there. Instead, the United States has unreasonable immigration laws (either way you look at it: they are either too strict or too poorly enforced), so they get ignored and the United States is unable to actually protect their border security now when it actually matters.

  35. That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Design that is.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by spiffmastercow · · Score: 5, Funny

      Eh, its not so bad once you learn the syntax. It's amazing how many people believe God doesn't listen to their prayers, when all they had to do was perform some simple debugging. Alternatively, I hear you can pray in python now, though its significantly less responsive.

    2. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by Chyeld · · Score: 4, Funny

      Alternatively, I hear you can pray in python now, though its significantly less responsive.

      That tends to happen when you attempt to use a snake as your intermediary with God. Just be happy he doesn't get pissed off enough to toss your ass out on the street and foreclose on your home... assuming he hasn't.

    3. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

      Ah, but think about the versatile prayers you can achieve with lambda functions.

      --
      i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
    4. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, I hear you can pray in python now, ...

      That tends to happen when you attempt to use a snake as your intermediary with God.

      [weird humor with obscure references]

      The only thing that sacrificing a snake at an altar to Python will get you is a wide-angle disintegration beam. The only thing that will save you from that YASD is if you are playing a Knight and have (N)amed your weapon "Ni!". FWIW, the *best* thing to sacrifice there is a "killer rabbit", that'll get you MAXVALUE brownie points from your God, as well as the coveted message: "You feel that GVR is pleased".

      [/weird humor with obscure references]

      To those who don't get the above, that's ok, its fairly obscure, the important thing to remember is this: The Python programming language was NOT named after the snake. :)

    5. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

      I pray in Perl, it is shorter, but God doesn't understand what I've said.

    6. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like a lot of maintenance work to me, snapping new species and varieties into existence as others go extinct, and keeping the whole system running properly by intervening every time the environment changes a little and a bunch of critters die off. That's lots of unnecessary recompiles and rebuilds if you do a big "mass extinction" reboot. If I was an intelligent designer I'd come up with a system that adapted to its environment "on-the-fly" and was largely self-maintaining. That would be the smart way to go. It might even be interesting to watch and see what unfolds.

    7. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Or, god forbid, convince you to eat an apple.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    8. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by ultranova · · Score: 1

      The only thing that sacrificing a snake at an altar to Python will get you is a wide-angle disintegration beam. The only thing that will save you from that YASD is if you are playing a Knight and have (N)amed your weapon "Ni!".

      Disintegration resistance also works. Kill a black dragon, then eat a tin made of its meat.

      To those who don't get the above, that's ok, its fairly obscure,

      Nethack is not obscure!

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re:That doesn't seem very intelligent to me by True+Grit · · Score: 1

      Nethack is not obscure!

      :)

      You know, as much as I'd like to agree with you, I'd have to guess that more people will get the "Ni!" and "killer rabbit" references than recognize the game environment I was alluding to.

      I now rarely see roguelike references even here on /. anymore, although I don't spend any time in the games section, maybe they're more common there.

      But, hey, in this case, I hope I'm wrong...

  36. Re:Yawn by theurge14 · · Score: 1

    "The 1918 flu was theorized to have started in Kansas around March 4th. By March 11th it was spread as far as New York City. In weeks, it had mutated into a more virulent strain that went on to kill more people than WWI had. It had killed an estimated 20 million people in 25 weeks, and that was without global air travel."

    Specifically, it was Fort Riley, Kansas and it spread to Europe thanks to troops deployed for World War I, which is where it got nicknamed "Spanish flu". You mention global air travel but I submit that air travel doesn't involve sharing an entire ship full of passengers for a cross Atlantic trip that could take 8-9 days to several weeks.

  37. Re:Yawn by 0123456 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "And if 80+ dead in 1000+ cases worldwide so far(and they are mostly healthy and young) are not more than 'nervous hand wringing' to you, then you are a fool."

    Except, um, no-one knows how many people caught this flu and had no serious problems, just like the majority of people infected outside Mexico. For all we know a million people caught it, a thousand became seriously sick and eighty died.

    American experience seems to show that only a small fraction of people are seriously sick, and Mexican experience seems to show that a small fraction of the seriously sick die. Trying to extrapolate those figures into Doomsday scenarios is silly at this point.

  38. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by VValdo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Honestly people, it's the flu. We get a new one every year... sometimes several. I stopped getting flu shots decades ago and have been a LOT healthier since that time...

    I really hope this doesn't prove to be the "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame" comment of pandemics.

    From what I am reading, this virus is distinct in that there is no natural immunity in humans (unless, I assume, you recover), that it kills those with the strongest immune systems, and the number of known cases are doubling daily. And that it's pretty lethal, at least in Mexico. Some of the estimates by doctors in the linked story says that Mexico is underrepresenting the death toll by 10x.

    Comments like "The truth is that anti-viral treatments and vaccines are not expected to have any effect, even at high doses" do not give me too much comfort either.

    As I understand it, viruses with a higher rate of mortality burn themselves out very quickly. If this is just lethal enough that most infected people survive long enough to pass it on... but a significant number of those infected experience the cytokine storm... we could all be in serious trouble. I'd rather have the CDC and WHO overreact than under-react.

    I guess we'll know soon (and that's assuming there's no dramatic mutation... there were three major waves of the 1918 pandemic as it came sweeping through the population and picked off the survivors of the previous one. The 2nd I think was the most lethal.)

    W

    --
    -------------------
    This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  39. Oh noes by kramulous · · Score: 0, Redundant

    We're all gonna DIE!!!!!!

    --
    .
  40. Kiss goodbye... by RepelHistory · · Score: 1

    ...your ability to get laid if you get this as you inform your partner that you have the Pig Disease.

    1. Re:Kiss goodbye... by D+Ninja · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dude. You're on Slashdot. We've had this problem since the beginning.

  41. Zombies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone get their zombie guns out, this is how it starts!

  42. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've been paying attention since 1918? You must be old and wise.

  43. Wife? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some on /. with a wife? Faker.

  44. We cant all die off yet by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Its not 2012...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:We cant all die off yet by ndege · · Score: 1

      Well, if not 2012, then certainly 2038.

      --
      Sig Return: 204 No Content
  45. Re:Das Svine Flu! by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1

    It would be pronounced "shvine", actually.

    --
    ResidntGeek
  46. That's it by Daimanta · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm scared, I'm moving to Madagascar before they close their ports.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    1. Re:That's it by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      Too late!

    2. Re:That's it by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      Bummer.

      Name : Madagascar Swine Influenza

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    3. Re:That's it by xkcd150 · · Score: 1

      We just have to make sure we get some good scientists there so finding a cure won't take 100+ years

  47. Re:Yawn by Starvingboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry, I'm just not that worried about it. Perhaps I'm just oversaturated with TV News disasters that never actually effect midwest USA. You can assume this is the 1918 flue-redu and hide in your basement if you like. Myself, I'm going to go to work tomorrow like normal. The fact that it's spreading rapidly in Mexico city, which is known for poor sanitation and overcrowding does not surprise me. So far the reported survival rate looks decent, I'll take my chances. It's still a bit early to seal up the bomb shelter in my opinion.

  48. worry in october, not now by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Informative

    recall that the spanish flu of 1918 came out in the summer, and was mild

    http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/health-and-human-body/human-diseases/next-killer-flu.html

    In 1918, the final year of the savage trench fighting of World War I, something else began felling the soldiers. No one knows for sure when or where the Spanish flu emerged, though it certainly wasn't in Spain. As a neutral country, Spain had no wartime censorship, and the flu apparently got its false pedigree from news reports about outbreaks there in May 1918. In fact the disease was already spreading on both sides of the European front, laying low entire divisions through the spring and early summer. Then it seemed to subside.

    In late summer, though, the Spanish flu returned, and this time its virulence was unmistakable. The sick took to their beds with fever, piercing headache, and joint pain. Many were young adults, exactly the group that normally shrugs off the flu. About 5 percent of the victims died, some in just two or three days, their faces turning a ghastly purple as they essentially suffocated to death. Doctors who opened the chests of the dead were horrified: The lungs, normally light and elastic, were as heavy as waterlogged sponges, clogged with bloody fluid.

    then the cold weather came, and it came down like a scythe. we will experience media hype for a month or two, the swine flu will be forgotten, then it will suddenly resurge like crazy in october. the reason is the flu virus actually survives better in the cold air than the warm air, and travels greater distances. the warm summer air will help us fight the flu, for now. there was science a few months ago that proved that:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7276447.stm

    The virus's outer membrane is composed chiefly of molecules known as lipids, such as oils, fats and cholesterol.

    The researchers found that at temperatures slightly above freezing, this lipid covering solidified into a gel.

    However, as temperatures approached 15.6C (60F) , the covering gradually thawed, eventually melting to a soupy mix.

    The researchers concluded that temperatures in the spring and summer were too high to allow the viral membrane to enter its gel state.

    As a result, at these temperatures the individual flu viruses would dry out and weaken - accounting for the end of the flu season.

    thats why flu is always a cold month thing

    so the thing to do is not worry now, worry later. the warm weather will mitigate the flu. then we should all keep a very wary eye come october, that's when the swine flu will prove if it is a superkiller or not

    one more concern:

    the cytokine storm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm

    this explains why those who died of the spanish flu, and are dying of swine flu now, are young, healthy adults. perversely, the healthier you are, the more you will be prone to die of the swine flu: your body overreacts, like anaphylactic shock. less healthy immune systems mean you underreact, and your lungs aren't flooded to death by your won body. the very young, and the very old, they should be able to weather the swine flu. the worst case scenario (hopefully this just fizzles out like SARS), it is us in the prime of life, 25-45, who will bear the brunt of mortality when everyone gets it this fall, hospitals are swamped, and the tamiflu runs out. then you have children and elderly with no breadwinners to take care of them

    prepare now, you have until fall until the scythe comes (hopefully, it won't, it could still fizzle out)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:worry in october, not now by IonOtter · · Score: 1

      less healthy immune systems mean you underreact...

      Hmmmm. So I guess we should weaken our immune systems then? Let's see...

      Staying indoors? Check!
      Working God-awful hours? Check!
      Getting little sleep? Check!
      Eating lots of crappy food? Check!
      Never getting any fresh air, sunlight or anything even remotely healthy? Check-a-roony!

      I'm a geek. My immune system could be knocked over by a fly with a hangover.

      Pass the pizza.

      --
      [End Of Line]
    2. Re:worry in october, not now by timeOday · · Score: 1

      So, would it be better to get this flu now to develop immunity rather than waiting until fall for it to come back with a vengeance?

    3. Re:worry in october, not now by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      So, would it be better to get this flu now to develop immunity rather than waiting until fall for it to come back with a vengeance?

      If, and that's still a big "if", it's like 1918, won't much matter. The 1918-19 pandemic included three rounds of the flu, the latter two mutant strains of the first, apparently. So getting it now likely just means you'll get to do it twice.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:worry in october, not now by spandex_panda · · Score: 1

      so the thing to do is not worry now, worry later. the warm weather will mitigate the flu.

      What about we unfortunate folks in the south of the planet... It's getting colder here already.

      I call insensitive clod.

      --
      like phosphorescent desert buttons singing one familiar song
    5. Re:worry in october, not now by jrumney · · Score: 1

      thats why flu is always a cold month thing

      I live in the tropics, where it is never cold. Yet we have a flu season - the rainy season when everyone stays indoors together.

    6. Re:worry in october, not now by Koppology · · Score: 1

      Maurice Hilleman had a hypothesis about flu pandemics. In a nutshell, his idea is that they occur every 68 years for each individual subtype. After 68 years, the majority of people who were previously exposed will have died off, leaving a totally naive population.

      This is related to the idea of herd immunity -- that a population is essentially immune if the number of immune people is above some certain threshold. Think of it this way: if 90% of people are immune to a disease, and a person on average spreads this disease to 10 people, the transmission rate will be linear. If you pass below a threshold of, for example 80% though, it will become rapidly exponential.

      After 68 years, the average turnover time of a generation, the numerator of immune people ends up decreasing, and this is why we get these cyclic pandemics.

      While everyone knows about the H1N1 Spanish Flu (the same subtype as this new Mexican flu) of 1919, much fewer know about the 1978 pandemic of the same type. This is what we should be thinking about.

      So, one might think, well, 68 years + 1978 = 2046. This pandemic is way too early. The problem is, however, that the 1978 pandemic was extremely mild -- it itself struck about 10 years too early. Thus, not many people were infected, leaving the numerator much smaller than it should be.

      The other problem is the population explosion, especially in third world countries. This has the effect of drastically increasing the denominator of that herd immunity ratio.

      Because of these two reasons, I suspect that the herd immunity ratio has already passed below the threshold needed to protect us from a pandemic.

    7. Re:worry in october, not now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google: 1918 flu aspirin

    8. Re:worry in october, not now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, I understand what they're saying, BUT it is now the end of April and the focus of the problem is in Mexico City, which should be fairly warm this time of year, shouldn't it?

      We're getting daytime highs in the low 80's here in South Florida these days, for example...

    9. Re:worry in october, not now by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      what's your point?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    10. Re:worry in october, not now by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The virus has already been reported in NZ; it's only a matter of time before it shows up in neighbouring South Pacific nations.

      50 million (from the Spanish flu) mightn't seem like much in a global context but it's plenty more than the population of Oceania, inc Australia.

    11. Re:worry in october, not now by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      (hopefully this just fizzles out like SARS)

      SARS is a different type of virus than influenza (it is a form of coronavirus), and it "fizzled out" mainly because the physicians who responded to the initial incidents were mistaken about how it was transmitted. Most of the people who came down with SARS did so because they were all staying at the same hotel, and the hotel had bad plumbing. The patients contracted the virus, essentially, by inhaling waste from other infected people. Viral cells were being aerosolized into the hallways by tiny cracks in the pipes. Nasty-sounding, but true. SARS is not really all that virulent -- my understanding is that you need pretty close contact with an infected person to catch it -- and this is the main reason why you haven't heard about more major outbreaks. As it turns out, all those face masks you saw on the news were really more of a result of bad information spread by the media than they were any kind of meaningful preventative measure.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    12. Re:worry in october, not now by rve · · Score: 1

      (hopefully this just fizzles out like SARS),

      SARS didn't just fizzle out.

      SARS was not an example of an overhyped storm in a glass of water nor an example of a lucky escape.

      Draconian measures were taken to prevent the disaster from fully breaking out, to the point that China built entire emergency quarantine villages for victims and anyone they had come in contact with. Travel was restricted, markets were closed, potential animal vectors culled.

      SARS was an example of an adequate response averting a disaster.

      People remember panic stories (Y2k bug, SARS, avian flu), remember that nothing happened to them personally, so they completely forget or disregard all the effort that went into containing these problems.

    13. Re:worry in october, not now by ethergear · · Score: 1

      Then you haven't seen how it is up north in Octoberish - flu incidence rises sharply.

    14. Re:worry in october, not now by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

      See it from the positive side the summer gives us a few months time to develope a vaccine, I assume heavy vaccination will start in summer.

      What made thw 1918 flu so serious was that there were no defense mechanisms on the medical side except for hygiene (which also was not existent mostly due to the ending war)

      This time it is different, we know well how to react to a flu and having this emerging in spring means we have a few months time to react!

      But I assume we should see it as a fair warning that cross genetic manipulations like some people proposed (growing transplant organs for humans in different mammals) should not be done. This is a first warning sort of!

    15. Re:worry in october, not now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Following that logic, should healthy people in mexico deprive themselves off sleep and food?

    16. Re:worry in october, not now by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      so the thing to do is not worry now, worry later. the warm weather will mitigate the flu. then we should all keep a very wary eye come october, that's when the swine flu will prove if it is a superkiller or not

      prepare now, you have until fall until the scythe comes (hopefully, it won't, it could still fizzle out)

      ...unless of course you are in the Southern Hemisphere where it's just starting to get cold and wintery about now.

      I'm a little worried about this actually (I'm in Australia). Just this last weekend, we had our first cold snap of the winter (which in my area means 20s-40s F and some snow in elevated locations). The normal start of our 'flu season' is right about now ... and they've announced 5 people who are currently being tested in Australia for possible swine flu (recent travelers to North America).

      I have relatives in the US flying over to visit next month. I sure hope this thing doesn't spiral out of control and disrupts their trip (well, if that happens, their trip is the last of my concerns actually). They've already announced they will be doing body temperature scanning of all passengers arriving at Australian airports from the US, Canada and Mexico from midnight tonight.

    17. Re:worry in october, not now by Devalia · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the cycle getting shorter be a side effect of an exponentially increasing world population (so the percentage of immune goes down with every birth)

    18. Re:worry in october, not now by Devalia · · Score: 1

      Oops you said that. Teach me not to read the entire comment..

    19. Re:worry in october, not now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, let's pretend like Tamiflu is going to help. The worst flu symptoms I saw last year were in vaccinated co-workers. Pathetic.

    20. Re:worry in october, not now by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 1


      we will experience media hype for a month or two, the swine flu will be forgotten, then it might suddenly resurge like crazy in october.

      Fixed that for you. Unless you can see the future, please don't make future announcements of doom, death and despair based off of AP wire stories and wkipedia. The fact is: right now this virus is poorly characterized. Why it killed up to 100 people (only 20 confirmed last I saw) is still unknown, and it might be entirely unrelated to conditions found anywhere else.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
  49. Great Influenza by zxjio · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People may be interested in the book The Great Influenza: The Epic Story of the Deadliest Plague In History on the Spanish flu.

    It mentions that these killer strains of flu are an anomaly in a virus that mutates rapidly, and so the general trend is for an outbreak to become less and less deadly as it continues (i.e., subsequent generations revert to the mean). Also, there were multiple strains in play at different times during the whole 1918-1920 crisis.

  50. OMFG ... by BitZtream · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    20 people died!?! Its the end of the world!

    Seriously ...

    A pandemic (from Greek Ïαν pan all + ÎήμÎÏ demos people) is an epidemic of infectious disease that spreads through populations across a large region; for instance a continent, or even worldwide.

    This shit is not a pandemic, its just another WHO scaremongering tactic to get funding, other examples:

    The west nile pandemic is evil and will be the end of the world if we don't act now. ... it wasn't.
    The bird flu pandemic is evil and will be the end of the world if we don't act now. ... it wasn't.
    The SARS pandemic is evil and will be the end of the world if we don't act now. ... it wasn't.

    The pig flu pandemic is evil and will be the end of the world. ... it won't be.

    The manbearpig flu pandemic is evil and will be the end of the world. ... possibly, Southpark is rather infectious, even my gf likes it now.

    I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm about sick and tired of hearing things that kill 20 people called a pandemic, unless it kills 20 people in about 10 seconds and infects a large portion of the population of at LEAST one continent.

    There are bus accidents, airline crashes, and sinking ships that should be called 'pandemics' by the logic of this bullshit. Hell I see a pandemic every season of Deadlist Catch, except its bad weather and not a real infection.

    Just because we finally got our acts together and data shared enough to notice these things happening doesn't mean they are new or really anything to be concerned about in the grand scheme of things.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't be monitored or that we shouldn't try to stop them, but the WHO and the news outlets sensationalizing this shit has got to stop. People have to stop believing the bullshit they see on the news and acting like its actually as bad as they say it is. Look at the last five years of 'scary' stuff on the news, if you didn't know about it from shitty journalism, it wouldn't have effected most of the world, right done to the 'economic problems'.

    I've never known anyone to be infected with, let alone die from: West nile, bird flu, pig flu, SARs or anything else that has been used to put the public in a state of fear during my lifetime with the exception of AIDS.

    The only 'pandemic' that has ever touched anyone I actually know is AIDs.

    Can we please stop calling things pandemics when they say shit like '20 people have died because of it in the last '?

    The common cold is a Pandemic by my definition, however it isn't by the WHO. The WHO considers anything new that spreads easily among humans to be a pandemic, regardless of how many people have been infected. Fucking high school mono outbreaks are pandemics according to the WHO because most are unique strains! Thats a retarded way of classifying something with a name that instills fear in people.

    The WHO is a political organization that needs to scare people to get funding, they have cried wolf too many times and now no one cares, my self especially.

    We need stomp their asses for this kind of shit so that when something that really IS bad happens everyone won't blow it off.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:OMFG ... by el3mentary · · Score: 1

      You idiot, the common cold is Endemic.

      --
      I reject your reality and substitute my own.
    2. Re:OMFG ... by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Some of us live in cities close to mexico, with a high hispanic population (Austin, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio). Houston's the second largest city in the US. If "only" 1000 people die of this, chances are, 70%+ will be on border states. The neighborhood I live in, near downtown dallas is almost 50% hispanic, and many of them go home at least once a month to mexico to visit family. You might recall, Hong Kong is an island, and most of the people passing through there hardly leave the airport.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    3. Re:OMFG ... by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 1

      The pig flu pandemic is evil and will be the end of the world. ... .

      WHO said no such thing in any of those incidents. Only the voices in your head are saying this. WHO has simply said that it is a public health emergency of international concern with the potential for a pandemic. Cases have now been reported in several countries, and it has killed some young, otherwise healthy people so it is a no brainer that it bears watching, and giving public health officials around the world a heads up is a reasonable precaution. No one has said you need to be quarantined, take anti-virals, or be vaccinated. All they've said so far is "Hey, if you are a health care provider keep an eye out for this."

      I despair for my species since so many of us seem incapable of rationally responding to mild, reasonably stated warnings. We seem to dismiss them out of hand, or exaggerate them into "OMG, it's the end of the world as we know it.".

    4. Re:OMFG ... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Endemic, in a broad sense, can mean "belonging" or "native to", "characteristic of", or "prevalent in" a particular geography, race, field, area, or environment; native to an area or scope.

      I don't think endemic applies to the common cold, kthx

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    5. Re:OMFG ... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      When you 'declare an emergency' no one thinks its mild. A warning would certainly be in order, or a watch perhaps, but emergency makes people think real and immediate threat to themselves and panic.

      I will certainly be concerned about it when it spreads to more than a statistically irrelevant portion of the population as a whole. Until then, its nothing more than sensationalism, to which you have obviously bought into.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    6. Re:OMFG ... by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 1

      but emergency makes people think real and immediate threat to themselves and panic.

      What panic? Certainly my neighborhood was pretty calm this afternoon? Did you actually read the WHO statement? What did WHO say that was so panic inducing? I'm going to wash my hands a bit more frequently, and if I develop flu symptoms I'll probably stay home from work when ordinarily I'd probably tough it out.

      I will certainly be concerned about it when it spreads to more than a statistically irrelevant portion of the population as a whole

      And is your version of statistically significant based on anything more then your gut feeling? There are objective measures of statistical significance, it's not just enough matter of enough sick people that it would impress a casual observer.

    7. Re:OMFG ... by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 1

      Endemic, in a broad sense, can mean "belonging" or "native to", "characteristic of", or "prevalent in" a particular geography, race, field, area, or environment; native to an area or scope.

      I don't think endemic applies to the common cold, kthx

      You missed a common usage in epidemiology:

      Endemic (epidemiology), an infection is said to be "endemic" in a human population when that infection is maintained in the population without the need for external inputs.

      This is the sense in which the common cold is endemic in human populations.

    8. Re:OMFG ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Houston's the second largest city in the US

      Where the hell did this come from? What happened to LA and Chicago (I will assume you know that NYC is by far the largest).

  51. Define Irony by IonOtter · · Score: 4, Funny

    Checking Slashdot and finding this article at the top?

    Right next to the poll, "How long do you expect to live?"

    --
    [End Of Line]
    1. Re:Define Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not irony. Irony is like, when it rai-ee-ains on your wedding day.

    2. Re:Define Irony by scubamage · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Um, no. Irony is when the opposite of the expected happens. Or an incongruency between the actual and expected result. That's just a funny cooincidence. Sorry to be a PITA :(

    3. Re:Define Irony by ep32g79 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Like rain on your wedding day?

    4. Re:Define Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      no you idiot. more like a free ride when you've already paid or good advice that you just didn't take.

    5. Re:Define Irony by ep32g79 · · Score: 1

      well, that figures.

  52. GERMS ARE GOOD..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe if we didn't completely sterilize every conceivable surface in out packing houses and restaurants, sterilize foods in radiation and chemicals, and push people to drench their houses in Lysol every time somebody coughed, we either wouldn't have this problem, or it wouldn't be as bad as it is.

    The problem today is that sanitization and sterilization of our restaurants and homes is that we are now exposed to FAR FEWER germs than in the past. When we kill germs with powerful disinfectants, we eliminate the chances of allowing our immune system to strengthen itself. I see commercials for cleaners that kiil 99.9% of bacteria, commercials for disinfectants aimed at parents using children as an excuse for sanitizing everything they touch so they don't get a cold.

    The more we continue to push for stricter standards, and the increased sanitization of our homes, workplaces, and restaurants, the weaker our immune systems will get, and the more deadly previously harmless germs will become.

    GERMS ARE GOOD!

    All I can say is "I told you so.".

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
    1. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Gerafix · · Score: 1

      It is good to know that living in my parents basement and not showering is good for me by providing adequate exposure to germs.

    2. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Maybe if we didn't completely sterilize every conceivable surface in out packing houses
      > and restaurants, sterilize foods in radiation and chemicals, and push people to drench
      > their houses in Lysol every time somebody coughed, we either wouldn't have this problem,
      > or it wouldn't be as bad as it is.

      "We" didn't do all that in 1918. 50 million people died. Hygiene is primarily responsible for the drastic reduction in infectious disease in the last 100 years.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      >>and the more deadly previously harmless germs will become.

      The rest of us would rather see 20 people die from a superbug than see 18 million people die from something that can be prevented by handwashing, proper cooking, and asepsis in hospitals. I think you're confusing the idea of innoculation such as not getting chicken pox more than once with the emergence of new (this flu is new) viruses. In fact, this virus is most deadly to people with very robust immune systems. And the next flu could target people with compromised immune systems (the usual case).

      If you really want to improve your health, get some intestinal parasites and maybe some flukes. Many illnesses in developed countries stem apparently from our lack of parasites: colitis, crohn's, allergies, etc.

      -b

      ymmv.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    4. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Have you come across any good research that shows the immune system gets stronger from exercise, like a muscle?

      People say this all the time, and it sounds nice to our intuition, but I haven't seen anything that actually took a nice objective look at it.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by pathological+liar · · Score: 1

      Bahaha.

      Yeah. Shame that if this shapes up like the 1918 pandemic it'll be the people with the strongest immune systems who are hit the hardest.

    6. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Those cunning parasites are trying to keep you alive for longer.

      They don't want you to die because they'll lose their home.

      They are also rather attached to you.

      --
    7. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by fumblebruschi · · Score: 2, Informative

      People died of infectious diseases long before sanitization began. Europeans in the 14th and 17th centuries lived their whole lives massively exposed to germs of every kind (living shorter, less generally healthy lives than they do now as a consequence), and that was no help at all when the bubonic plague came.

      Flu viruses live in bird populations, and mostly people don't get sick from them because birds and humans are so dissimilar. But pigs can get the flu from birds -- mainly from drinking water that infected birds have crapped in -- and pigs and humans are so similar that we can catch many pig diseases. (This is why you can eat rare beef but not rare pork.) These viruses mutate in the pigs, that's why they're so deadly. The H1N1 strain that caused the 1918 pandemic is still around, it's just that it isn't as deadly any more because we've accomodated ourselves to it.

      This current strain is not a "previously harmless germ"; it's new, and so no amount of previous exposure to other germs would have any effect at all on our reaction to this one. Worrying about over-sanitization leading to immune weakness is probably a valid concern, but it doesn't apply here, and invoking it is an example of one-theory-to-fit-everything sloppy thinking.

    8. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by yourexhalekiss · · Score: 1

      When we kill germs with powerful disinfectants, we eliminate the chances of allowing our immune system to strengthen itself. I see commercials for cleaners that kiil 99.9% of bacteria, commercials for disinfectants aimed at parents using children as an excuse for sanitizing everything they touch so they don't get a cold.

      The more we continue to push for stricter standards, and the increased sanitization of our homes, workplaces, and restaurants, the weaker our immune systems will get, and the more deadly previously harmless germs will become.

      GERMS ARE GOOD!

      All I can say is "I told you so.".

      I agree with your premise - people aren't dirty enough these days, and it's bad for them. However, this is a virus, not a "germ". Disinfectants like the ones you describe do not work against viruses, and will neither help nor hinder the spread of the swine flu virus.

    9. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen, brother!

      This is exactly why I don't go out of my way to disinfect or wash my hands... and I only get ill maybe once every couple of years.

    10. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      You really think this is how Mexico brought the flu upon themselves? By squeaky-cleaning the whole country too much?

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    11. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe if we didn't completely sterilize every conceivable surface in out packing houses and restaurants, sterilize foods in radiation and chemicals, and push people to drench their houses in Lysol every time somebody coughed, we either wouldn't have this problem, or it wouldn't be as bad as it is.

      The problem today is that sanitization and sterilization of our restaurants and homes is that we are now exposed to FAR FEWER germs than in the past. When we kill germs with powerful disinfectants, we eliminate the chances of allowing our immune system to strengthen itself. I see commercials for cleaners that kiil 99.9% of bacteria, commercials for disinfectants aimed at parents using children as an excuse for sanitizing everything they touch so they don't get a cold.

      The more we continue to push for stricter standards, and the increased sanitization of our homes, workplaces, and restaurants, the weaker our immune systems will get, and the more deadly previously harmless germs will become.

      GERMS ARE GOOD!

      All I can say is "I told you so.".

      Umm, as you state yourself, those disinfectants kill bacteria. The flu is a virus.

    12. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "We" didn't do all that in 1918. 50 million people died. Hygiene is primarily responsible for the drastic reduction in infectious disease in the last 100 years.

      IMO the middle ground is best. Except in some environments (hospitals, etc), I don't think one should go out of one's way to sanitize every conceivable surface. Washing hands is good. Spraying the telephone with lysol is paranoia and counterproductive, despite what the ads on TV say.

      Also there is a growing body of evidence that kids who grow up in less sterile environments (farms, etc) grow faster and have fewer illnesses as adults than those who grow up in more sterile environments. Some of these involve experiments with raising animals in sterile environments.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    13. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by jmilloy · · Score: 1

      ... the weaker our immune systems will get, and the more deadly previously harmless germs will become.

      when it comes to the flu, it appears that a weaker immune system is better.

    14. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are a troll. In any case, your post is ridiculous beyond belief and it's a shame it's a +4 somehow. So I'll just try to make this short and counter it with this:

      In 1918, a huge outbreak, antivirals and antibiotics didn't exist. Vaccines were not prevalent or advanced. Sterilization and hand washing were hardly done, that was largely a post WWII public health push. For perspective, The Jungle was written 12 years earlier.

      This has shit to do with some uneducated spouting of germs are good. You want exposure? Go to the local sewer treatment plant and roll in stuff. No one here is keeping you. Stupid jackass.

    15. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Too bad mass douchebaggery using antibacterial 'everything' is happily killing the wrong stuff, and making super bugs of everything else.

      I'll be happy to jam a "I told you so." down your throat too.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    16. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      The problem today is that sanitization and sterilization of our restaurants and homes is that we are now exposed to FAR FEWER germs than in the past.

      And interestingly, today FAR FEWER people die in infectious disease epidemics than in the past.

      Maybe we've gone too far in our germ-phobia, sure. But people today don't remember the world (which was most of human history) where damn near everyone had a sibling, spouse, or child -- especially a child, or multiple children -- who had died young from some disease that we know now to be easily preventable by basic sanitation measures. If you want to go back to that world, don't expect the rest of us to go along with you ... or let you drag us back into it.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    17. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would agree with you if we were talking about bacterial infection but we aren't so I don't

    18. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't insightful. Germs are not viruses. And the problem is that some
      viruses come along that no one has seen before.

    19. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll be happy to jam a "I told you so." down your throat too.

      Sounds pretty gay.

    20. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ironic that this steamed from the least sterile countries in the world?

      All I can say is 'You told me nothing'.

    21. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Alcohol based sanitizers are fine, they more or less physically destroy the bacteria, rather than disrupting their biology. Personally, I'd be happier if triclosan was less used, or not used at all, but there isn't much out there showing that resistance to it is actively becoming a problem.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    22. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is why you can eat rare beef but not rare pork."

      AFAIK that was traditionally because of trichinosis, a parasite infestation

    23. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only on Slashdot is a "germs = viruses" post modded Insightful.

      And you didn't even mention the real problem: overuse and abuse of antibiotics in medical situations, which has led to resistant bacteria like MRSA (not viruses).

      All I can say is "I told you so.".

      All I can say is you're an ignorant twat. Go read some history of the world before disinfectants were readily available, you ignorant twat.

    24. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Spraying the telephone with lysol is paranoia and counterproductive, despite what the ads on TV say.

      Depends on the phone. The bad MRSA strains that were making their way around hospitals were due to shared cell phones.

    25. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by fumblebruschi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, that's true. Because humans and pigs are so similar, almost all parasites that live in pigs, like trichinosis, can also live in humans, so we have to cook the pig meat enough to kill parasites before we eat it. On the other hand, humans and cows are not very similar, so cow parasites generally cannot live in humans; we don't have to cook cow meat thoroughly, because any parasites that may be living in the cow meat won't affect us.

      Similarly, if a cow gets sick, that's not really a concern for people; if you're a farmer, and your cow gets a bronchial infection, you don't have to worry about catching it if the cow coughs on you, because most cow diseases can't live in human hosts. However, if your pig gets the flu, then you do have to worry, because there are many variants of pig diseases that can live in humans.

    26. Re:GERMS ARE GOOD..... by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Hence "Except in some environments (hospitals, etc)..."

      I was fairly careful to note that there were exceptions....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  53. cytokine storm by wes33 · · Score: 1

    so ... does this mean that young people should be given some
    cyclosporin to temporarily weaken their immune systems?

    1. Re:cytokine storm by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > so ... does this mean that young people should be given some
      > cyclosporin to temporarily weaken their immune systems?

      Steroids such as prednisone are cheaper and safer.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  54. But-but- by VValdo · · Score: 1

    thats why flu is always a cold month thing

    so the thing to do is not worry now, worry later. the warm weather will mitigate the flu. then we should all keep a very wary eye come october, that's when the swine flu will prove if it is a superkiller or not

    This got started in fairly warm Mexico City.

    W

    --
    -------------------
    This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  55. FSM Flu by Maestro485 · · Score: 1

    Flying Spaghetti Monster Flu.

    Fortunately, it's only spread through direct contact, so we should all be safe...for now.

  56. when was the last time you were sick? by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    Yeah, thought so, your immune system is healthy.

    1. Re:when was the last time you were sick? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      That's no proof of a healthy immune system.

      It's hard to catch contagious diseases if you're stuck in a basement all the time.

      --
  57. Illegal immigrants and open borders by Phizzle · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    For The Win!

    For those who are trying to marginalize this one - give it time.

    --
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
    1. Re:Illegal immigrants and open borders by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Good point sir.

      Immigration laws exist for a reason folks!

    2. Re:Illegal immigrants and open borders by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Would you really deny entry to millions of people that both yearn for a better way of life and are escaping certain death in their country?

      Come on, we're better than that, aren't we?

      Besides, the resl solution to the immigration problem is when Mexico has a higher standard of living than the USA does. Then they will just have to go back for work.

    3. Re:Illegal immigrants and open borders by Phizzle · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Would you really deny entry to millions of people that both yearn for a better way of life and are escaping certain death in their country?

      Hell yes! Everyone can achieve a better way of life without breaking OUR laws! And the "certain death" is more than a bit overblown - I've been to Mexico doesnt sound like you have, its not a death camp. I have a bunch of middle class, educated people, in Mexico who are just like middle class people here.

      Come on, we're better than that, aren't we?

      Better how?! Is this guilt that is drawn on some superiority complex? That WE are soo much better than THEM, that they cant do without OUR help? Bit arrogant isnt it? That kind of condescension breeds both Racism and Whitey Guilt which is another form of racism.

      Besides, the resl solution to the immigration problem is when Mexico has a higher standard of living than the USA does. Then they will just have to go back for work.

      Ummm, no one is stopping them from having a higher standard of living, hell I wouldnt even care if they had a higher standard of living than USA - BTW many of them do. What does it have to do with them breaking OUR laws and sneaking into OUR country?

      --
      I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
    4. Re:Illegal immigrants and open borders by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      Yes i would deny them if they were infected with all kinds of things we cant stop from spreading.

      I would welcome those from other countries but how many can we take and shouldnt we be screening them to find out a little about them first?

      There is a legal process to immigration for a reason. Its not to keep people out, its to keep certain people out.

      When they're running across borders in the desert, they're breaking the law and disrespecting the country they want to be apart of.

      Too many of them are criminal minded as well. Its no wonder they illegally enter the country.

  58. absolutely by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the flu can still spread in warm climates, flu in fact is a regular feature of the tropics. but in warm weather you will see more close contact cases, cases among families, cases among office workers cube-to-cube. long term close contact being needed in the warmth. not random walking-by-on-the-sidewalk transmission, like you will get with cold weather

    the whole point is not that the summer months will destroy or prevent the swine flu. the problem is it will still spread, but at a lower background noise rate. seeping all around in tiny little clusters

    then the weather gets cold, and the flu will suddenly leap out of all of these tiny below the radar clusters, and expand exponentially in a matter of days, and suddenly be everywhere at the same time, with falling temperatures

    seriously, worry come october for us in the northern mid-latitudes

    or, alternately, if you are in the far north (in a populated area, rare), or in the soutern hemisphere as your winter approaches, worry now

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:absolutely by VValdo · · Score: 1

      Interesting & thoughtful response. I wonder if/how having two flues going around will interfere with each other?

      Question-- did you post the same note #7 as "BR" on the NYTimes or was someone ehem, engaging in fair use?

      W

      --
      -------------------
      This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  59. Environmental Factors? by W.Mandamus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sorry to point out the obvious here but Mexico City is located more then a mile above sea level (higher elevation then Denver). Could environmental factors be the reason that people are dying of respritory complications in Mexico but, so far, this doesn't seem worse then other flu outbreaks. And keep in mind folks, in a normal flu season around 30,000 people (out of a population of 340,000,000) die of the flu in the US.

    1. Re:Environmental Factors? by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Sorry to point out the obvious here but Mexico City is located more then a mile above
      > sea level (higher elevation then Denver). Could environmental factors be the reason that
      > people are dying of respritory complications in Mexico

      Do cities at high elevations normally see a much higher than average death rate from influenza?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:Environmental Factors? by Kaeso · · Score: 1

      Could environmental factors be the reason that people are dying of respritory complications in Mexico but, so far, this doesn't seem worse then other flu outbreaks.

      Isn't Mexico City massively polluted? I wonder how that might affect things.

    3. Re:Environmental Factors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could also be that breathing in Mexico City is like huffing gas fumes.

  60. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by Maestro485 · · Score: 1

    And while you suffer through allergy season, I'm enjoying it thanks to antihistamines!

    (FYI, you might want to refrain from admitting to boneheaded behavior when trying to justify future points.)

  61. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, I'm just not that worried about it.

    I'm not losing any sleep over it either, but you called it a "disaster of the week" as if the whole thing were a media invention. That is most definitely *not* the case. It should be taken seriously.

    Does that mean you should hide under your bed? No. Does that mean you should make empty accusations of "hand wringing"? No. Ignore the media and read up on the actual issue. With these warning signs, inaction would be inexcusable.

  62. Those comments are horrifying by benjamindees · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a doctor, I realise that the media does not report the truth. Authorities distributed vaccines among all the medical personnel with no results, because two of my partners who worked in this hospital (interns) were killed by this new virus in less than six days even though they were vaccinated as all of us were.

    I'm a specialist doctor in respiratory diseases and intensive care at the Mexican National Institute of Health. Staff are starting to leave and many are opting to retire or apply for holidays. It is killing three to four patients daily, and it has been going on for more than three weeks.

    I am a doctor and I work in the State of Mexico. We doctors knew this was happening a week before the alert was issued and were told to get vaccinated.

    In the capital of my state, Oaxaca, there is a hospital closed because of a death related to the porcine influenza. Many friends working in hospitals or related fields say that the situation is really bad, they are talking about 19 people dead in Oaxaca, including a doctor and a nurse. They say they got shots but they were told not to talk about the real situation.

    Two of my friends at work are sick, they were sick for a couple of days, they went to the hospital and they sent them back to work. The doctor told them it was just a flu until Friday when the alarm was spread, then they were allowed to go home. I work in a call centre and I'm worried because there are no windows in the building so it cannot be ventilated and around 400 people work there. We all have talked to our supervisor but no one has done anything not even sterilise or disinfect the area. We will be sick soon and, well, do the math - 400 can infect at least another two per day.

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    1. Re:Those comments are horrifying by V.11.1997 · · Score: 1
      How do you know those comments were made by Mexican doctors? Just about anybody can send an e-mail to the BBC.
      Quoting their own guy, Steven Gibbs:

      "Of the 1,364 people who were suspected of carrying the virus on Saturday, 929 had been discharged in good health. Hospitals in Mexico City have been besieged by people with flu-like symptoms, convinced that they are suffering from swine flu."

    2. Re:Those comments are horrifying by khallow · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is true and maybe it's someone looking to score a buck or write a good troll. Remember there are people who stand to gain from a panic, for example, selling masks, vaccine or curealls, etc. Posting a hoax to a newspaper (or for that matter to slashdot) is a very low risk activity.

    3. Re:Those comments are horrifying by Walter+Carver · · Score: 1

      Can you please provie a link for these?

    4. Re:Those comments are horrifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The link is in the summary, which has been mentioned twice already.

  63. Too late... by mangu · · Score: 1

    Immediately buy stock in Anheiser-Busch and Dunkin Donuts...

    Stock in Anheuser-Busch is no longer available

    1. Re:Too late... by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      Only on slashdot would someone actually check that...

    2. Re:Too late... by Guido+von+Guido · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you can buy stock in the parent company, Anheuser-Busch InBev.

  64. So, is it just me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...or has anyone else been dreaming about an old black woman in Nebraska lately?

    1. Re:So, is it just me... by saintlupus · · Score: 1

      For the last time, that was a work of fiction. FICTION. As in, not real. There ARE no black people in Nebraska.

  65. Astragale by astragale · · Score: 1

    I think this will be contained much like bird flu was. Right now though there is fair bit of hysteria being whipped up about this by the media. I have not heard much professionals calming things down. If it is really that dangerous, then they better give us all vaccines.

    --
    http://www.natural-healing-for-all.com/
    1. Re:Astragale by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Informative

      > I think this will be contained much like bird flu was.

      "Bird flu" hasn't happened yet. That virus has not yet acquired the ability to pass from human to human.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  66. Re:Yawn by Daswolfen · · Score: 1

    So those cases in Kansas don't count as Midwest? And I am not hiding in my basement... I just pointed out some similarities between the two events. I am pretty sure this not going to be huge, but it is a wake up call.

    --
    Don't rush me, Sonny. You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.
  67. The real war requires a real army. We're not ready by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 0

    Perhaps its a good time to point out that the greatest threat to all of us is not ourselves but our health.

    It affects all of us more than terrorism ever will. Here's to hoping we have universal health care soon.

    If we can have an army that kills, we sure can have an army that heals.

  68. Orwell predicted this by Ronald+Dumsfeld · · Score: 0

    "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

    -- George Orwell, Animal Farm.

    --
    Where's the Kaboom?
    There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
  69. Mod Points! by atrocious+cowpat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Somebody [Cough] hand me Mod Points! [Cough] [Sneeze] [Cough] [Cough]... Thanks, I'll be dying here all wee... [Cough] [Sneeze] [Cough] [Retch]

    --
    sig? Oh, that sig...
    1. Re:Mod Points! by HungSoLow · · Score: 1

      Please report your illness directly to the CDC. Thank you.

  70. Priorities! by fugue · · Score: 0

    This is ridiculous. We in the USA have 130 deaths per day due to car accidents alone, and the number of premature deaths due to obesity-related illnesses is roughly twenty times higher, and those are seldom mentioned, let alone addressed. Does this country exist solely to mock health?

    --
    "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
    1. Re:Priorities! by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      Right, but those are steady, well established ways of dying. This is new and has the potential to increase. There isn't much more the government can do to dramatically change those death rates in a short period of time. It can prevent a new form of death from becoming worse. So that's what its doing.

      Think of it this way: If someone in your family started to gamble compulsively, would you wait until they were spending more money than your mortgage? Or would you try and stop it before it got to that point?

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    2. Re:Priorities! by General+Wesc · · Score: 1

      and those are seldom mentioned

      What media sources do you use? I see it mentioned in the news (NY Times and various online sources) probably at least once a week.

      Which is strange, as change is news. 'People still dying of obesity, just like last week/month/year' is not.

    3. Re:Priorities! by fugue · · Score: 1

      Right, but those are steady, well established ways of dying.

      True, but...

      There isn't much more the government can do to dramatically change those death rates in a short period of time.

      Banning SUVs (2 to 6 times as likely to kill someone in a crash, and more likely to be involved in a crash, than cars), lowering speed limits (which would also positively impact pollution, climate, and possibly the economy (by keeping more money around rather than sending it to the Middle East?) etc), would help with the first one. Large grants for public transportation infrastructure would help both, and quite dramatically. Luckily, we're finally starting to see at least the latter.

      If someone in your family started to gamble compulsively, would you wait until they were spending more money than your mortgage?

      You're quite right. But think of it this way: if the deaths due to this new flu level off at a couple of million per year, it will be no worse than obesity, and should receive no more attention. Do you think that that is likely?

      Obviously, the number could level off much higher. We don't know, but I'm sure they are busily trying to bound the number. But if they end up taking stronger action than that which they take for some other risk, they really should have cause to believe that it is likely to be more catastrophic than the other risk.

      What we have here is a government that has decided that certain deaths are an acceptable consequence of our way of life. If you know the numbers and you know the mechanism and know the trade-offs and you have the power to choose, the consequence of your choice is your intention.

      --
      "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
  71. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The primary cause of flu deaths is secondary bacterial infections - pneumonia, for example. The 1918 flu came about before antibiotics existed to take care of those infections. Also, because 'globalization' was just coming into being, what with expanded rail systems, shipping, and a global war, there were all sorts of routes for the virus to spread to populations which, up until that point, had never had to deal with the flu.

    So, now that almost everyone on the planet has been exposed to the flu at some point in their lives, and we have antibiotics that can kick the poop out of all but the most vicious of secondary infections, do you honestly believe that this is the plague that is going to kill us all? As someone who ends up in the hospital virtually every time I get the flu, I'm not particularly concerned.

  72. Lifeless by Magnakor · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Why do people discuss the 'flu' has if it where caused by a living organism? A virus is NOT alive.

    1. Re:Lifeless by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why do people discuss the 'flu' has if it where caused by a living organism? A virus is NOT alive.

      Because the notions of "alive" and "not alive" are fuzzy human definitions only partially based in distinctive underlying natural phenomena. Key attributes frequently assigned to living things are metabolism and reproduction. Viruses reproduce, but in some sense have no metabolism. Historically, folks have gone back and forth over the years on whether both attributes are needed or only one. Eventually most folks realize they are arguing over a ambiguous border, and give it up.

      In the context at hand it make a lot more sense to think of viruses as living. They reproduce, and are transmissible, which make an outbreak of a contagious virus look pretty much like an outbreak of a contagious bacteria, as opposed to a mass poisoning by a toxin.

  73. Re:Yawn by Starvingboy · · Score: 1

    Guess we'll just have to wait to see how the thing plays out. If it's as bad as the 1918 bug, I doubt if there is a heck of a lot we can do to slow it down. I just don't see how fanning the flames of hysteria (as I see on the news) is going to help much. Maybe I'm watching the wrong channels, but I'm not seeing them mention survival rates, just body count and a color coded map of suspected incidents that narrow it all the way down to the STATE level. Just my opinion, and hell, I'm an IT guy, so that counts for bunk :

  74. Oh no ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the andromeda strain!

  75. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by erroneus · · Score: 1

    My season used to be anywhere from 4 to 5 months in duration. It is now 1 week. There is nothing "wrong" with suffering a little. When faced between that and being chemically addicted to something, I'll endure it. If, on the other hand, refusing to take medicines made no change in the duration of the season, I wouldn't have arrived at the conclusion that it is probably better to endure a little to become more normal for a lot longer, naturally.

    Antihistamines have side-effects that I do not find better than going without. And frankly, they are only effective for short periods of time before one has to rotate to another one. All the while, there is still the intermittent suffering that occurs throughout when the drugs wear off. It's far from boneheaded to see the whole problem for what it is, weigh the benefits of each and arrive at a conclusion that is not not only far cheaper and more natural, but the net decrease in suffering is far better. 4 months intermittent suffering versus 1 week... and frankly, this year hasn't done much of anything to me and the trees in my area have already completed their cycles which is what does it to me the most. Could it be that I have actually conquered allergies entirely?

  76. TO THE IDIOT MOD ABOVE by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    You HAVE to be kidding. WHO, CDC and other health agencies are stepping up concerns and take appropriate actions against this. As I said, you need to be CONCERNED, but it does no good to be afraid of it. How concerned? Well, if you live in cities where it has popped up, then yes, you may wish to think about working out of home. As I mention, this bug is killing those who are healthy AND in the prime of their lives. Look around at the posters here. Do you really think that they are under 5, or old and decrepit? 98-99% here will be between 15-60. That means that just about EVERYBODY here would be a pretty good target if this bug is in their location.

    Just because you have mod points does not mean that you should not think about what you are doing. Hopefully, the meta modders nail you for being a fool.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:TO THE IDIOT MOD ABOVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful, asshole. Bad modding is a fact of life here on Slashdot. Let those with points decide to correct the situation if they so choose. Crying about it makes you out to be a whiny pussy, and we certainly don't need any more of those.

    2. Re:TO THE IDIOT MOD ABOVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think modding people who type u instead of you down is fair play.

    3. Re:TO THE IDIOT MOD ABOVE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I am well aware of it. BUT, the advice that I offered was not a repeat; it was not derogatory; it was not a troll; and it was not wrong.
      I was on the ground floor of HIV (worked at CDC in 1981). I got to watch how things happened (we were BEGGING for money from reagan in 1981 to track and stop this and got nothing). That is the kind of things that absolutely do NOT make the history books.
      Now, This is going to be a fast moving virus that has the potential to hit in a number of places. But this virus was likely known 3-6 weeks ago and we should have done something. Most likely they were told to not tell the press and to do nothing, because it would have meant closing our borders to which we would have looked like were shutting down immigration (which we would have been temporary and for biological reasons). From what I saw, when the press first gets notified, it means that things are worse than what is told. Just thinking about it, the Mexican Gov probably said nothing because they were afraid of losing more Spring Break money (which was already much lower due to the drug war), which is what allowed this to migrate to America so rapidly.

  77. Coincidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Report from 4 days ago, on CNN and the Washington post: "Army: 3 vials of virus samples missing from Maryland facility"

    http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/04/22/missing.virus.sample/index.html#cnnSTCText

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/22/AR2009042202005.html

    The staff at Fort Detrick claim it was an equine virus that was, erm, misplaced... Equine, swine, it gets confusing sometimes...

  78. The Culling of Stratholme by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Anyone else having W.o.W. flashbacks now?

  79. Re:About covering your mouth... by symbolic · · Score: 1

    Whatever you do, do NOT cover your mouth with your hand unless you intend to wash it immediately afterward. Using kleenex is equally ineffective, since all that junk seeps right through to the hands anyway. The CDC recommends using the sleeve of your shirt - sneezing and coughing into the sleeve right at the elbow joint. This minimizes the chance of spreading all the crap that comes out of your nose and mouth at 80-100 MPH.

  80. Cowen on handling pandemics by General+Wesc · · Score: 1
    Tyler Cowen wrote a very-readable study about handling flu pandemics. This was 2005 so avian flu was the predominant example, but his advice is still germain (as it was intended to be).

    (Tyler Cowen is economist who co-writes Marginal Revolution, an economics blog (among other things).

    Wash your hands.

  81. Who is the Surgeon General? by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    Who is the Surgeon General? Why can't Obama's advisers advise him of a good Surgeon General nominee, who then can advise the President about a health emergency?

    1. Re:Who is the Surgeon General? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Because the Surgeon General wouldn't have much to say about something like this. Advice would probably come from the people at the CDC that specialize in influenza. And the President's probably already getting that advice from them already.

      It's a flu outbreak. A different strain, but handle it the same way you (ought to) handle any other bout of the flu. Wash your hands. Avoid contact with people who're coughing, sneezing or otherwise showing symptoms of having the flu. If you think you're showing symptoms, see a doctor ASAP for treatment. If you aren't showing symptoms, talk to your doctor about any possible vaccines (if they aren't available now, they probably will be). And if you do come down with it, STAY HOME! Do not, I repeat do not, go to work, go to school, go out in public where you can spread the stuff to others. Infected people staying home, taking care of themselves and minimizing contact with the uninfected until they're recovered is probably the single most effective measure for stopping this stuff from becoming a major outbreak.

    2. Re:Who is the Surgeon General? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you do come down with it, STAY HOME! Do not, I repeat do not, go to work, go to school, go out in public where you can spread the stuff to others. Infected people staying home, taking care of themselves and minimizing contact with the uninfected until they're recovered is probably the single most effective measure for stopping this stuff from becoming a major outbreak.

      Isn't the doctor's office a public place? I hate waiting there when people with flu like symptoms follow your advice and head there to spread it asap.

  82. i actually believe so by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    i think anyone who catches the milder form now will have resistance come wintertime

    additionally, the health system will be well-prepared and well-stocked to treat you if you catch a severe case this summer

    but come winter, when everyone and their uncle gets this, medicine supplies will dwindle and the health system will be swamped, resulting in deaths due to inundated personnel and infrastructure and supplies

    catch it now, or catch it next summer

    don't catch it this coming winter, when everyone will be catching it

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:i actually believe so by ekhben · · Score: 1

      Bah, I followed this thread right down to here, but it's clearly just another counter-culture scam! I'll catch the bacon flu when it's popular like everyone else will, thank you very much.

    2. Re:i actually believe so by Peter+H.S. · · Score: 1

      i think anyone who catches the milder form now will have resistance come wintertime

      Well, soldiers who had the Spanish Flu (the Grippe) in its non lethal form in 1917 and 1918 did have a higher survival rate than people who hadn't had the flu before, but the mortality rate was quite high anyway as I understand it. So a previous infection doesn't necessarily give immunity.

      --
      Regards

    3. Re:i actually believe so by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Maybe. But don't bet on it giving you resistance (there's a chance it might even make it worse):

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_antigenic_sin

      --
  83. Re:About covering your mouth... by Parallax48 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The CDC actually advises to use a tissue and throw away as a preference, and the sleeve only if you don't have tissues available.

    "Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it. "

    See: http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/swineflu_you.htm

  84. The advice from the CDC by Parallax48 · · Score: 5, Informative
    See the CDC page (copied below): http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/swineflu_you.htm For up to the minute data:
    http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/whatsnew.htm?s_cid=tw_epr_68 http://twitter.com/CDCemergency
    CDC page pasted into comment:
    What is swine flu?
    Swine Influenza (swine flu) is a respiratory disease of pigs caused by type A influenza viruses that causes regular outbreaks in pigs. People do not normally get swine flu, but human infections can and do happen. Swine flu viruses have been reported to spread from person-to-person, but in the past, this transmission was limited and not sustained beyond three people.

    Are there human infections with swine flu in the U.S.?
    In late March and early April 2009, cases of human infection with swine influenza A (H1N1) viruses were first reported in Southern California and near San Antonio, Texas. Other U.S. states have reported cases of swine flu infection in humans and cases have been reported internationally as well. An updated case count of confirmed swine flu infections in the United States is kept at http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/investigation.htm CDC and local and state health agencies are working together to investigate this situation.

    Is this swine flu virus contagious?
    CDC has determined that this swine influenza A (H1N1) virus is contagious and is spreading from human to human. However, at this time, it not known how easily the virus spreads between people.

    What are the signs and symptoms of swine flu in people?
    The symptoms of swine flu in people are similar to the symptoms of regular human flu and include fever, cough, sore throat, body aches, headache, chills and fatigue. Some people have reported diarrhea and vomiting associated with swine flu. In the past, severe illness (pneumonia and respiratory failure) and deaths have been reported with swine flu infection in people. Like seasonal flu, swine flu may cause a worsening of underlying chronic medical conditions.

    How does swine flu spread?
    Spread of this swine influenza A (H1N1) virus is thought to be happening in the same way that seasonal flu spreads. Flu viruses are spread mainly from person to person through coughing or sneezing of people with influenza. Sometimes people may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose.

    How can someone with the flu infect someone else?
    Infected people may be able to infect others beginning 1 day before symptoms develop and up to 7 or more days after becoming sick. That means that you may be able to pass on the flu to someone else before you know you are sick, as well as while you are sick.

    What should I do to keep from getting the flu?
    First and most important: wash your hands. Try to stay in good general health. Get plenty of sleep, be physically active, manage your stress, drink plenty of fluids, and eat nutritious food. Try not touch surfaces that may be contaminated with the flu virus. Avoid close contact with people who are sick.

    Are there medicines to treat swine flu?
    Yes. CDC recommends the use of oseltamivir or zanamivir for the treatment and/or prevention of infection with these swine influenza viruses. Antiviral drugs are prescription medicines (pills, liquid or an inhaler) that fight against the flu by keeping flu viruses from reproducing in your body. If you get sick, antiviral drugs can make your illness milder and make you feel better faster. They may also prevent serious flu complications. For treatment, antiviral drugs work best if started soon after getting sick (within 2 days of symptoms).

    How long can an infected person spread swine

  85. Obligatory reference... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has Madagascar closed their port, yet?

  86. obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone else think it's coincidence that Obama was just in Mexico City, now this? Maybe it was all that talk about putting lipstick on a pig...

  87. You think like a ReThuglican Jew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think like a ReThuglican Jew

  88. Re:Yawn by compro01 · · Score: 1

    You mention global air travel but I submit that air travel doesn't involve sharing an entire ship full of passengers for a cross Atlantic trip that could take 8-9 days to several weeks.

    And I submit that there are a hell of a lot more people taking planes now than there were taking ships back then.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  89. Something like this is needed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at Al Gore's charts of man-made CO2 output. Look at the charts of human population. Climate change is caused by people, and they hammer us with that. Now remember they want to get to 1990 CO2 levels.

    That means killing off about 1 billion people. We either need a big war, or a global pandemic. They are planning this as the ultimate solution to climate change. /tinfoil-hat

  90. heres something offbeat in that vein by way2trivial · · Score: 1
    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  91. "Wash your hands"?! That's crazy talk! by mkcmkc · · Score: 2, Funny

    Isn't there an expensive series of pills with occasional lethal side effects I can take instead?

    --
    "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
  92. thats extremely interesting by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    thank you

    depends upon how much the strains "drift" i suppose. but the flu is so nasty and polymorphic we should probably be pessimistic

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  93. First-hand reports from doctors in Mexico City by Savantissimo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are first-hand reports that the number of fatalities reported publicly and the mortality rate are under-reported in the news. Emails to the BBC from doctors and others in Mexico tell a different story than we're getting from the Mexican government and the CDC- here are two of the most interesting:

    I'm a specialist doctor in respiratory diseases and intensive care at the Mexican National Institute of Health. There is a severe emergency over the swine flu here. More and more patients are being admitted to the intensive care unit. Despite the heroic efforts of all staff (doctors, nurses, specialists, etc) patients continue to inevitably die. The truth is that anti-viral treatments and vaccines are not expected to have any effect, even at high doses. It is a great fear among the staff. The infection risk is very high among the doctors and health staff.

    There is a sense of chaos in the other hospitals and we do not know what to do. Staff are starting to leave and many are opting to retire or apply for holidays. The truth is that mortality is even higher than what is being reported by the authorities, at least in the hospital where I work it. It is killing three to four patients daily, and it has been going on for more than three weeks. It is a shame and there is great fear here. Increasingly younger patients aged 20 to 30 years are dying before our helpless eyes and there is great sadness among health professionals here.

    Antonio Chavez, Mexico City

    I work as a resident doctor in one of the biggest hospitals in Mexico City and sadly, the situation is far from "under control". As a doctor, I realise that the media does not report the truth. Authorities distributed vaccines among all the medical personnel with no results, because two of my partners who worked in this hospital (interns) were killed by this new virus in less than six days even though they were vaccinated as all of us were. The official number of deaths is 20, nevertheless, the true number of victims are more than 200. I understand that we must avoid to panic, but telling the truth it might be better now to prevent and avoid more deaths.

    Yeny Gregorio Davila, Mexico City

    --
    "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    1. Re:First-hand reports from doctors in Mexico City by ukyoCE · · Score: 1

      What's interesting is that no one is dying outside of Mexico. Outside of tawdry racist comments, why would this be the case? Why is the flu so mild outside of Mexico?

      The answer is, I think, Evolution. We tend to think of these viruses as evil killers. But does it benefit the flu to kill its hosts? It doesn't. I benefits most when the host stays alive, sneezing and coughing, spreading the flu.

      So why did the deadly flu only kill people in Mexico? Because it was too severe. It killed off all of its hosts. Only a milder form lasted long enough to travel outside of Mexico.

      That's my optimistic project so far, anyhow. Let's hope thats the case ^_^

  94. Re:Yawn by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    Thus far, I am not calling off my trip to Ecuador this summer. However, I AM following this closely. My suspicion is that this will be reasonably contained, but it is something to pay attention to.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  95. Conspiracy Theory by tjstork · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This is bio-warfare. I would say that its possible that the Obama Administration released a bio-warfare agent. It cuts down the human population and cements their own hold on power.

    The USA has been researching swine flu since the 1970s.

    Environmentalists feel that the earth is vastly overpopulated. People will gravitate towards strong governments in times of crisis, trading freedom for safety, invariably. Free trade and open borders makes it easier for diseases to spread globally.

    The political party that is both in favor of dominating central government, and most aligned with environmentalists, and is the party that pushed free trade on the world since 1916, and is in complete control of the US government.

    It certainly makes a good conspiracy theory!

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Conspiracy Theory by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

      That's a lousy conspiracy theory; you didn't even work in black helicopters.

      Also:

      ... the party that pushed free trade on the world since 1916, and is in complete control of the US government.

      Who was the US president that signed the NAFTA agreement? Who was the president who signed the CAFTA agreement? Which party ran both houses of our Congress - when CAFTA was passed into law, and held open voting in the House for an hour and a half beyond the normal allotted time, in order to get the measure passed 217 to 215?

      Not to say that the Democrats didn't do their part, but your knowledge of history - with respect to free trade at least - seems a bit deficient.

    2. Re:Conspiracy Theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a lousy conspiracy theory; you didn't even work in black helicopter

      black helicopters are so 1990s! probably going to do something with stealthy uavs.

      Not to say that the Democrats didn't do their part, but your knowledge of history - with respect to free trade at least - seems a bit deficient

      The Republican position on free trade is actually a largely 1990s thing. For most of its life, the Republicans were protectionist northern party as much as the democrats were the free trading southern party. Indeed, Wilson and Roosevelt both couched free trade as a progressive reform when it was really about keeping the south locked solidly democratic. Reagan is considered to be the first really free trader Republican President, because of Jack Kemp's libertarian influence, but, even he had no problem adopting protectionism measures when he felt necessary. He most famously capped the imports of japanese cars during his administration. I wonder when / if Barrack Obama would consider -that-. He won't, which is pretty silly for him as his northern base really has no use for free trade and never has. free trade generally only benefits hillbilly countries with slave / low wage labor.

    3. Re:Conspiracy Theory by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

      The Republican position on free trade is actually a largely 1990s thing.

      Right, except for the free trade stuff like CAFTA, which was signed in 2005 - under a Republican president and Congress. The truth of the matter is that corporatists have largely overtaken economic policy in America, and it doesn't much matter which party is running things.

    4. Re:Conspiracy Theory by tjstork · · Score: 1

      Right, except for the free trade stuff like CAFTA, which was signed in 2005 - under a Republican president and Congress. The truth of the matter is that corporatists have largely overtaken economic policy in America, and it doesn't much matter which party is running things.

      No, no... I don't disagree with this at all. I should have said -since 1990s- thing. And, its not even that corporatists that dominate. I'm sure GM would much rather not have to fight to stay alive in North American will South Korea riots at even the prospect of being required to allow American cars in. It's globalists and an investment class that are driving all of this. Even the corporations are being pushed into it by the banks.

      --
      This is my sig.
  96. Re:Yawn by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wrong.

    The primary cause of death during the 1918 "Spanish Flu" was "Ctyokine storms" - basically overactivity of the immune system in reaction to the virus if had never seen before. That's why it killed the young and healthy (i.e those with string immune systems) rather than the young and old who are nomally flu victims. I'm not aware of anything modern healthcare could do for them.

    Everyone on the planet has been exposed to *some* type of flu virus, but not this one - it's a very unusual mix of pig, avian and human influenza DNA which your immune system has never seen before. All flus are different, which is why sometimes your annual flu shot protects you (when they guess right about the strains that are likely to be around that year), and sometimes doesn't (like last year, when they guessed wrong).

  97. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 1918 flu was theorized to have started in Kansas around March 4th. By March 11th it was spread as far as New York City. In weeks, it had mutated into a more virulent strain that went on to kill more people than WWI had. It had killed an estimated 20 million people in 25 weeks, and that was without global air travel.

    What do you Americans do with pigs to get their viruses? ;)

    Anyways, what most of us young and more or less healthy young men can hope is that we will get infected by this first(a bit deadly) strain where more resources will be available to treat us before it becomes really deadly and most money goes to save old bastards(aka. the ones with the money) and children(aka. major infection vectors and human piglets).

    As the virus will eventually become endemic to human populations like all flu viruses, there is nothing you can do to keep it away from you short of entering into a bunker and never leaving again until you die. If you leave you will die like Native Americans.

  98. LOL yeah thats me ;-) by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    that's funny someone noticed

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  99. Mortality Rates and Flu 'Waves' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    At present, about 1300 cases are being reported in Mexico, and 80 deaths are being attributed to swine flu - mortality rate is about 6%. Now it's likely that more deaths than 80 were caused by swine flu, but since nobody was looking for swine flu, nobody attributed these deaths to it - which would increase the mortality rate. However, it is just as likely that many cases of swine flu have gone unreported (infected individuals not seeking medical care, etc.) - which would decrease the mortality rate. Overall, it probably balances out. The other important thing is the incidence rate - how many exposed people can be expected to become infected. I don't know what this is, neither does the CDC, etc. If it's low - we're probably going to be OK; if it's high - we could be screwed. Because . . . . pandemic flu comes in waves (incidence rate/mortality rate can vary highly from wave to wave - so the below is not really realistic, it's just an example).

    If the incidence rate approaches 100%:
    Wave 1 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 94% of the original population survives;
    Wave 2 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 88.4% of the original population survive;
    Wave 3 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 83.1% of the original population survive;
    Wave 4 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 78.1% of the original population survive;
    Wave 5 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 73.4% of the original population survive;
    Wave 6 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 69% of the original population survive;
    Wave 7 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 64.8% of the original population survive;
    Wave 8 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 61% of the original population survive;
    Wave 9 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 57.3% of the original population survive;
    Wave 10 - 6% mortality rate = 94% of the infected survive; 53.9% of the original population survive;

    Get the picture?

  100. Re:About covering your mouth... by symbolic · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thanks for the correction - I apparently confused this with a site called http://coughsafe.com./ However, the CDC also states, Then, clean your hands, and do so every time you cough or sneeze." The coughsafe.com website recommended the sleeve approach over any other, due at least in part, I imagine, to the fact that people are generally not going inconvenience themselves to wash their hands every time they cough or sneeze.

  101. the flu can still spread in warm climates by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    flu in fact is a regular feature of the tropics

    but in warm weather you will see more close contact cases, cases among families, cases among office workers cube-to-cube

    in fact, the flu season in the tropics coincides with the rainy seasons because every one stays indoors in close contact... btw i'm basing that comment on another comment in this thread:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1212387&cid=27725019

    long term, close contact being needed in the warmth, not random walking-by-on-the-sidewalk transmission, like you will get with cold weather

    the whole point is not that the summer months will destroy or prevent the swine flu. the problem is it will still spread, but at a lower background noise rate. seeping all around in tiny little clusters

    then the weather gets cold, and the flu will suddenly leap out of all of these tiny below the radar clusters, and expand exponentially in a matter of days, and suddenly be everywhere at the same time, with falling temperatures

    seriously, worry come october for us in the northern mid-latitudes

    or, alternately, if you are in the far north (in a populated area, rare), or in the soutern hemisphere as your winter approaches, worry now

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  102. Baby boomers triumph yet again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is us in the prime of life, 25-45, who will bear the brunt of mortality when everyone gets it this fall

    So THAT's what it'll take to stop the youngsters whining about the baby boomers! We survive once more! We survived the nuclear threat, the communist threat, the great oil crisis... nothing can stop us now!

  103. This is how the world ends... by dr_strang · · Score: 2, Insightful

    not with a bang, but with a whimper.

    --
    This is a sig. It is like every other sig in the world, except that it is mine, and it is different.
  104. Zoonosis by ptudor · · Score: 1

    The biological term for the migration of of something, say, SIV from Pan troglodytes to HIV in Homo sapiens or flu from swine to human, is zoonosis. In case you wanna sound smart in conversation tomorrow at work.

  105. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

    But is there ever a natural immunity in humans to a flu?

  106. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    The longer this thing goes on, the more it looks like it might be a biological attack.

    I find it interesting that the first case, in Cali, was supposedly a Chinese person, coming from China. Yet China hasn't had any known or reported cases yet (and they had a top general declare about 6 years ago that the US was going to be attacked by a bioweapon).

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  107. Soon you may be able to buy a quick test for the.. by RobiOne · · Score: 1

    When these guys ramp up, there may be a great quick way of testing for any of these nasty flu variants.
    They have a great test for the A/H5N1 Avian Flu right now. 100% sensitivity and specificity, which means no false positives. There's nothing else like this.. cool technology and FDA approved.

    --
    -- Robi
  108. Flu wiki by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

    There's also the flu wiki. (Insert joke here about doing amateur genetic engineering on H1N1).

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  109. President America... by Pathetiqu3 · · Score: 1

    someone just sneezed in Mexico! Shut. Down. EVERYTHING.

  110. Official WHO and Federal Response Stages by kencf0618 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The WHO stage remains at 3; the Federal phase remains at 0.
    I'll worry when either or both of those numbers change.

    http://www.pandemicflu.gov/plan/federal/fedresponsestages.html

    http://www.pandemicflu.gov/
         

    1. Re:Official WHO and Federal Response Stages by bheer · · Score: 1

      The Federal Response Stages pretty much assume a pandemic will break out overseas. The page you linked to defines "stage 4" as "first human case in North America". Pretty sure this has happened already?

    2. Re:Official WHO and Federal Response Stages by vlm · · Score: 1

      He meant the propoganda we see is at level 0, not the actual situation.

      I expect a Bush-like "for the sake of the economy, get out and shop" speech this week.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Official WHO and Federal Response Stages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      alright.. done

      http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/27/swine.flu/index.html

    4. Re:Official WHO and Federal Response Stages by kencf0618 · · Score: 1

      No kidding! The WHO has just bumped it up to Phase 4; we're still at Stage 0.

    5. Re:Official WHO and Federal Response Stages by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, WHO is at 4 now(Apr 27, 2009, 22:38 UTC)

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  111. Im a mexican... by ShadowXOmega · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It is true:

    Im a mexican, i live in Nuevo Leon, and what the papers and news say is probably only the 10% of the real.

    Even the newspapers contradict themselves: They said that where no cases in my state...and in the next page, they said that were 10 cases...

    Today they said that there were 1 dead....

    An hour ago , the goverment announced that schools will be closed from tomorrow until new advice.

    And in the center the things are ever worse...
    A friend of mine lives in mexico city told me tha the situation is totally awry:
    - No people in street
    - only went outside for food, medicines, work
    - all wearing masks
    - people stopping to go to work

    Taking account that our sanitary infrastructure is not the better and that the people here have the tendency to ignore what government says and that most of our cities tend to be overcrowded...

    This not seems very well...

    Im seriously thinking to get a van, gas, food, some stuff and some weapons(any) and secure a cabin in the mountains....just in case....

  112. Why don't we have a long term program for flu? by sl149q · · Score: 1

    20-30 thousand deaths a year without a pandemic version of flu ... So why don't we ramp up spending on solving flu all the time. It might save thousands of people EVERY year. And have the side effect of creating infrastructure that might save even more when a pandemic hits.. Otherwise when it hits we take months to react and try at that point to ramp up production of vaccines and other meds.

  113. Re:This is how the world ends... by jjohnson · · Score: 1

    not with a bang, but with a whimper^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsniffle.

    Fixed that for you.

    --
    Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  114. 1...2...a 1 2 3 4... by adavies42 · · Score: 1

    courtesy of The Flying Fish Sailors, it's Flu Pandemic! everybody sing along on the chorus!

    It was the Flu pandemic
    And it swept the whole world wide
    It caught soldiers and civilians
    And they died, died, died!
    Whether they're lying in the trenches
    Or lying in their beds
    Twenty million of them got it
    And they're dead, dead, dead!

    There was a soldier on the battleground in 1917
    He turned there to his buddy with his face a ghastly green
    He said "We made it both through Passchendaele, the Somme, and Flanders too
    But now my number's up my lad for I've gone and caught the flu"

    chorus

    Well a nurse was in the hospital when Tommy was brought in
    When he sneezed she caught a face full that was flying in the wind
    She wrote a letter home to England to tell them of her plight
    But the letter never got there 'cause the postman too had died

    chorus

    From the meadow-lands of Somerset and o'er the bounding main
    To the shores of old Americay they sung the same refrain
    Mothers, fathers, uncles and aunts as well as the odd nephew
    Brothers and sisters and bosses and lovers were all got by the flu

    chorus

    Well a farmer out in China watched his family dropping down
    And a businessman in Cairo hit the street without a sound
    And an eager little Bolshevik in old Sevastopol
    couldn't keep up his grinnin' at Lenin as Comrade Virus took its toll

    --
    Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
    -kfg
  115. Re:bird flu by astragale · · Score: 1

    > I think this will be contained much like bird flu was.

    "Bird flu" hasn't happened yet. That virus has not yet acquired the ability to pass from human to human.

    People have died from it though and if the authorities did not take the precautionary appropriate steps things could have got worse.

    --
    http://www.natural-healing-for-all.com/
  116. Hooray! by smileytshirt · · Score: 1

    tHI

    --
    www.shortman.com.au - top shorted stocks on the ASX
    1. Re:Hooray! by smileytshirt · · Score: 1

      Silly browser.. as i was saying.. This must finally mean an end to pork barreling!

      --
      www.shortman.com.au - top shorted stocks on the ASX
  117. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

    It is a little early but it is looking eerily like the beginning of pandemic spread (late season, high mortality rate among generally healthy, H1N1). It may not be much, but the easiest, safest, cheapest method of dealing with it is rapid isolation. Like closing borders.

    Realistically (and cinically) the best hope for survival humanity has in case of a pandemic is if the virus kills quickly, thus limiting its own spread. Viruses tipically survive only 2 hours out in the open, but live as long as the host does, inside it. Humans moving around is THE number one problem that will either curb or facilitate the spread.

    --
    i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
  118. Posters: please do not scaremonger ? by Zoxed · · Score: 0

    I am not a doctor, but are not comparisons with the 1918 flu outbreak irrelevant: it passed human to human, whereas this pig flu is only passed pig to human.

    Solution: leave the pigs alone (as a vegy I am trying very hard to not say "I told you so" !!)

    1. Re:Posters: please do not scaremonger ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well we should probably excuse your ignorance as a veggie, but the problem is that it DOES SPREAD FROM HUMAN TO HUMAN!

  119. gold? ammo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it will be ammunition.

  120. Could you blame me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work at a food store which basically sits in the epicenter of the San Antonio cases. I'm trying to decide if being around all the people and the passed money this next week is worth the paycheck at the end of it.

    I'm still young, so I suppose I can just stick to orange juice and hope.

  121. Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I scrolled all the way down and didn't see the word "zombie" once???
    I'm disappointed.

    This is an outbreak. Z-day has arrived.

  122. Why I'm more concerned about this one. by Xest · · Score: 1

    Personally, the whole H5N1 thing wasn't something I was going to get too worried about despite the news telling us day in and day out for months how it was the end of the world. But this one I am concerned about, why?

    The whole bird flu thing was primarily theoretical, whilst some people died from flu they caught from contact with birds it never actually evolved into a strain that could easily be spread between humans. Whilst we should always be prepared for the theoretical, there seems little point the average person caring or worrying about it beyond having a breif awareness of the possibility of it happening.

    This time, it's different, it's clearly not theoretical, this thing exists, it's in the field and it's affecting people.

    I don't know why such a fuss was made about H5N1 for so long, whilst this thing went un-reported until it had already killed a ton of people. I can't help but feel the original H5N1 bird flu scare was somewhat of a manufactured scare, because whilst it was theoretically worrying, so are many other things, like nuclear war, but that doesn't mean we need to spend months on end reiterating to everyone why the should be worried. In a way it's good that the H5N1 scare educated people on the danger of pandemics but I still think it was overstated and took up a massively disproportionate amount of news coverage at the time and for the duration.

    So the whole H5N1 scare was a blessing and a curse, a blessing because it raised awareness of pandemics and possibly assisted preparation for this (The UK government spent £500m on Tamiflu for the H5N1 scare - seemed a stupid move at the time, perhaps not so now) but it was also a curse in that it got many people worried for many months and took up a disproportionate amount of media coverage such that arguably more important events at the time were missed or poorly reported.

    1. Re:Why I'm more concerned about this one. by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Not to say that this virus is the kind of thing that people theoreticaly expected to come from H5N1.

  123. Air quality by rusl · · Score: 1

    I'm just guessing but I think the famously abysmal air quality in Mexico City probably has something to do with the deadliness of this flu there. Isn't it a respiratory problem ultimately?

    The high mortality in other cities has yet to materialise.

    I'm hoping that in the long run we will maybe start taking air quality seriously as a result of this. Maybe even decide to stop relying on cars because we don't really need them in cities. (Unlike computer analogies)

    On the other hand maybe we should all watch a tall stack of apocalyptic movies (The latest ones I saw were: the Happening, Blindness, The Day the Earth Stood Still, none were good - Blindness the only one worth considering) and freak ourselves out and get paranoid about our neighbours and immigrants. I'm sure that would be helpful.

    --
    Stupidity is its own reward.
  124. Re:Wow... Zombie by cdn-programmer · · Score: 1

    Its there now.

  125. Nobody panic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, my advice to anyone in the US right now is not to panic. Keep calm. There are certain steps you can take to ensure the safety of yourself and you family.

    The first thing to do is to flu-proof your home. Use duct tape or silicone sealant to make the building as air-tight as possible. Pay particular attention to the gaps around doors and windows, but don't forget gaps in roof spaces and ventilation holes!

    Next, you need to leave your family at home, then go calmly to your local store to stock up on some essential supplies. Obviously you'll want to wear some kind of flu-proof protective clothing and mask/ breathing apparatus. You may have to improvise here; if you haven't been prudent enough to stock up on biohazard gear in advance you may have to swaddle yourself head to toe in bleach-soaked rags.

    Don't get too close to anyone on your way to the store or while shopping, to reduce the spread of the virus. Bear in mind that many other people may not have read this advice, and will probably be panicking and acting irrationally. Warn these people loudly and clearly to keep their distance.
    However if anyone insists on getting closer than three or four metres from you, then they are putting you at risk. Shoot them. If you don't have a gun/ crossbow, dissuade them with a golf club or length of wood/ metal brought along for this purpose. Try not to splatter too much blood or brains around though, for obvious reasons.

    At the store, buy as much of everything as you can. Food, medicine and firearms are obviously the priorities, but you may find these items in short supply. You may have to fight for certain premium items. If you can't get hold of what you need, just stock up on anything - clothes, books, toys, carpet cleaner, plumbing supplies - anything is better than nothing. If the cashier insists that you cannot pay for the items without coming dangerously close to them, it's better to just leave without paying. The aim is to just fill up the car with stuff and get it home as soon as possible. However you must do all this in as calm and rational a way as possible.

    Remember, other people may be panicking! Expect to see people acting irrationally. They may even seem to be afraid of you as you waddle calmly through the parking lot in your bleach-drenched wrappings, calmly brandishing your crossbow, rationally dragging a cart full of cheese strings, light fixings and sanitary products whilst calmly screaming at people to stay away from you. Do not let sympathy for these weak and undisciplined minds endanger you. Your life, and your family's lives are at stake, so you must treat any deranged potential host of this killer infection as you would any murderer, rapist, terrorist, pedophile or dope-smoker. Even responsible members of society like the police may succumb to the hysteria and start behaving irrationally. consider this when they start telling you what to do, and be sure respond in the manner that minimises your risk of exposure to infection.

    Above all, this is SWINE flu. If you see any pigs, KILL THEM WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE.

    Having arrived safely back home with your supplies, strip naked and burn all your outdoor clothes on the front doorstep. Now bring your supplies indoors, but bear in mind they are covered in dust and air from the outside! It's best to seal the supplies in a 'quarantine' cupboard for a month or two, to give the infection time to die off. Once you have sealed the cupboard, bathe in bleach and you will finally be ready to get dressed and join your family in pure, uncontaminated, flu-free safety!

    Seal yourself into the house with your family, and try to spend as much time as possible calmly hiding under a sturdy table or bed. In the basement, if available. Remember it has yet to be proved that the swine flu cannot be transmitted digitally, so do NOT switch on your TV, radio or computer, or make any use of your telephone. Shoot any family member who even thinks about going outside, or anyone who approaches the house. Remain indoors for a period of at least 14 months.

    If everyone in the US were to follow this advice today, the world would no longer have to worry about swine flu.

    Or a bunch of other stuff.

  126. "milder" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in this case, "milder" means blowing out your nose or coughing up a total of about 1/2 cup of sputum every morning plus lesser amounts throughout the day.

  127. Don't cast Perl... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What you take your daily dose of re-legion from a Python in an alleged Tree of knowledge? Oh and by the way, the singular of the plural form for "deer" should be "door", just like the present tense of "drag" should be "drug" (because we all know a rug is for footwear while rugged footwear pulling somthing heavy shouldn't drag too much as where one would have drug it using a dolly.

    Peace. of shit.

  128. MOD PARENT DOWN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    In 1981 I was Reagan and I gave those guys all they were asking for, please mod the bullshit parent down. Thanks.

  129. hmm by GregNorc · · Score: 1

    The cynic in me is skeptical that the swine flu story broke the same day it was announced more torture pictures were being released.

    Misdirection is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

    If you you take a look at the detailed stats on the effected, only people in Mexico died, which could be attributed to lack of medical attention rather than a particularly virulent strain of swine flu. In mexico, roughly 1600 people were infected, roughly 100 died. However in the US, we've had ~100 confimed cases. Based on that data, we should expect ~10 deaths, but have had none so. far.

  130. Dunbass Patient zero is Smithfield hams pig farms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Mexican swines!

    It is American swines living in Mexico.

  131. Manbirdpig? by Technopaladin · · Score: 1

    He was sooo close

  132. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

    We know (because of AIDS) that it is possible to craft viruses with very specific traits that attack very limited subsets of the population, and mostly ignore others. This one sounds like an equal-opportunity killer. It might be a deliberate attempt to cull the population on a very broad basis, since it seems likely to have exactly that effect, but I doubt very highly that it was designed by one specific nation-state to target the members of another.

  133. Re:Das Svine Flu! by Ptraci · · Score: 1

    and spelled "schwein".

  134. Re:Yawn by Chicken04GTO · · Score: 1

    its until proven to NOT be the disaster of the week ala:
    west nile
    SARS
    avian flu
    monkey pox
    ..whatever,

    default response is: intarwebz overblown doomsday disaster of the week response in effect. Meh.

  135. How far north? by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    if you are in the far north (in a populated area, rare), or in the soutern hemisphere as your winter approaches, worry now.

    Actually the article you quoted says "at temperatures slightly above freezing" so the optimal temperature range is presumably ~0-16C. So, speaking as a resident of the somewhat 'far north' (for North America at least, less so for Europe) this might be less of an issue since our winters are well below 0 (it is usually -10 to -30C).

  136. ToBeSwineOrNotToBeSwine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't eat a pig with a hat!

  137. Too late by donutello · · Score: 1

    They've already closed their borders.

    --
    Mmmm.. Donuts
  138. nobody expects by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    the spanish flu irony inquisition!

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  139. Cytokine_storm by ShadowXOmega · · Score: 0

    Is because of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm When the people have a strong immune system, it over-reacts to the infection, effectively getting killed by its own defensive system.

  140. Re:About covering your mouth... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

    people are generally not going inconvenience themselves to wash their hands every time they cough or sneeze

    Especially not when they realize that this is to prevent spreading their germs to others, not to protect themselves from infection.

  141. Obama says swine flu not a cause for alarm by frank249 · · Score: 1

    CNN reports that President Obama said Monday that the swine flu outbreak is a 'cause for concern and requires a heightened state of alert,' but is not a 'cause for alarm.' I for one agree with him. No one has died in the US from swine flu yet the media is portraying it as a major disaster. How is this any worse than the regular influenza that causes approximately 36,000 deaths and more than 200,000 hospitalizations every year in America?

    --

    Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.

  142. Should I worry? by b0ttle · · Score: 1

    So I guess if this really becomes a serious outbreak, those living in big cities should be the most affected.

    I'm a 25 year old healthy male and I live near an airport in the city of Sao Paulo (which is in Brazil, pretty close to Mexico). With a population of 11 million people. Should I worry?

  143. Re:Those comments are horrifying...or hoax by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

    I'd be really suspicious of this message. First off, I would have expected any such message to circulate in the US before Europe, as we have much closer ties with Mexico. Secondly, it seems to be designed specifically to cause panic. Lastly, it seems to be using British spellings. Damn near every Mexican who has learned English would have leared the US variety, and thus would have used US spellings.

    This looks to me more like a message generated in England specifically to scare people.

  144. Us Health and Human Services pamphlet by Tiger4 · · Score: 1

    http://www.pandemicflu.gov/PLAN/PDF/GUIDE.PDF

    This one seems to have been prepared in response to the avian flu hysteria of a few years ago. But the basic tips on how to prepare and protect yourself and your friends and family are the same.

    If you do nothing else, *Wash Your Hands!* thanks!

    --
    Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
  145. Re:Those comments are horrifying...or hoax by benjamindees · · Score: 1

    Those comments are from the BBC page linked in the summary. I did cherry-pick the best parts of the best comments, but they are all there. It is not a single "message" as you say, but portions of messages from five different people that the BBC has (presumably) sourced before quoting.

    Perhaps they are using British spellings because they were translated, or because they are British ex-pats, or they are Mexicans who read the BBC, or the BBC has a spell-checker that automatically replaces American spellings with British ones (okay that was a joke).

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
  146. Why does everyone always compare to 1918? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

    Whenever flu is discussed in the context of a pandemic outbreak, everyone goes back to the 1918 pandemic and acts as if that is the most recent pandemic. There have been TWO pandemic outbreaks of flu since 1918. One in 1957-58 and another in 1968-69.

    Death tolls for the pandemics:
    1918-20 40 million
    1957-58 1-1.5 million
    1968-69 .75-1 million

    Now how were the latter two different from the first? Well, the first occurred right on the end of WWI and for all intents and purposes before the advent of modern medicine (which I date to the discovery of penicillin, although one might instead choose the development of sulfa drugs).
    Despite the repeated attempts to drum up mass hysteria by referencing the 1918 death toll in stories on flu outbreaks, I don't believe it is justified. It is appropriate for government agencies to "gameplan" for the long shot case that we have a recurrence of 1918 death tolls. However, it is irresponsible of the media to treat that as anything more than a remote possibility.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  147. Struck me as such by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are dead and still trying to take credit for what you should take blame on.

  148. Swine Flu 1976 by frank249 · · Score: 1

    OMFG I still have a scar from my swine flu vacination that I was forced to have when I was in the Army in 1976. My arm swelled up with pus as if I had a boil. I was sick for days but at least I was not hospitalized like some of my friends. Wired has an article about those days. 1 person died from the actual flu while 30+ people died from the vacination. The nation wide vacination program cost $135 mil($500 mil in todays dollars). I hope they improved the vacine from those days because mine hurt like a bitch.

    --

    Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.

  149. Re:Environmental Factors? and pollution by rusl · · Score: 1

    The high altitude makes pollution worse. I was in Bogota Columbia and the pollution there in combination with the altitude made the air very unhealthy. Like Mexico City they are implementing ways to get cars off the streets where only odd numbered licence plates can drive on odd days etc.

    I'm quite certain the pollution and altitude mix makes things worse there. The question is the disease still leathal in other environments. The Google map had a death in Baja Mexico as well... I think we'll see the results in the next few days. If the disease is widely leathal outside of Mexico City and peripheral (as opposed to just contageous) then that would debunk our theory somewhat.

    On the other hand as these scares spread so do -I would think- the incidence of exaggeration and mis-reported deaths (only suspected to be swine flue because of the notion being so present) so the information isn't going to be objective.

    The best case scenario is that the pollution is the cause of the real leathality and then in the aftermath we but more serious efforts into improving air quality and maybe reducing dependance on plague breeding factory farms (However, that never really happened with the bird flu scare so it's probably too optimistic)

    --
    Stupidity is its own reward.
  150. Re:Das Svine Flu! by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    Nah that didn't go over so well. Well how about a little Leviticus for your amusement? http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/lev15.html That seems to be the level of hysteria we're reaching at this point.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  151. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add to that, is the fact that it has spread globally in a few days, spreads person to person rather easily and the chances of finding patient zero in a place like Mexico is going to be near impossible, makes this appear to be something that is more than 'nervous hand wringing by the talking heads'

    Thank you mister talking head. You can continue wringing your hands now.

  152. Re:That's it... Keep'em distracted by Maestro485 · · Score: 1

    It's all in your head. You'd probably be (maybe you are?) one of those parents who think that vaccinations are a pharmaceutical industry conspiracy. Allergies are a little strange. People can go their whole lives being exposed to something, then one day have an allergic reaction to it. Some people also outgrow allergies. Asthma is sometimes similar. That doesn't change the fact that medication can (though doesn't always) reduce symptoms. It most certainly doesn't mean that you're actions have had any effect on your response to allergens.

    Trying to "conquer" allergies is like trying to conquer pneumonia or strep throat. Just because you haven't caught it doesn't mean that multivitamin or apple-a-day is the reason.

  153. Maybe you could stop mass consumption of pork by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    like the chickens were slaughtered and and not eaten for a few weeks/months when bird flu struck.
    Now delicious pork can kill.

  154. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it may be 'disaster of the week' for you, but to those of us who can pay attention for more than 5 minutes will see the direct correlation between this and the 1918 epidemic that killed 50 million people world wide.

    The 1918 flu was theorized to have started in Kansas around March 4th. By March 11th it was spread as far as New York City. In weeks, it had mutated into a more virulent strain that went on to kill more people than WWI had. It had killed an estimated 20 million people in 25 weeks, and that was without global air travel.

    I hope that this is just a minor incident and a false alarm, but since it has already proven to be resistant to the first two of the four major flu anti-virals (the neuraminidase inhibitors - Tamiflu and Relenza are the ones that seem to be effective so far), that in and of itself is cause for concern.

    And if 80+ dead in 1000+ cases worldwide so far(and they are mostly healthy and young) are not more than 'nervous hand wringing' to you, then you are a fool. Add to that, is the fact that it has spread globally in a few days, spreads person to person rather easily and the chances of finding patient zero in a place like Mexico is going to be near impossible, makes this appear to be something that is more than 'nervous hand wringing by the talking heads'

    I'm so scared. I know history so I know about the Spanish Flu. Bad stuff can happen. What if the govt. is downplaying the danger so as not to cause a panic? I'm 23 and I don't want to die. I'm scared to leave my apartment.