H5N1

yet another reason for me never to leave the house again... this will stop the bears from getting me!

Sounds like fun.

Is the world trying to kill us all? First the tsunami, then land slides in California (USA) now this! Oh god...

No link?

Watch out for biting Ducks!

Well, if you belive what a high ranking minister bloke in the church said a few weeks back maybe its god trying to make the world come together.... granted I nearly exploded when I heard that and only held my tongue as my highly relgious sister was in the room and I didnt fancy a fight over dinner [grin]

I'd say it's probably just God trying to keep us on our toes. Can't let us get too complacent. [grin]

Quote:

Original post by infrmtn H5N1 has picked up speed and is infecting & killing people in Vietnam again. Recent reports from the Philippines suggest a possibility of H5N1 having acquired moderate ability to move from human to human with a mortality rate of 68 %. The WHO estimates that one-third of the world's population could get infected in the inevitable (bird) flu pandemic. Careful, "optimistic" figures of 2-7 million bodies, possibly 20, 50 or 100 mil. Highly virulent and coming with a high mortality rate, H5N1 could kill many more.

Quick -- hide your credit cards. It's already spreading to the TV stations!

But in all honesty, I haven't heard anything about this yet. Can you provide some links?

Quote:

Original post by kSquared But in all honesty, I haven't heard anything about this yet. Can you provide some links?

there are two links in my last post

Quote:

Original post by mozie Quote: Original post by kSquared But in all honesty, I haven't heard anything about this yet. Can you provide some links? there are two links in my last post

Good lord, those links are a load of trash. This one, for instance, reads like a spammer's dream list. There isn't enough vaccine to go around, the article says, so you'd better start turning to "anti-viral vitamins", "Amazon herbs", and "nutritional supplements available right now" to help fight off this dreaded pandemic. With an article as rife with errors as that one is, I wouldn't trust anything else that came from that site. I'll wait to see what CNN or MSNBC says.

Well, the avian flu is something the WHO has been aflutter about for quite some time now. Once there is a strain of the virus that can spread easily between humans, a huge pandemic is very likely as, obviously, nobody has the antibodies to defend themselves against this particular flu. Millions will die. There's really not a lot we can do about it, but the people this concerns are doing whatever they can. Asian countries have been slaughtering immense numbers of birds as a precautionary measure.

Except for the farmers that cover up the fact that their chickens have the flu so that they don't go out of business.

Quote:

Original post by kSquared I'll wait to see what CNN or MSNBC says.

I don't think they'll come ringing your doorbell to tell you about the bird flu.

Quote:

The 100 million figure was reported widely, including in the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal Online, CNN, Newsweek and the U.K.'s Observer; but without much caution about how arbitrary it is.

You could, for example, use news.google.com to see what's going on in the world. Search for H5N1 or bird flu and you will know.

This may have some interest: WHO on H5N1. There is no real evidence of human-to-human transmission yet. But as twix said, if H5N1 is the next influenza pandemics (the WHO believe this virus has the potential to become the Next Big One) then countries should prepare themselves. This virus is very dangerous (47 human cases, 34 death -> mortality is 72%) and optimistic views lead to 7-10 millions death in the eventual case of a pandemic.

But (again), as for now, there is no evidence of h2h contamination.

Quote:

Original post by kSquared Good lord, those links are a load of trash. This one, for instance, reads like a spammer's dream list. There isn't enough vaccine to go around, the article says, so you'd better start turning to "anti-viral vitamins", "Amazon herbs", and "nutritional supplements available right now" to help fight off this dreaded pandemic. With an article as rife with errors as that one is, I wouldn't trust anything else that came from that site. I'll wait to see what CNN or MSNBC says.

Since it is proved that human don't have any immunity to this virus, this article - by saying that smart people should use herbs to boost their immunity - is criminal. They don't deserve any more reading.

Regards,

Quote:

Original post by Emmanuel Deloget This virus is very dangerous (47 human cases, 34 death -> mortality is 72%) and optimistic views lead to 7-10 millions death in the eventual case of a pandemic.

I am not a statistician, in fact I'm not even sure if that's the correct term (or spelling), for a person whose job lies in statistics. My limited knowledge of statistics, however, would indicate to me that 47 cases out of a world population of appx. 6,372,797,742 (source: US Census Bureau) is not all that great a statistic to go quoting around. 47 cases is not enough to be considered anywhere near even a 0th or 1st order approximation of the death toll on such a large population.

Example: Take a population of 1,000,000 people. Say three people contract a rare virus and two die. This virus has a 66% mortality rate from observed cases and your population sample is .0003% (3e-4%) of your population. This is clearly not a reasonable statistic and any scientist claiming a 66% mortality rate for the virus on the entire population based on that study should be punched in the face. Now, your 72% mortality rate is based on a population sample of 7e-7% of the population.

Please, either quote some other studies showing that such a number is a reasonable figure when applied across the entire population or don't post statistics.

Quote:

Original post by jperalta I am not a statistician, in fact I'm not even sure if that's the correct term (or spelling), for a person whose job lies in statistics. My limited knowledge of statistics, however, would indicate to me that 47 cases out of a world population of appx. 6,372,797,742 (source: US Census Bureau) is not all that great a statistic to go quoting around. 47 cases is not enough to be considered anywhere near even a 0th or 1st order approximation of the death toll on such a large population. Example: Take a population of 1,000,000 people. Say three people contract a rare virus and two die. This virus has a 66% mortality rate from observed cases and your population sample is .0003% (3e-4%) of your population. This is clearly not a reasonable statistic and any scientist claiming a 66% mortality rate for the virus on the entire population based on that study should be punched in the face. Now, your 72% mortality rate is based on a population sample of 7e-7% of the population. Please, either quote some other studies showing that such a number is a reasonable figure when applied across the entire population or don't post statistics.

Well, assuming that these cases are at least somewhat well spread out, there's no real reason that would make that figure dramatically different across the whole population. Now, it won't be exact, but until something shows that it's completely implausible, it's probably a reasonable guess.

Quote:

Original post by cowsarenotevil Well, assuming that these cases are at least somewhat well spread out, there's no real reason that would make that figure dramatically different across the whole population. Now, it won't be exact, but until something shows that it's completely implausible, it's probably a reasonable guess.

However, the cases are not all spread out, they are concentrated in Vietnam and Thailand. It's a well-known fact that people from certain parts of the world can be more or less pre-disposed to certain illnesses. Also, how many of these people were male and how many were female? What were the ages? This is all important information in deciding on a world-wide fatality rate. On top of that, what about the superior medical treatment available in first-world countries?

I'm not trying to play this down or say that it's not important, but I don't believe it's something we, as the general population, need to be overly concerned with as of yet. I'm sure WHO, CDC, etc. are working on this problem and us spreading information that this disease has a 72% mortality rate(!!!) and will kill millions(!!!) is not going to help them do their job any more effectively or help to prevent mass panic.

Actually, those numbers have been thrown around by the WHO, and 2-7 million is their "official" number. Unfortunately for us, they say it's a best-case scenario, and they've also quoted the higher figures. In fact, it's the WHO 'who' is spreading this information in hopes that local authorities do something to prepare for it. They don't want to cause mass panic, but at the same time the world is woefully unprepared to handle something as big as what's coming.

Unless you want to go around the world infecting people with this disease to see how many die, you're not going to know the exact mortality rate. You do know that it's very high right now and that's a cause for concern, as noted by the WHO. Living in a well-developed country will not help much since right now there is nothing a doctor (or your body) can throw at H5N1 to stop it. Hospitals will be full before you know you have it.

Read some news articles to see the male-female ratio as well as their age. The sad thing is that it kills everyone, not just the very old and the very young.

Quote:

Original post by jperalta Quote: Original post by Emmanuel Deloget This virus is very dangerous (47 human cases, 34 death -> mortality is 72%) and optimistic views lead to 7-10 millions death in the eventual case of a pandemic. I am not a statistician, in fact I'm not even sure if that's the correct term (or spelling), for a person whose job lies in statistics. My limited knowledge of statistics, however, would indicate to me that 47 cases out of a world population of appx. 6,372,797,742 (source: US Census Bureau) is not all that great a statistic to go quoting around. 47 cases is not enough to be considered anywhere near even a 0th or 1st order approximation of the death toll on such a large population.

I am not a statistician too. The fact is: 34 death out of 47 cases, so the current mortality is 72%. I don't want to invent figures. Of course, it will be different when (if) the disease spread. But for now, this 72% is a good indication of the power of H5N1. The virus must not be underestimated.

Anyway, the WHO works hard to prevent this for happening. If H5N1 begins to spread then I believe they'll be able to provide short term solutions (I hope they'll be able to do it). But, again, may main point was: There is no real evidence of human-to-human transmission yet. Therefore, all the stuff we said is actually not very important.

Regards,

What makes this flu so bad? Is it no worse than the normal flu and the only reason that it's so big and scary is because we have no immunity to it so the infection rate will be huge and the death rate will be much higher because of that? Is it like ebola (you get it == you die)? Do we know?