This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
A Detroit newspaper claiming that "...92% of the 109 U.S. infections came without travel to affected areas, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported." [1] I can't find any other source carrying that claim. Is this more media misinterpretation? Rmhermen ( talk) 14:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The virus was initially DETECTED in Mexico... Not originated in Mexico.
Also this virus is a MUTATION of the euro-asiatic influenza virus already knew years ago and from which Mexico never had cases of infection... i mean the virus scientifically named as "Influenza A virus subtype H1N1", responsible for the 1918 flu pandemic, that killed some 50 million to 100 million people worldwide (A/H1N1-1918).
Now, if you refer to the "swine flu" (A/H1N1-2009) as "mexican flu"... also there are many people who refer to it as "American flu" (refering to USA) or "North American Flu" (refering to the region of North America) or "A/California/2009" or "hog flu" or "pig flu"... so add these too or just refer to it as "swine flu".--. 18:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by OyashiroSama ( talk • contribs)
27 are ill in the U.K. now, including victims in Gloucestershire, Merseyside, Dulwich, Redditch and Oxfordshire. [2]!-- 86.29.246.3 ( talk) 19:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Another Portuguese bloke has fallen ill now- [3]
The map should be updated for El Salvador and Guatemala. [4] (in Spanish)-- Vrysxy ¡Californication! 22:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I read the source of the information about "scientific name" of the new flu strain and I really could not search any "California" within this page. Also there were described a "vaccine" from South Hemisphere; and as everybody knows I began in the North Hemisphere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hedleypanama ( talk • contribs) 03:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
My purpose to remove the use of antibiotics for "dual infection" is to reduce confusion and not foment the popular misconception of using abtibiotics to treat viral infections. I am aware that the "dual infection" mentioned in this article implicitly referred to bacterial pneumoniae + flu virus, however, one can not expect a casual reader to know that or to understand that the word pneumoniae could be a pathology or a bacteria, especially without the article explaining this and while the article is focused on a virus. If somebody feels the compelling need to compare treatments of viral pneumonia with a bacterial pneumonia, Fungal pneumonia, Parasitic pneumonia co-infection, please explain so in the apropriate section or article and remark that the use of antibiotics by itself is not effective against any virus, especially the H1N1. Cheers, BatteryIncluded ( talk) 06:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I added a section on historical context to talk about the cyclical nature of influenza pandemics and how this has lead to an increased level of alertness on the part of public health officials. It's a little rough but I think its necessary to put this outbreak in context. Please read it and make it better.-- Hdstubbs ( talk) 16:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
Just suggesting another name change. As the WHO is now calling the disease by it's Scientific name Influenza A(N1H1) to avoid confusion with pigs, should the title not be change to 2009 Influenza A(H1N1) Outbreak? Thanks!-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 11:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the prior discussion above there seems now to be a majority support for changing the name. Regarding "common name", there are a lot of exceptions to the "common name" rule. Like neutrality and ambigouity. Following common name should not conflict with other more specific Wikipedia:Naming conventions which are more important. To quote "Except where other accepted Wikipedia naming conventions give a different indication, title an article using the most common name". One example, the article influenza, not "flu". Another very important example which should be a precedent. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1, Transmission and infection of H5N1, and Global spread of H5N1. Not "Bird flu". Ht686rg90 ( talk) 13:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't see the problem. All it would take is a page move and a redirect.-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 04:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
So Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco and Egypt have prepared for the worst and are screening any on coming from Mexico. Egypt has also seen riots over the resent pig culling- [7] / [8] / [9]!
The Egyptian health ministry said on Thursday "That the decision to cull quarter of a million pigs was not a measure against swine flu but a general health measure." " [10]"-- 86.29.248.49 ( talk) 03:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree, the Egyptians never like looking like complete, hysterical, morons!-- 86.29.248.49 ( talk) 03:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
See- [11] [12]-- 86.25.55.164 ( talk) 09:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Please update the image with the following:
Thanks. ~ A H 1( T C U) 22:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Why was the timeline removed from External links? It's not against RS as every event appears to be sourced, either a local news source, university/college website, or something like LATimes/NYTimes/AP. It was a good source to quickly ctrl+f through, and it's also listed on DMOZ GTNz ( talk) 03:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
It should be noted that many people have suggested vitamin D as both treatment and prevention for this and other types of influenza (see http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/science/research/vitamin-d-and-influenza.shtml and http://www.healthy.net/scr/news.asp?Id=8826 and http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller27.html and www.naturalnews.com/024982.html unreliable fringe source? and http://journals.cambridge.org/action/login;jsessionid=C971FC31034D3FECE9F481FD109C6D2D.tomcat1 I can only wonder why none of this is mentioned in the article under prevention and treatment. 201.230.106.3 ( talk) 18:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
http://www.promedmail.org/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1001:2365278416456707::NO::F2400_P1001_BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1000,77349 Influenza A(H1N1) worldwide - 11: coincident H3N2 variation
British Columbia CDC has found some BC residents who have traveled to Mexico to have both A/H1N1 and a recently mutated form of H3N2 (see promed link).
The suggestion is that the presence of both viruses might explain the difference in Mexican and non-Mexican mortality rates. As such referring to it just as the H1N1 influenza might not be correct. 151.194.17.27 ( talk) 00:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
None of this is an argument against naming the article H1N1, though, as that was the name originally applied and is how the outbreak is most widely and 'correctly' known. Certainly it is more correct than the current "Swine Flu". Everyone knows The Hundred Years War really wasn't, they just decided to call it that. 139.48.25.60 ( talk) 15:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Further info on the variant H3N2. In BC it causes more severe flu than the H1N1 strain from NPR. http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2009/05/second_strain_might_have_cause.html 151.194.21.159 ( talk) 19:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I deleted swine flu from this table earlier because there are no active epidemiological studies for the infection rates and death rates of swine flu. Media reports and passive detection methodologies are not a replacement for such data. By including swine flu in this table we imply that we have as good a handle on this data as we have on 20th century pandemics. A qualifier of 'early data' is not enough and is in addition seriously misleading. The data we have to date is almost totally useless compared to that we have for the 20th century pandemics. I have deleted swine flu again from the table. Please do not add a swine flu line again without a properly conducted epidemiological study to back up the figures we give (and a formal announcement of a pandemic). (Also note that swine flu has not been declared a pandemic and did not occur in the 20th century so should not be included in a table who's title is 20th century flu pandemics). When/If a study is carried out and swine flu added as a line the table would need to be renamed. Barnaby dawson ( talk) 08:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
An influenza pandemic is an epidemic of an influenza virus that spreads on a worldwide scale and infects a large proportion of the human population. In contrast to the regular seasonal epidemics of influenza, these pandemics occur irregularly, with the 1918 Spanish flu the most serious pandemic in recent history. Pandemics can cause high levels of mortality, with the Spanish influenza estimated as being responsible for the deaths of over 50 million people. There have been about three influenza pandemics in each century for the last 300 years. The most recent ones were the Asian Flu in 1957 and the Hong Kong Flu in 1968. [1]-- 86.25.55.164 ( talk) 09:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
A major link is needed, there closly related.-- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Where did the Wikipedia totals section of the table come from?
Have the words 'original research' occured to anyone? 86.16.117.213 ( talk) 12:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
It is factually inaccurate to call it a "Wikipedia total." Wikipedia has done nothing to generate the totals. All we have done is adding individual RS. Adding is not OR. Also the "note" is completely unnecessary. Our readers are intelligent enough to release a total is a sum of the numbers in the table. There are tens of thousands of similar summary tables across Wikipedia -- do ANY of them have a disclaimer that the total is the sum of the parts??? -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 16:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Here is a good time line of events and infections , not the internal! -- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
What the heck does it mean when there is a negative number of cases? Common sense would indicate that the confirmed case count will be a smaller number than the probably or suspected numbers. After all, weren't the patients who were confirmed suspected and likely to be infected? Now the chart has negative numbers. What in the world does that mean? I think an explanation of what the numbers in the chart mean is needed. Victor Engel ( talk) 19:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The second death in the US should be dropped from the table. "Health officials stopped short of saying that swine flu caused the woman's death. State health department spokeswoman Carrie Williams said the woman had "chronic underlying health conditions" but wouldn't give any more details." The lady had swine flu but had chronic health issues aswell. It has been blown up, by the media, again, to make it look like it killed her. 90% of people I talk to are sick and tired of this media over hype on swine flu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.37.96.11 ( talk) 02:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Madagascar is in lockdown now! [13] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Denmark has just cleared 12 people of having swine flu [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], Sweden has confirmed a case [20], [21] as has go one to Germany has [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27]! -- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC) -- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
-- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Ireland has now got 4 pig flu victims. [30] The government has stated it has vaccine for over half the country so far. Airports are scanning every person entering checking of infections through thermal imaging and the minister joined a meeting in Luxemburg. -- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Mexico has nearly 200 deaths now [ [31]]/ [ [32]]! -- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Mexico recons it is now in controll of the situation [33].-- The 'reel' boffin man! ( talk) 16:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 42 Mexicans are listed as dead! [34] [35]-- 86.29.250.97 ( talk) 19:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Here you can see the latest update: 44 deaths confirmed, and 1204 cases confirmed (not dead!). The "200 deaths" are not dead, but (only) 173 confirmed cases from 27th April (not up-to-date).-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 21:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Fiji has it's first case[ [36]]!-- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 09:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
All flights to and from Mexico are suspended! [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] -- 86.29.250.97 ( talk) 19:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
First confirmed case in Argentina [42]
A South African is now ill with it! [43]-- 86.29.250.97 ( talk) 19:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Brazil has confirmed its first case today, some minuts ago, I've just heard on television João P. M. Lima ( talk) 22:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The Minister of Health of Brazil confirmed the first 4 cases of swine flu in the country. Three of the confirmed cases are from people that were in Mexico and the other is from a person that was in the United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.107.24.45 ( talk) 22:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
4 persons infected in Brazil were confirmed.
+1 Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=adZ_DpGY6JPs&refer=home 189.122.194.161 ( talk) 23:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Continued idea from the last comment above by Abecedare:
It seems we have a catch-22 situation, as you say to "use global stats only" but agree that global stats are either unavailable or unreliable. That may leave only one option: a chart for U.S. only. I guess it would still be for pandemics (and maybe epidemics) but the title would state it was U.S. data only and the data is both available and verifiable. Any thoughts on this? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 06:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The historical epidemics infected millions and killed at least tens of thousands, so the fractional random error from Poisson statistics alone can in principle be as low as 0.01 (since 0.01 = sqrt(1/10000)). The relatively recent ones with several hundred deaths also have fractional errors that are not too high for a popular level encyclopedia. There could be other sources of random error and certainly there are systematic errors that epidemiologists know about. But let's ignore those and just consider the Poisson error.
Template:2009_swine_flu_outbreak_table gives 31 confirmed deaths out of 1767 confirmed cases, which gives 1.8% (no longer 2.6%). The minimum fractional error (as i said, disregarding all the caveats about homogeneity of the samples, data collection in different countries, reporting biases, etc. etc.) is 1/sqrt(31) \approx 0.18. So the figure would be (as of 01:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)) 1.8%0.3%. So stating it without an error (for this encyclopedia) is probably not absurd.
However, we should at least put a footnote clarifying the calculation, such as "Global confirmed deaths/global confirmed infections", in which case it should be OK without qualifying as OR, since we are definining exactly what is calculated. BTW, i am not recommending adding uncertainty (error) estimates, since those are calculations beyond "routine calculation". They should come from epidemiologists. Boud ( talk) 01:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) indicates that it has found H1N1 flu virus in a swine herd in Alberta. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/newcom/2009/20090502e.shtml http://investors.smithfieldfoods.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=381309 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmgg170 ( talk • contribs) 21:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I think there is not going to be a repeat of pandemic flu because only about 5-7% of Mexican victims, 2 Americans and 1 Spaniard have died so far!-- 86.25.51.245 ( talk) 04:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
It is hardly the wipe out Hong Kong flu or SARS were either!-- 86.25.48.106 ( talk) 09:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The UN and WHO reckon that the UN pandemic alert level should stay at level 5 and not be raised to level 6 in the near future- [44] [45] [46] [47]. Mexico recons it is now in control of the situation [48]. -- 86.25.51.45 ( talk) 16:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
(related to this version) Please reread http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs211/en/index.html and change within lead section from Worldwide the common human H1N1 influenza virus affects millions of people every year, according to WHO officials, and "these annual epidemics result in about three to five million cases of severe illness, and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths" annually.[45] to Worldwide common human influenza viruses affect ... -- Aardappelmesje ( talk) 20:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I have created a special barnstar for swine flu related articles. I felt a special award was warranted due to the unusually large amount of effort required to keep these page up to date. Any user is welcome to award this barnstar to whomever they think has contributed a great deal to the various swine flu related articles.
I have handed out an initial batch, but I am sure I missed a number of deserving editor's. Please visit User:ThaddeusB/Swine Flu Barnstar and correct my oversights.
Thank you -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 20:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Are surgical masks of any value in preventing the spread or reducing the chance of contracting H1N1 flu, or any other flu, for that matter? Supplies of masks are being hoarded already, but I am quite doubtful about the efficacy of masks for the general public. Medical staff can wear respiratory masks, which may be much more effective than surgical masks. Comments? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 21:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The last two pandemics killed around 1 million people each, so why does the table only mention U.S. deaths? The key word here is "pandemic". cyclosarin ( talk) 23:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Cuba is scared of it to- [49]
4 South Koreans are still being tested for the v ioruse [ [50]] [ [51]] [52] [ [53]] and Thailand is checking out all air passengers arriving from Mexico. A Thai woman has now been found to be flu free [54]!
China’s Inner Mongolia region has some cases of Swine flu now! China has also banned pork imports from the U.S.A. and Mexico [55]! Hong Kong has quarantined 300 people in a hotel [56],[ [57]], [58], [59]! China has gagged nosy reporters in the infested regions our side Hong Kong and Macau [60]! 34 Chinese are now dead [61], [62], [63]
Mongolia is Swine flu free! [64], [65], [66]!!! Sadly, Bird flu is in parts of the country [ [67]].
1st confirmed human victim!! [68]!
Somebody needs to change the color image to black for Canada.
Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.94.25.62 ( talk) 14:39, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Death now confirmed to be caused by the virus. First death in Canada confirmed [69] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericleb01 ( talk • contribs) 23:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Norway has got two confirmed cases, according to the latest news. ( http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n180474 and http://nrk.no/nyheter/1.6602215) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.166.72.98 ( talk) 20:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
The WHO reports just an hour or so 896 confirmed cases for the United States. However, in the table we are already counting 1,714 cases. I mean.. this is nearly 100 percent in difference. Why is the WHO so slow? Or do we have mistakes? -- Grochim ( talk) 18:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Country has more two cases of the new flu, announces Minister
7-year-old girl is of SC and it had rise. Another patient is a friend of young person interned in the Rio de Janeiro
In the total, 6 persons infected with the swine flu in Brazil.
Might anybody update for me there in the article?
-- Rodfanaia ( talk) 23:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
WHO totals 2500[2] N/A 44[2]
The ref says
Mexico has reported 1204 laboratory confirmed human cases of infection, including 44 deaths. The United States has reported 896 laboratory confirmed human cases, including two deaths.
And the WHO map of deaths and cases says 2,500 and 46 deaths.
http://www.who.int/csr/don/GlobalSubnationalMaster_20090508_1815.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.211.181 ( talk) 01:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Costa Rica confirmed its first swine flu related death (in Spanish) -- Vrysxy ¡Californication! 17:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Going over some sources, the total infected numbers were apparently arrived at by taking a percentage estimate of the population, U.S. or world. That's why the three in the chart are around 50 million for the U.S. But there is no confirmed number of cases since most people don't report their flu. However, the total deaths were consistent among all sources. The one I'd recommend looking at is Globalsecurity.org which also has a ton of other useful material, including the current outbreak. In any case, we need to consider whether the mortality rates are accurate enough to put on a chart like this, especially in an encyclopedia. I personally don't think so. It's probably best to just include confirmed totals. And it's true that since the current outbreak is not officially a "pandemic," some footnote should be added. We could even add the 1976 Swine flu "scare," since it never became a pandemic but is of historical mention due to the 40 million vaccinations.
A modified chart without absolute figures. Feel free to modify it for other ideas. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 02:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Chart of pandemics | ||||||
Epidemics (avail. data) | Year | People infected | Deaths | Mortality rate | Data sources | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spanish flu (worldwide est) | 1918-19 | 500 million | 50 million | CDC | ||
Asian flu (U.S.) | 1957 | 45 million | 70,000 | Globalsecurity.org | ||
Hong Kong flu (U.S.) | 1968-69 | 50 million | 33,000 | Globalsecurity.org | ||
Avian flu (worldwide) | 1990-today | 421 | 257 | Globalsecurity.org | ||
Seasonal flu (U.S.) | yearly average | 50 million | 36,000 | .08% | CNN | |
Swine flu (worldwide) [confirmed deaths/confirmed infections] [2] | as of 22:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC) | 1893 | 31 | 1.6% [2] | WHO |
I really like the table but I think the death rate section is inaccurate. We should only use this information if it comes from a research or health care professional. I think it is WAY too early to tell what the death rate is and 1.8% is very high. That is twice the mortality rate of ordinary influenza and there is no evidence of that. -- Hdstubbs ( talk) 03:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The lead is currently seven paragraphs and Wiki recommends no more than four. I took the first three, which seemed like they could be condensed, and rewrote them as one for sandboxing, (new verb?) below. Note that for easier editing, I trimmed out the citations and some wikilinks so it's easier to sandbox.
Existing:
Condensed:
I think we can trim other lead paragraphs also but offer this one for comments. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
What readers are really interested in is current and predicted contagiousness, spread, lethality, and morbidity —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.95.139 ( talk) 01:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
...
While searching for sources for the Historical context section, I found this information through pubmed:
The epidemic behaviour of influenza has been so erratic and difficult to understand that there are still a few scientists who consider that extraterrestrial influences operate. These views are not taken seriously by most virologists but there are puzzling aspects of influenza that are not yet understood.
— Beveridge, W.I. (1991). "The chronicle of influenza epidemics". History and Philosophy of the life sciences. 13 (2): 223–34.
Should we add this critical content to our article ? :) Abecedare ( talk) 02:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes I was kidding; thought other editors might enjoy the diversion.
To be clear: I don't hink this belongs in any of the Influenza related articles; the fringiness can be covered adequately at the pages of its proponents
Fred Hoyle,
Chandra Wickramasinghe or perhaps at
panspermia.
Abecedare (
talk) 03:04, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
It is posible that it was a anilen virouse.-- 86.29.243.170 ( talk) 09:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
On the other hand, depending on how you define "extra-terrestrial" agents, we can also note that they're already here. We've got cosmic rays, X-rays, gamma rays, uv rays, ozone holes, etc. which cause mutations, cancers, and a host of evolutionary unknowns. The sun is probably a key extra-terrestrial agent of change. But as Louis Brandeis said, sunlight is also the best medicine. Take your pick. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 03:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a confirmed case. -- 190.49.117.246 ( talk) 14:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
1.) Color - I think that black is not a good color for confirmed deaths. Especially now that Canada is likely to have confirmed death soon this means that the entirety of North America is black for less fifty deaths. Maybe I've played too much Pandemic II but I think this is a little over the top. My suggestion is red = death, green = confirmed, and yellow = suspected
2.) Territories - Should territories be colored even if there are no cases there? Ex: Alaska, French Guiana, etc. -- Hdstubbs ( talk) 16:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations to all the editors; in real life, I have received numerous compliments today about the quality and usefulness of this and related articles. Graham Colm Talk 21:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Whereas most influenza strains affect the elderly and young children worst, this strain has primarily caused deaths in people aged 25–50.[158] -- is this statement, which refers to that outdated report, still considered valid? By the way, it looks like the original report is slightly misrepresented here. Colchicum ( talk) 17:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
A chart I put together for some quick perspective and comparison. Feel free to revise or expand. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 01:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Chart of pandemics | ||||||
Epidemics (avail. data) | Year | People infected | Deaths | Mortality % | Death rate/10,000 | Data sources |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spanish flu (worldwide est) | 1918-19 | 500 million | 50 million | 10% | 1000 | CDC |
Asian flu (U.S.) | 1957 | 45 million | 70,000 | .16% | 16 | |
Hong Kong flu (U.S.) | 1968-69 | 50 million | 33,000 | .07% | 7 | |
Avian flu (worldwide) | 1990-today | 421 | 257 | 61% | 6100 | |
SARS (worldwide) | 2002-03 | 8,096 | 774 | 9.6% | 960 | |
General flu (U.S.) | yearly average | 50 million | 36,000 | .08% | 8 | CNN |
Swine flu (worldwide) [confirmed deaths/confirmed infections] | as of 01:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC) | 1767 | 31 | 1.8% | 180 | WHO |
I like this alot. I think we should make a historical context section and place it after the introduction. It would go over previous pandemics and outbreaks prior to this one. What does everyone think?-- Hdstubbs ( talk) 03:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Many people compare it to 1918 pandemic of H1N1 variant. H comes from hemagluttenin and N comes from neuroaminidase (sp?). I BLASTed most recent HA and NA sequences against their 1918 counterparts from 3 strains mentioned in flu database at NCBI. Neuroaminidase has 83% nucleotide sequence identity and hemogluttenin has 81% to their counterparts. That is pretty low. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.174.217.67 ( talk) 03:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
For the version modified and used in the article, there's a big problem I see. Since the available figures include worldwide or U.S. totals, the other columns makes less sense as a comparison tool unless there is some ratio column with it, such as % or /1,000. I added both here since there was plenty of room. Some people are used to seeing stats as a % (i.e. investors) and others like the per thousand (i.e. crime rates.) In fact, the reason I added "(avail. data)" was because I only found accurate data for that demographic, although other estimates may be still be available.
It would also be easy to add another column as a place to include one or more source links to avoid OR issues. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I went ahead and added a colum for sources to see how it might look. Note that the sources can easily be changed and other sources can be added, since the column will just expand to fit (but abbreviate the source name if possible.) -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
This analysis seems to be a case of synthesis, with numerators and denominators from different sources. There is little accuracy or consistency in the number of "cases" since only the most ill come to be included. Mild cases resolve at home with chicken soup and no medical attention. The fatality rates for some varieties are absurd original rsearch. Edison ( talk) 02:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC) Edison ( talk) 02:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I think the basic consept of the chart is very good given resent events.-- 86.29.255.77 ( talk) 08:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I have put an NPOV tag on the section re source of the virus. It is WP:SYNTHESIS at its worst. Also, the quality of sources is very poor. What happened to the original, reliable sources? This section now functions as a link farm for blogs. -- Una Smith ( talk) 18:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
This section is now much better. -- Una Smith ( talk) 14:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link).I also made a logarithmic chart, it shows better the numbers in the first days. But I think if we place it into the article, it's too much. Any ideas? -- Grochim ( talk) 09:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
WHO_level5
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).The vertical axes need labeling. Somebody's going to come along and get freaked out that the disease is 90% fatal. In fact, putting the deaths on the same chart with a different scale may be a bad idea entirely. -- Cyrius| ✎ 20:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
The World Health Organization will be raising the threat level to 6 at noon tomorrow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.110.9 ( talk) 03:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
It will blow over, just like this one did! [74] -- 86.25.50.119 ( talk) 10:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
For many searchers, "Swine Flu" is the only search term they know. That search delivers them to a technical swine flu page, not the 2009 outbreak page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.11.186 ( talk) 17:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
see the links to ncbi genome page for updated flu sequences and the promed site for infectious disease information from workers in the field. It took forever to load so I posted to wrong page :) Nerdseeksblonde ( talk) 21:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I am concerned that some countries may seriously under-report cases to the WHO. For example, Mexico cases do not follow the epidemiological curves seen in other country data.
Under-reporting can be due to lack of lab equipment or access to labs and lack of medical screening / reporting infrastructure, but also due to local political / economical reasons. I would hope, that folks at WHO could comment on that.
Country listings: Instead of the current confirmed / suspected lists, it would help to break up data according to whether the subject caught the flu while visiting another country, or from catching it in their own country.
Country listings: It would help, to list the median age, +/- sigma.
Fk52b ( talk) 00:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Aaaaaaaaaaah! It's the end of the world!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkgirl411 ( talk • contribs) 00:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, we got trough pandemic flu in 1918-1919 and medical science is even better now.-- 86.29.255.85 ( talk) 02:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
A 53 year old man, who never went to Mexico [ [75]] during the plague has now died!-- 86.29.247.157 ( talk) 10:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
A China/Macau/Hong Kong vidio confrence was held. Macau is flu free [76].-- 86.25.53.147 ( talk) 11:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I do not see the value of a chart which has an aggregate of confirmed cases compared to confirmed deaths. First of all, the chart is unclear as to what it is tracking. Is it worldwide deaths or cases? It is not good enough to know that it is cases but my point is that the chart does not clarify this at all. Second, what is the reasoning in comparing suspected cases to deaths? This is not clear as to why it should be included in a single chart. Overall, the chart is ambiguous and should be removed. I request opinions on this since I am for removing the chart. GaussianCopula ( talk) 03:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Some clerics blame "God's vengeance on the infidels" (or whatever people mean when they say things like that) for swine flu
[ [77]] -- 86.25.53.147 ( talk) 11:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Could someone add a list of those countries in which there were human-to-human transmissions? I know of Mexico, USA, Germany and Spain, but probably there are more.-- Roentgenium111 ( talk) 14:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
why does every link go to globalsecurity.org ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.211.181 ( talk) 18:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
All still there, just a link to a website with no references or sources and some spelling mistakes in the article. And selling items from the US Cavalry store.
Why is this the upmost site for the 1968 Hong Kong Flu for example? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.194.211.181 (
talk) 13:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
[ someone deleted this from earlier, lots of edits today]
I didn't know wiki covers current events and was impressed by amount of stuff here. Are there general means to auto-generate this type of content harvest from machine or even human readable sources? Also, the NCBI has a sequence library,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/FLU/SwineFlu.html
and these guys have some good resources, not sure of opps to coordinate,
http://www.promedmail.org/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1000:
and personal interest looking for coding opportunities
for dealing with infectious diseases :)
Nerdseeksblonde ( talk) 19:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I thought I may have missed it but I tried to check. Promed is a great resource
and I'd like to think there would be a way to get automated counts- if they
can tally votes and other stuff in real time, why not verified and putative case
reports?
Nerdseeksblonde (
talk) 21:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
How do I edit the table? I wanted to update that Canada now has 330 cases per the same source referenced but I didn't see the table in the article, nor was I able to bring it up as a Wikipage. CycloneGU ( talk) 20:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/artikkeli/Suomessa+varmistui+kaksi+sikainfluenssatartuntaa/1135245884424
2 confirmed cases in Finland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.128.216.246 ( talk) 06:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that most of the time the External Links and templates following the References section do not appear while I view this page with User:Lupin/popups.js, using updated Firefox and Vista. I'm curious if anyone confirms this bug? Mike Serfas ( talk) 09:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Regard this medical fact to [ [79]]!!!
Palau's Health Minister has issued a health alert and increased screening of passengers entering the country for swine flu [80]]!-- 86.29.253.163 ( talk) 14:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC) I hope the tinny Pacific can cope with it all!
If someone would like to add this I think it could be beneficial to the article. The source is CDC http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5817a1.htm
As of May 5, using an updated case definition of fever plus cough or sore throat for a suspected case and real-time reverse transcription--polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) or viral culture for a laboratory-confirmed case, Mexico had identified 11,932 suspected cases and 949 cases of laboratory-confirmed novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection, including 42 patients who died.
The figure above shows the 822 confirmed and 11,356 suspected cases of novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in Mexico with dates of onset from March 11 through May 3, 2009. Both confirmed and suspected cases rose sharply from April 19 to April 26, then decreased sharply.
Daveonwiki ( talk) 21:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
You are right, Teahot. And I would like to find a reference for the confirmed cases in March. I have never heard of any CONFIRMED case in Mexico before April. Anyone has a reference (apart of the report of the CDC that doesn't really mention anything about it)? As far as I know the first confirmed cases in March are from California only... I (and maybe others) would be interested in a reference confirming that.-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 23:31, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
BTW, this chart covers only Mexico, so probably doesn't belong in the main article. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 00:09, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
There's a new map available... File:H1N1 map by confirmed cases.svg
76.66.202.139 ( talk) 05:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Mike Serfas ( talk) 09:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
obviously as the flu spreads more it will become impossible to track the exact number of cases even if a every country reported all the cases the detect... it's something we'll have to put up with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.253.113 ( talk) 11:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I personally don't like either map for reasons stated above, and agree that unless a map shows cases per thousand then it's useless at best and misleading at worst. But even with cases/M, the stats are now already becoming questionable and troublesome: Mexico and Canada are now ignoring suspected cases; international politics are being affected; countries like China who once kept SARS a secret, are now possibly overreacting; countries like Egypt are slaughtering their pigs and have been accused by their minority (10%)Christian population of using the swine flu as a pretext for discriminatory injury; countries that rely on tourism will have an incentive to underreport after seeing how Mexico's economy was badly hit by world censure; countries, like India or most of the African ones, don't have the medical infrastructure to provide accurate data (i.e. AIDS); and some governments that decide they don't want to have their Wiki map colors turn black, like the U.S. and Mexico, may opt out of relaying accurate data. Anyway, as a minimum, if we want our numbers to be meaningful, we should only map cases/M IMO. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
The original global map with countries coloured for suspected, confirmed and fatal cases should be removed. The same data is more accurately rpresented on the page that has individual country breakdown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_outbreak_by_country I think there should be one global map that uses density of infection (cases per million population). This then shows the intensity of the spread on the global map, and the (as good as can be) locality of the spread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.253.112 ( talk) 14:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I have compiled a graph of the flu progress in Canada. Quite interestingly, from day 6 of the outbreak till now, the progress is very linear and doesn't seem to follow any exponential trend (even a weak exponential doesn't fit). This is rather strange, but looking at the global picture, the worldwide trend looks exponential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.220.148 ( talk) 18:43, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Here is my data. I've tried to gather information from the 24th, and these data come from the CBC, Radio-Canada, La Presse (Montreal) and radio station CBF 690. First column is the date (day of the month). Second column is the day (from day zero, April 23th). Third column is the total number of cases from day zero to the specific day. The linear trend is established between days 6 and 7.
DATE; DAY; TOTAL CASES;
23; 0; 0;
26; 3; 6;
28; 5; 13;
29; 6; 19;
30; 7; 35;
1; 8; 51;
2; 9; 85;
3; 10; 101;
4; 11; 140;
5; 12; 165;
6; 13; 201;
7; 14; 214;
9; 16; 281;
10; 17; 286;
11; 18; 330;
12; 19; 358;
(author: Hugo Dufort) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.220.148 ( talk) 02:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
The article currently says 500 pigs were slaughtered. Is that correct? Word choice here is very important. Animals destined for human consumption are slaughtered, animals not fit for human consumption are rendered, and animals fit for no use at all are destroyed. -- Una Smith ( talk) 06:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a table listing the number of confirmed cases and the number of deaths by country. If the U.S. has the most cases, why is Mexico listed first? What is the sort rule? It appears arbitrary. Edison ( talk) 02:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Please read here: http://www.exonline.com.mx/XStatic/excelsior/template/content.aspx?se=primera&su=pulsonacional&id=590520&te=nota (it is in Spanish). In brief: There were earlier cases in California at the end of March (as we already know). Now health authorities of California question the Mexican origin, since those children didn't have contact to pigs, nor have a travel history to Mexico. The strain already existed in California, before it was detected in Mexico. Maybe something for the article, useful reference...?-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 14:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Surely, it is to find in English, too, because the health authorities of Claifornia say so, not Mexico. I just came across this by accident, not because I looked for it. Weird, that you say that Mexico tries to blame. I have never seen anything like this (but the opposite: others blame Mexico and call it the origin of the flu with patient zero, who can obviously not be the first person who fell ill since there were evidently earlier cases - in California). I get quite sad with these kind of comments that just shows how biased people are with languages/nationality.-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 15:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
You don't expedct me to answer that, do you? ;) Anyways, I wanted to point out this article (there are others on the same topic) so it can be considered and added if it is of any use.-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 13:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Pandemic parity of articles
I see that a lot was done on the swine flu outbreak. However looking at other pandemics (especially TB and HIV, which are ongoing and killing far more people) there does not seem to be parity of reporting on deaths, confirmed cases etc. Also the way they are separated is different.
It would be good if wikipedians could source in the same way and try and get accurate figures for these other pandemics. They might be useful for improving wikipedia's standing and commonality allows accurate comparisons as to how bad flu really is not in this case.
I am wanting that as an ENCYLOPEDIA ARTICLE there is a similarity given that all 3 are in fact current events this would be expected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.246.66.223 ( talk) 13:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
First there are any number of epidemics in various areas of the world, cholera being one that is being seen quite frequently.
Second, any kind of 'comparison' really has no merit.
-Influenzas are RNA viruses that are primarily spread through the air, though surface contamination and body fluid contact are also major ways of transmission. There are vaccines, but much depends on which viruses are used, and when certain viruses make the rounds, in terms of efficacy. Influenzas can be caught by all populations, though those in a weakened state or without good medical access will likely have more deaths occuring.
-Tuberculosis isn't a virus at all, it is a mycobacteria, and someone that is vaccinated against it will not get it through exposure. Also, tuberculosis is often latent, with some people being asymptomatic and never developing it fully. Tuberculosis is also predominantly a problem in developing nations that don't have access to vaccines and anti-biotics.
-HIV is a virus, but it is one that suppresses the immune system, is transmitted by direct body fluid, and in many cases can be prevented with proper care taken in areas of sexual contact, medical procedures, etc. There is no 'cure' for HIV or AIDS, and until recently almost all HIV carriers developed full-blown AIDS, and almost all people with AIDS died. There is still much to be understood about the exceptions that have been appearing where some people are life-long HIV carriers, or where someone with AIDS is living a very long time.
/end of educational rant, but seriously, lets be careful about 'comparing' things... as the saying goes, apples vs oranges. Kavri ( talk) 20:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
found on the Spanish wikipedia:
76.66.202.139 (
talk) 06:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
It has a good, clear and impressive colour scheme and authoritative style to.-- 86.25.53.120 ( talk) 17:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
How often is the data table updated? I feel it should be a regular update eg. midnight everynight, so that the data shown is always up-to-date as far as the previous day. Of course i don't know whether someone has to read all the sources and do the update manually which makes my suggestion impractical. comments please wuku ( talk) 10:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I reverted that entry. The CDC says there is no evidence to support that claim. Nothing in the reference says the WHO is taking it seriously. There is a long intro about the author of the theory that is not pertinent to the article. The contributor reverted the revert. I suggest it get removed again. What do you think? Daniel.Cardenas ( talk) 17:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
A notable virologist who even participated in the creation of Tamiflu has shared a paper which the WHO has considered credible enough to consider investigating. It's been reported by Bloomberg, AP, and other notable news sources. Please refrain from removing it as a fringe theory; it has not been rejected and while it has not had a full critical review from the scientific community, the study's author is a noted virologist. If it were a fringe theory the WHO would have disregarded this researcher. He's a well educated with a long track history in this field. You might not feel comfortable with the idea, but the Virus has been called notable by many doctors for its unique genetic make up. This researcher has put together a paper detailing his findings and its being investigated seriously. Feel free to expand the section, but for now, it is notable, it's in the news, it is pertinent to the article and it provides an explanation for how its genetics came to be. Maybe I'm wrong but I would assume this to be important to the genetic aspects of it. Yawaraf ( talk) 17:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I have listen several rumors about A-H1N1-2009 is a human created virus. Amazing! synthetic biology is believed to be very mature to design and create a new malevolent virus.
A-H1N1-2009 is in fact a human created virus, it is the result of evolution by the interaction of birds, pigs and humans in farms.
Some research is done in studying virus sequences in order to predict future mutations. Given the predicted mutations it is possible to synthesize the new sequence to produce vaccines with `dead' attenuated viruses before the virus evolves to the predicted mutation. As far as I know this method is not mature yet.
My suggestion is you can add information about such theory in the article, just be careful checking citations, being serious not alarmist. It means, be clear about the context in which it may be true, and the possibility of the hypothesis.
This is a proposed revision to this section which I feel is warranted now that the flu is steadily growing. The links that were deleted were no longer needed as they dealt with timely news facts, dates, places, stats, etc. which are now mostly history. Because this section is one of the most important to visitors, I recommend keeping it simple and uncluttered. All of the facts are paraphrased from the CDC site and redundancy trimmed out. I also felt that bulleted lists are worthwhile.
The CDC has stated that the symptoms of this new H1N1 flu virus are similar to the symptoms of seasonal flu and include the following:
A significant number of people who have been infected with this new H1N1 virus also have reported diarrhea and vomiting. People at higher risk of serious complications include people age 65 years and older, children younger than 5 years old, pregnant women, people of any age with chronic medical conditions (such as asthma, diabetes, or heart disease), and people who are immunosuppressed (e.g., taking immunosuppressive medications, infected with HIV). [1]
If you show symptoms for the flu, expect them to last a week or longer. You should stay home and avoid contact with other persons, except to seek medical care, if necessary. If you leave the house to seek medical care, you should wear a mask or cover your coughs and sneezes with a tissue. In general you should avoid contact with other people as much as possible to keep from spreading your illness. The CDC believes that this virus has the same properties in terms of spread as seasonal flu viruses and may likely be contagious from one day before they develop symptoms and up to 7 days after they get sick. Children, especially younger children, might potentially be contagious for longer periods.
Any comments or suggestions would be helpful to see if this would be good replacement text. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 02:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree that the suggested layout and facts above, which you don't like, was more "guidelike" than before. But with a section called "Symptoms and severity," using primary sources like the CDC, which was aimed at the average visitor needing basic information, and which itself uses the "guidelike" format, I'm not sure it's accurate to say this is not encyclopedic. The article already has graphs, charts, and lists which are meant to keep the details organized for readability and reference. So it would seem that if there's a list of symptoms, then there's a purpose to keep those in a neat list also, even bulleted, due to potential the value to many readers. Being in the TOC means that anyone could just skip over it.
The alternative presentation of facts for this section are like the typical paragraph below, which you put back in. Are you saying that this sample paragraph is more useful and relevant to a topic on "symptoms and severity" than the earlier one? Personally, if I kept it in, I'd put it into a new article called something like "2009 swine flu statistics."
The alternative would be some hybrid of the two formats, but unless and until someone writes one out, then we should consider what we have. Any comments or suggestions? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 16:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
it was added as fringe.are you out of your mind.its mainstream news.WHO is investigating it and it is fringe. dont censor the truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.8.212 ( talk) 13:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I think a brief summary of the genetic makeup of this virus should be kept in the article, but most of the Genetics section - oriented more toward biologists - should be moved to influenza virus where it seems to have a much more relevant context. However, if it's moved, it should probably go into the talk page so redundant material can be surgically removed and new facts grafted in by one of their resident editors. Comments? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 06:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
The content referred to is about the genetics of a single specific strain at the point of its creation of a single subtype of a single species. It is far too specific to belong in any article other than this one. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 21:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I have pasted all the text into a new article
H1N1/Influenza/A/B96.3 as there is simply too much info for an existing article. The article needs some cleanup, ref fixing, and probably a better name, but its a start. --
ThaddeusB (
talk) 00:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the source, Australia and Thailand appear to be properly specified as "1+" infections, but they are showing up with the colour of the "50+" category. Anyone know what's going on? -- π! 14:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I think a map showing the number of infections in a country per 1000 of the population would be a good addition to this page. I think it would be very interesting to see which countries have the highest proportion of their population infected, this is generally far more interesting than the overall number of infections in acountry. Does anyone agree/disagree and would anyone be able to create it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.217.164.171 ( talk) 14:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is this page not updated as soon as news about confirmed cases in countries not listed breaks. People use this page as a reference and need the page to be updated within minutes of news breaking
See subject line —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.21.22 ( talk) 07:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Is the pandemic just getting to big for Wikipedia/Wikipeia users to handle? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.21.22 ( talk) 07:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Look, Wikipedia's purpose is that anyone can edit it. Even new users and IPs. This means that the information can only be updated when someone does it. We're not paid to sit here and type about pandemics. We do it as a hobby. Demanding the page be kept updated is pointless and using it as a source - particularly with ever-changing information - is more so. So why not cease complaining and start updating? GARDEN 11:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I was just wondering why Greenland is not marked when Denmark is? Like how Svalbard and Alaska are marked because Norway and the main US is. Aleco ( talk) 13:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add to the list that in Belgium we have a 5th person infected. 91.180.26.13 ( talk) 19:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.180.26.13 ( talk) 19:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Bio-Medicine CDC says confirmed cases, including 2 new deaths, may not reflect true reach of the disease
"SATURDAY, May 16 (HealthDay News) -- While the official tally of confirmed U.S. swine flu cases topped 4,700 on Friday, experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now estimate the true number of infections at more than 100,000 nationwide." --
Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 23:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Concerns about the Mexican Health System Mexican public health system is oversaturate, an important lack of drugs forces physicians to prescribe what is available not what is needed. Physicians in the public health system never have time to upgrade their knowledge, no research is done. The IMSS (Mexican Institute of Social Security) used to do some medical research, a recent director forbid any research activity, in his opinion it was unnecessary.
Many people have died of curable diseases just because they did not got immediate attention. I know cases of people that have died of cancer because they got an appointment 3 months after they ask the service at the IMSS, at that time the curable stage changed to a terminal stage. Under this conditions as a patient would you ask help just for a cold? What could be your attitude as a physician working in an oversaturate clinic, when you receive a cold patient? Take paracetamol and go home!
This facts should be discussed in the article. The A-H1N1 is not the unique killer, a destroyed Public Health System not providing correct attention to public health. This irresponsible omission is a latent danger to develop new resistant strains of pathogen agents. Apart of all the people dying of curable diseases, just for lack of medical attention.
A bad quality and insufficient Health System is an important cause of diseases in this flu sprout.
Please include this information in the article.
Update the main page table - 2 more deaths in US TX and AZ. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6425771.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.194.21.159 ( talk) 17:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Just a question, not a proposed addition or anything, but it seems we should be in alert level six. The criteria for level six is described as sustained community outbreaks in two or more WHO regions. Obviously North America is sustained, and now there are 100 confirmed cases in spain along with the various numbers reported by neighbooring European countries. Sounds like a sustained community outbreak in another WHO region to me. So whats up with this? Is the WHO sleeping? Drew Smith W hat I've done 10:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Came across this nicely done graph and thought maybe it could be used in the article in place of ours (top right). I suspect that because it took Reuters a lot of time to create this, they'll update it continually. If others like it, we should consider some options: whether a screen capture would be "fair use" to upload; request permission; recreate our own; or just add a link. And of course they would get full credit mention so they might be more than willing to have Wiki post it.
Any thoughts?-- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 22:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Some scientists seem to be very concerned about mutations of H1N1 mixing with H5N1 in Asia. Is this worth mentioning in the article anywhere? Perhaps a section dedicated to topics of concern? I mean the WHO made a pretty big deal about letting everyone know a new virus had arrived. This might be a good place to put such speculation. Just my 2 cents. Yogiudo ( talk) 01:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Below is my proposal for a third section under the heading "Initial outbreak in the US and Mexico". An earlier version had been deleted by Abecedare who judged it OR. I have now added more and more authoritative refererences. I do think an update on the US situation is sorely needed. As my earlier attempt was controversial , I will post my proposal here first. Please check for problems (and please give concrete reasons and/or sources for your critique), and suggest amendations if possible. The following text (the proposed new content) has its html tags on the references removed so the references show in the text. This is because footnotes are apparently not visible on discussion pages and I wanted you all to be able to see the references. As you may note, I have given a number of quotations(later to show in the footnotes), if this isn't ok in WP please tell me. Geometer9420 ( talk) 13:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Ø ===US Situation in May=== By mid-May, the Virus appeared to be widespread and freely circulating in much of the United States. About half of all cases of influenza tested turned out to be swine flu, and in some areas, flu activity was reported to be as high as in peak influenza season, an unusual pattern for May. ref"The fact that novel H1N1 activity is now detected through seasonal surveillance systems is an indication that there are higher levels of influenza-like illness in the United States than is normal for this time of year. About half of all influenza viruses being detected are novel H1N1 viruses." CDC A(H1N1) update May 15th 2009; http://www.enewspf.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7538:h1n1-flu-swine-flu-cdc-update-may-14-2009&catid=88888984:swine-flu&Itemid=88889934, accessed 5-16-2009,/refref" "But what we're seeing is that there are some areas that actually have reports of the amounts of respiratory disease that are coming into their clinics that are equivalent to peak influenza season, and so that's an indicator to us that there's something going on with the amount of influenza disease out there." Dan Jernigan of the CDC in the Canadian Press, http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5iSxR2p2Bjjs0h_PBiLSrhiVOA7kg, accessed on 5-16-2009). On May 6th, US schools closed because of flu outbreaks were encouraged to re-open, as the virus was then no longer perceived as a threat by officials. ref"Schools shut by flu can reopen: Outbreak may be milder than feared", Washington Post 5-6-2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050500719.html, acessed 5-16-2009./ref Ø According to a CDC report on May 6th, the US as well as the Mexican swine flu cases show an unusually high proportion of severe illness with hospitalization in the middle age group, while seasonal flu is a problem mainly for the elderly.ref"First, the percentage of patients requiring hospitalization appears to be higher than would be expected during a typical influenza season (3). Second, the age distribution of hospitalizations for novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection is different than that of hospitalizations for seasonal influenza, which typically occur among children aged <2 years, adults aged ≥65 years, and persons with chronic health conditions (3). In Mexico and the United States, the percentage of patients requiring hospitalization has been particularly high among persons aged 30--44 years." Quote from: Update: Novel Influenza A(H1N1) Virus Infections Worldwide, May 6, 2009, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.ref By mid-May, three schools in Queens, New York City were closed after an outbreak in one of them that caused life-threatening disease in an assistant principal. The school most affected is located within a two-mile radius of the prep school severely hit by the earlier NYC school outbreak (initiated by students returning from Mexico). According to the ill principal's wife, who is a teacher at one of the schools closed in mid-May, her principal had wanted to close her/his school as soon as a surge of flu-like illness among the students became known, but was told not to by city health officials, who said that would only cause a panic. Another of the schools was forced to stay open despite confirmed cases of swine flu among the students. refWashington Post, May 15threfrefhttp://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/05/15/2009-05-15_queens_assistant_principals_other_health_issues_preclude_treatmentswine_flu_cond.htmlrefrefNew York Daily News, http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/05/15/2009-05-15_queens_assistant_principals_other_health_issues_preclude_treatmentswine_flu_cond.html, accessed 5-16-2009/ref Geometer9420 ( talk) 13:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Let me (roughly) summarize what the proposed sections says:
The problem with this is that:
In summary, I think this section violates WP:SYNT and is undue her; although some parts may be relevant in 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States if the content is not already covered there. Abecedare ( talk) 17:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Mild U.S. Flu Cases May Exceed Official Tally
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/16/health/16influenza.html?hp
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
NYT Published: May 15, 2009
The real number of swine flu cases in the United States could be “upwards of 100,000,” a top public health official estimated on Friday — far higher than the official count of 7,415 cases confirmed by laboratories.
The official, Dr. Daniel Jernigan, head of flu epidemiology for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at a news conference that the official number gave an inaccurate picture of the outbreak because so few mildly sick people were being tested.
... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.101.142.131 ( talk) 00:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Remove [15] GTNz ( talk) 05:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Towards the bottom of "Symptoms and severity" is a sentence which reads In all, 36 three people died. I'd fix it myself if I knew what it meant. A case for experts I think. Fainites barley scribs 22:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
There are 8 confirmed death in the US, 3 in TX, 2 in AZ, 1 in WA and NY and Missouri and 1 is under investigation in NY ( [84]..-- Vrysxy! ( talk) 23:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I see that in the article's opening sentence the word epidemic has been changed to pandemic. The WHO have not yet raised the Pandemic Alert level to 6: we are still at level 5, 'Pandemic preparedness'. Was there a reason to change from epidemic to pandemic at this point in time? -- Dionliddell ( talk) 09:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
To add to this. As soon as I saw that the article was now talking about a 'pandemic', I thought straight away that the WHO had raised the alert level. For others that view this page (sometimes obsessively as I do) they may also think that that is the case. I personally think that the article should be reverted back to epidemic, and only changed to a pandemic if we go to level 6. -- Dionliddell ( talk) 11:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree. I just saw a recent article just a few minutes ago clarifying that the WHO has still not raised it to a pandemic, so it would seem that this page should either use epidemic or refer to the 'Pandemic Preparedness' state. I'd change it myself, but for the fact I'm a relatively new user on a massively viewed page. Lost puppies ( talk) 17:37, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Some WHO doctrine (
"Pandemic influenza preparedness and mitigation in refugee and displaced populations" (PDF). 2008.) seems to have drawn from (Reynolds B, Seeger MW (2005). "Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model". Journal of Health Communication. 10: 43–55.) (if someone can check that). Back in 2005, raised the issue of ambiguity in this definition, but it doesn't seem to have been addressed anywhere I can find.(WHO-AFRO Division of Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases (April 2005).
"Report on the 1st Consultation of the Technical Advisory Group on Measles and Rubella Control in the African Region" (PDF). WHO.{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: date and year (
link))
LeadSongDog
come howl 17:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Why does WHO have to say its a pandemic for us to say its a pandemic. If we used the definition of pandemic ourselves then we would call it pandemic. WHO's criteria for phase 6 are filled to be honest i don't know why it hasn't been declard yet. i say leave it as pandemic... as that is what swine flu now is. Wuku ( talk) 08:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
All this panic is senseless.More persons were killled by suicide, than for this kind of flu. Agre22 ( talk) 03:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)agre22
Regardless, your opinion on whether the panic is senseless or not has little to do with whether it's a pandemic or an epidemic. Yellowlarakin ( talk) 07:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
This obviously IS a pandemic. It doesn't matter what level the WHO says we are. We could be at level 10 million, it wouldn't change anything to reality. 206.47.141.21 ( talk) 13:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd be interested to see some mention of individual cases. What is the age group, how long was the patient sick before dying, did they go to the hospital, how long had it been since they got sick until it was diagnosed as swine flu. etc.. Hreinn ( talk) 01:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
First can someone tell the bot to stop archiving so quickly?
What do you think of the previously healthy person passing away? Did he seek medical attention early? Did he take care of himself? Was it cold in New York like it was in Mexico City? According to his family he had fairly mild pre-existing conditions which were gout and high blood pressure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/05/15/ST2009051503651.html Daniel.Cardenas ( talk) 03:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
May I add the information that (except in media reports and soothing statements by health officials) there is no indication that severe disease is absent or rarer in healthy than in unhealthy people. Let me cite the CDC: "Information is available on the clinical course of illness for 22 patients with laboratory-confirmed illness who were hospitalized, including seven patients who died. Five of the 15 surviving patients and one of the seven patients who died had underlying chronic medical conditions."( http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5817a1.htm)In other words, six of the seven dead had no underlying medical conditions. By the way, one US pregnant woman who died was reported to have been "chronically ill", but the case report (also published by the CDC) shows that her chronic illness, if any, certainly wasn't serious: "On April 15, a woman aged 33 years at 35 weeks' gestation with a 1-day history of myalgias, dry cough, and low-grade fever was examined by her obstetrician-gynecologist. She had been in relatively good health and had been taking no medications other than prenatal vitamins, although she had a history of psoriasis and mild asthma." ( http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5818a3.htm) Geometer9420 ( talk) 06:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
please expand h1n1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.89.103.12 ( talk) 15:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Currently, "Symptoms and severity" includes the following:
"Differences in the viruses or co-infection are also being considered as possible causes. In 1918, influenza weakened the infected, and it was then lung infections such as pneumonia which killed 3% of them. In the current outbreak, the first deaths (13 and 21 April) were diagnosed as 'atypical pneumonias', a pneumonia which, helped by the flu, becomes more dangerous."
All of this, as far as I can see, is unsourced. It is also at least partly wrong and/or misleading.
1."In the current outbreak, the first deaths (13 and 21 April) were diagnosed as 'atypical pneumonias', a pneumonia which, helped by the flu, becomes more dangerous." This sounds as if the patients had died of a pneumonia causally unrelated to the flu. This is untrue. The patients died of viral pneumonia caused by the flu; eg, they died of the flu. "Atypical pneumonia" was the first (incorrect) diagnosis in the first patient and reflects the fact that seasonal flu does not normally cause severe non-bacterial pneumonia in healthy adults. They believed she had SARS, but it turned out she had swine flu.
2. "In 1918, influenza weakened the infected, and it was then lung infections such as pneumonia which killed 3% of them." That is the way influenza normally kills, especiually seasonal flu: bacterial pneumonia (a superinfection) is the usual immediate cause of death in seasonal influenza cases. What was special about 1918 was the fact that many especially among younger people died of viral pneuimonia (i.e. pneumonia caused by the flu virus itself) and/or a cytokine storm related to it. The statement is misleading in this context.
3. The pragraph is meant to explain why the disease was more fatal in Mexico than in the US.However, it is far from clear whether the disease was in fact more lethal in Mexico than in the US. US and Mexican lethal cases show the same young age pattern, and the fact that the US has a slightly lower rate of dead vs infected now may be due to sampling error or some other statistical artifact. Geometer9420 ( talk) 18:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
(Sorry, the footnote is invisible. The reference is to an official CDC report which includes all of the above information: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5817a1.htm.)
It looks like Canada has stopped reporting daily figures of A H1N1. Since last Saturday, all we can get is sporadic data from just a few provinces (Nova Scotia, Quebec mostly) with the local number of cases rising at a steady rate. But Health Canada has not updated its website since May 15th/16th, and the officials keep using outdated figures (from May 16th) in press conferences and press releases ever since. From local medias, we know that new cases were found in Nova Scotia, Quebec (at least 16 new cases Monday in Quebec). According to a linear growth model projections, the number of cases in Canada should reach 575 as of Tuesday May 19th. 70.83.220.148 ( talk) 20:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
There were reports of this being Biological Terrorism, but I don't see any info here about that?- NootherIDAvailable ( talk) 07:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I made a lot of revisions to the lead so feel free to suggest or make any repairs. The goal was to trim out excess details already in the main body, to update with more current news summaries, and to simplify for readability. Adding the Bloomberg quote (with cite) was questionable but it seemed to be a nice summary of what might be happening in other cities, here and abroad. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 23:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The introduction states that " there is mounting evidence that the symptoms are even milder than the seasonal flu." The statement is OR and I think unwarranted, certainly in this exposed position in the article. I have not seen a single dependable source saying that swine flu is milder than seasonal flu, and I haven't found the statement in the newspaper article given as the source for the paragraph, though admittedly I perused the article rather quickly; an LA Times article that cites Mayor Bloomberg as an expert is certainly not an authoritative source on the epidemiology of swine flu. On the contrary, available data currently points to a somewhat higher case fatality rate in swine flu. (Given as 0.4 vs. 0.1 by Science/WHO, although that is still very uncertain). Swine flu may be milder for people above 65. So far all of the US fatalities and most hospitalizations were of young and middle age, the reverse pattern is seen with seaonal flu. (The newly published immunological data show 33% immunity against swine flu in the oldest age cohort, and practically no immunity in the rest of the population.) Younger adults rarely require hospitalization with seasonal flu, but suffer disproportionatly in the current outbreak. So current data indicate that at least for adults below 60, swine flu seems to be more problematic than seasonal flu. Also, swine flu could affect more people as the population is largely immunologically naive; swine flu was thus judged to be more contagious than seasonal flu.
All in all, an unqualified statement that it swine flu is milder than seasonal flu is clearly wrong at this point in time.
The same (OR?) section in the introduction also states that of 201 confirmed cases in New York, only one was a fatality (and of 279 in Japan, none was); apparently citing this is as evidence that swine flu is less severe than seaonal flu. This does not makes sense statistically. Seasonal flu has a case fatality rate of 0.1%, i.e. one death per thousand cases. 201 New York flu patients do not a statistic make; but if they did, they would indicate a case fatality rate of 0.5, five times higher than with seasonal influenza. (Note that I am not saying that this is a valid statistic.) The sentence as it stands now is plain nonsense.
I think the whole statement including the part about New York and Japan needs to be deleted. The judgemental sentence about Japan overreacting (according to whose standards?) has no place in an encyclopedic article. If one does want to speak of the fatality rate or the severity in the introduction, it would be appropriate to say that the fatality rate is probably not very much higher than the one fatality per thousand seen in seasonal flu, although younger adults may be disproportionately affected. Geometer9420 ( talk) 07:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following three sentences from the lede:
As of May 21st, for instance, despite 201 confirmed cases in New York City, most have been mild and there has been only one confirmed death from the virus. "New York City officials struggle for balanced response to swine flu", Los Angeles Times, May 21, 2009Similarly, Japan has reported 279, mostly mild flu cases, and no deaths. "Spread of Swine Flu Puts Japan in Crisis Mode", New York Times, May 21, 2009 And in Mexico, where the outbreak began last month, the government lowered its swine flu alert level as there have been no new infections for a week. "Mexico City ends swine flu alert, no cases in week" Associated Press, May 21, 2009
which violated wikipedia guidelines againsts
synthesis, by selectively and incorrectly citing examples to try to establish that "there is mounting evidence that the symptoms are so far milder than health officials feared." After all, why do we cite 1/279 deaths/cases in NY and not 3/500 deaths in Arizona ? Also the last example is simply wrong - the newspaper report is about
Mexico city not the country as a whole!
I believe the earlier statements in the paragraph (as reworded by Wikiwacher1) are true, and therefore haven't removed them from the article. However we need to add a reference for those statements, and perhaps remove the POVish adjective mounting, unless it is specifically supported by the source(s).
Abecedare (
talk) 09:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
The new version as revised by Abecedare and Wikiwatcher is fine. Thank you both. "Milder than feared" is perfectly okay (because what virologists feared was Spanish flu or even bird-flu like virulence); what I objected to was "milder than seasonal influenza" which is not supported by current stats. Thanks for collecting the citations, Wikiwatcher, but note they don't say milder than seasonal flu. (By the way, the WHO's wording "most of the cases at this time continue to be mild cases, where people recover without needing hospitalization although there are some people that do get fatal and serious illnesses" would have been true even of the Spanish flu, which had a 97,5 % recovery rate yet still managed to kill millions of people.) I dont think anyone in the know still wonders "why the disease was worse in Mexico", Mexico has 78 confirmed fatalities, the US now has ten, simply because the epidemic started later, and at a time when normal influenza season was over. What you still read occasionally is that victims in Mexico were mosty healthy while most (but not all) US victims are reported having chronic disease, however, that is probably due to the fact that conditions like mild asthma, being overweight, pregnant or having sleep apnea were not counted as chronic disease in Mexico while with the US cases they were. (Which is of course OR which is why I won't post it in the article! ;-)) Cheers. Geometer9420 ( talk) 12:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
NEJM
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
A Detroit newspaper claiming that "...92% of the 109 U.S. infections came without travel to affected areas, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported." [1] I can't find any other source carrying that claim. Is this more media misinterpretation? Rmhermen ( talk) 14:54, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The virus was initially DETECTED in Mexico... Not originated in Mexico.
Also this virus is a MUTATION of the euro-asiatic influenza virus already knew years ago and from which Mexico never had cases of infection... i mean the virus scientifically named as "Influenza A virus subtype H1N1", responsible for the 1918 flu pandemic, that killed some 50 million to 100 million people worldwide (A/H1N1-1918).
Now, if you refer to the "swine flu" (A/H1N1-2009) as "mexican flu"... also there are many people who refer to it as "American flu" (refering to USA) or "North American Flu" (refering to the region of North America) or "A/California/2009" or "hog flu" or "pig flu"... so add these too or just refer to it as "swine flu".--. 18:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by OyashiroSama ( talk • contribs)
27 are ill in the U.K. now, including victims in Gloucestershire, Merseyside, Dulwich, Redditch and Oxfordshire. [2]!-- 86.29.246.3 ( talk) 19:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Another Portuguese bloke has fallen ill now- [3]
The map should be updated for El Salvador and Guatemala. [4] (in Spanish)-- Vrysxy ¡Californication! 22:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I read the source of the information about "scientific name" of the new flu strain and I really could not search any "California" within this page. Also there were described a "vaccine" from South Hemisphere; and as everybody knows I began in the North Hemisphere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hedleypanama ( talk • contribs) 03:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
My purpose to remove the use of antibiotics for "dual infection" is to reduce confusion and not foment the popular misconception of using abtibiotics to treat viral infections. I am aware that the "dual infection" mentioned in this article implicitly referred to bacterial pneumoniae + flu virus, however, one can not expect a casual reader to know that or to understand that the word pneumoniae could be a pathology or a bacteria, especially without the article explaining this and while the article is focused on a virus. If somebody feels the compelling need to compare treatments of viral pneumonia with a bacterial pneumonia, Fungal pneumonia, Parasitic pneumonia co-infection, please explain so in the apropriate section or article and remark that the use of antibiotics by itself is not effective against any virus, especially the H1N1. Cheers, BatteryIncluded ( talk) 06:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I added a section on historical context to talk about the cyclical nature of influenza pandemics and how this has lead to an increased level of alertness on the part of public health officials. It's a little rough but I think its necessary to put this outbreak in context. Please read it and make it better.-- Hdstubbs ( talk) 16:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
Just suggesting another name change. As the WHO is now calling the disease by it's Scientific name Influenza A(N1H1) to avoid confusion with pigs, should the title not be change to 2009 Influenza A(H1N1) Outbreak? Thanks!-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 11:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the prior discussion above there seems now to be a majority support for changing the name. Regarding "common name", there are a lot of exceptions to the "common name" rule. Like neutrality and ambigouity. Following common name should not conflict with other more specific Wikipedia:Naming conventions which are more important. To quote "Except where other accepted Wikipedia naming conventions give a different indication, title an article using the most common name". One example, the article influenza, not "flu". Another very important example which should be a precedent. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1, Transmission and infection of H5N1, and Global spread of H5N1. Not "Bird flu". Ht686rg90 ( talk) 13:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't see the problem. All it would take is a page move and a redirect.-- gordonrox24 ( talk) 04:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
So Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco and Egypt have prepared for the worst and are screening any on coming from Mexico. Egypt has also seen riots over the resent pig culling- [7] / [8] / [9]!
The Egyptian health ministry said on Thursday "That the decision to cull quarter of a million pigs was not a measure against swine flu but a general health measure." " [10]"-- 86.29.248.49 ( talk) 03:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree, the Egyptians never like looking like complete, hysterical, morons!-- 86.29.248.49 ( talk) 03:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
See- [11] [12]-- 86.25.55.164 ( talk) 09:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Please update the image with the following:
Thanks. ~ A H 1( T C U) 22:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Why was the timeline removed from External links? It's not against RS as every event appears to be sourced, either a local news source, university/college website, or something like LATimes/NYTimes/AP. It was a good source to quickly ctrl+f through, and it's also listed on DMOZ GTNz ( talk) 03:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
It should be noted that many people have suggested vitamin D as both treatment and prevention for this and other types of influenza (see http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/science/research/vitamin-d-and-influenza.shtml and http://www.healthy.net/scr/news.asp?Id=8826 and http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller27.html and www.naturalnews.com/024982.html unreliable fringe source? and http://journals.cambridge.org/action/login;jsessionid=C971FC31034D3FECE9F481FD109C6D2D.tomcat1 I can only wonder why none of this is mentioned in the article under prevention and treatment. 201.230.106.3 ( talk) 18:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
http://www.promedmail.org/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1001:2365278416456707::NO::F2400_P1001_BACK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1000,77349 Influenza A(H1N1) worldwide - 11: coincident H3N2 variation
British Columbia CDC has found some BC residents who have traveled to Mexico to have both A/H1N1 and a recently mutated form of H3N2 (see promed link).
The suggestion is that the presence of both viruses might explain the difference in Mexican and non-Mexican mortality rates. As such referring to it just as the H1N1 influenza might not be correct. 151.194.17.27 ( talk) 00:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
None of this is an argument against naming the article H1N1, though, as that was the name originally applied and is how the outbreak is most widely and 'correctly' known. Certainly it is more correct than the current "Swine Flu". Everyone knows The Hundred Years War really wasn't, they just decided to call it that. 139.48.25.60 ( talk) 15:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Further info on the variant H3N2. In BC it causes more severe flu than the H1N1 strain from NPR. http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2009/05/second_strain_might_have_cause.html 151.194.21.159 ( talk) 19:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I deleted swine flu from this table earlier because there are no active epidemiological studies for the infection rates and death rates of swine flu. Media reports and passive detection methodologies are not a replacement for such data. By including swine flu in this table we imply that we have as good a handle on this data as we have on 20th century pandemics. A qualifier of 'early data' is not enough and is in addition seriously misleading. The data we have to date is almost totally useless compared to that we have for the 20th century pandemics. I have deleted swine flu again from the table. Please do not add a swine flu line again without a properly conducted epidemiological study to back up the figures we give (and a formal announcement of a pandemic). (Also note that swine flu has not been declared a pandemic and did not occur in the 20th century so should not be included in a table who's title is 20th century flu pandemics). When/If a study is carried out and swine flu added as a line the table would need to be renamed. Barnaby dawson ( talk) 08:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
An influenza pandemic is an epidemic of an influenza virus that spreads on a worldwide scale and infects a large proportion of the human population. In contrast to the regular seasonal epidemics of influenza, these pandemics occur irregularly, with the 1918 Spanish flu the most serious pandemic in recent history. Pandemics can cause high levels of mortality, with the Spanish influenza estimated as being responsible for the deaths of over 50 million people. There have been about three influenza pandemics in each century for the last 300 years. The most recent ones were the Asian Flu in 1957 and the Hong Kong Flu in 1968. [1]-- 86.25.55.164 ( talk) 09:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
A major link is needed, there closly related.-- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Where did the Wikipedia totals section of the table come from?
Have the words 'original research' occured to anyone? 86.16.117.213 ( talk) 12:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
It is factually inaccurate to call it a "Wikipedia total." Wikipedia has done nothing to generate the totals. All we have done is adding individual RS. Adding is not OR. Also the "note" is completely unnecessary. Our readers are intelligent enough to release a total is a sum of the numbers in the table. There are tens of thousands of similar summary tables across Wikipedia -- do ANY of them have a disclaimer that the total is the sum of the parts??? -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 16:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Here is a good time line of events and infections , not the internal! -- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:11, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
What the heck does it mean when there is a negative number of cases? Common sense would indicate that the confirmed case count will be a smaller number than the probably or suspected numbers. After all, weren't the patients who were confirmed suspected and likely to be infected? Now the chart has negative numbers. What in the world does that mean? I think an explanation of what the numbers in the chart mean is needed. Victor Engel ( talk) 19:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The second death in the US should be dropped from the table. "Health officials stopped short of saying that swine flu caused the woman's death. State health department spokeswoman Carrie Williams said the woman had "chronic underlying health conditions" but wouldn't give any more details." The lady had swine flu but had chronic health issues aswell. It has been blown up, by the media, again, to make it look like it killed her. 90% of people I talk to are sick and tired of this media over hype on swine flu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.37.96.11 ( talk) 02:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Madagascar is in lockdown now! [13] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:44, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Denmark has just cleared 12 people of having swine flu [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], Sweden has confirmed a case [20], [21] as has go one to Germany has [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27]! -- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC) -- 86.29.249.180 ( talk) 16:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
-- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Ireland has now got 4 pig flu victims. [30] The government has stated it has vaccine for over half the country so far. Airports are scanning every person entering checking of infections through thermal imaging and the minister joined a meeting in Luxemburg. -- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Mexico has nearly 200 deaths now [ [31]]/ [ [32]]! -- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 08:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Mexico recons it is now in controll of the situation [33].-- The 'reel' boffin man! ( talk) 16:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 42 Mexicans are listed as dead! [34] [35]-- 86.29.250.97 ( talk) 19:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Here you can see the latest update: 44 deaths confirmed, and 1204 cases confirmed (not dead!). The "200 deaths" are not dead, but (only) 173 confirmed cases from 27th April (not up-to-date).-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 21:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Fiji has it's first case[ [36]]!-- 86.29.240.235 ( talk) 09:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
All flights to and from Mexico are suspended! [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] -- 86.29.250.97 ( talk) 19:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
First confirmed case in Argentina [42]
A South African is now ill with it! [43]-- 86.29.250.97 ( talk) 19:18, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Brazil has confirmed its first case today, some minuts ago, I've just heard on television João P. M. Lima ( talk) 22:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The Minister of Health of Brazil confirmed the first 4 cases of swine flu in the country. Three of the confirmed cases are from people that were in Mexico and the other is from a person that was in the United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.107.24.45 ( talk) 22:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
4 persons infected in Brazil were confirmed.
+1 Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=adZ_DpGY6JPs&refer=home 189.122.194.161 ( talk) 23:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Continued idea from the last comment above by Abecedare:
It seems we have a catch-22 situation, as you say to "use global stats only" but agree that global stats are either unavailable or unreliable. That may leave only one option: a chart for U.S. only. I guess it would still be for pandemics (and maybe epidemics) but the title would state it was U.S. data only and the data is both available and verifiable. Any thoughts on this? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 06:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The historical epidemics infected millions and killed at least tens of thousands, so the fractional random error from Poisson statistics alone can in principle be as low as 0.01 (since 0.01 = sqrt(1/10000)). The relatively recent ones with several hundred deaths also have fractional errors that are not too high for a popular level encyclopedia. There could be other sources of random error and certainly there are systematic errors that epidemiologists know about. But let's ignore those and just consider the Poisson error.
Template:2009_swine_flu_outbreak_table gives 31 confirmed deaths out of 1767 confirmed cases, which gives 1.8% (no longer 2.6%). The minimum fractional error (as i said, disregarding all the caveats about homogeneity of the samples, data collection in different countries, reporting biases, etc. etc.) is 1/sqrt(31) \approx 0.18. So the figure would be (as of 01:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)) 1.8%0.3%. So stating it without an error (for this encyclopedia) is probably not absurd.
However, we should at least put a footnote clarifying the calculation, such as "Global confirmed deaths/global confirmed infections", in which case it should be OK without qualifying as OR, since we are definining exactly what is calculated. BTW, i am not recommending adding uncertainty (error) estimates, since those are calculations beyond "routine calculation". They should come from epidemiologists. Boud ( talk) 01:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) indicates that it has found H1N1 flu virus in a swine herd in Alberta. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/newcom/2009/20090502e.shtml http://investors.smithfieldfoods.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=381309 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmgg170 ( talk • contribs) 21:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I think there is not going to be a repeat of pandemic flu because only about 5-7% of Mexican victims, 2 Americans and 1 Spaniard have died so far!-- 86.25.51.245 ( talk) 04:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
It is hardly the wipe out Hong Kong flu or SARS were either!-- 86.25.48.106 ( talk) 09:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The UN and WHO reckon that the UN pandemic alert level should stay at level 5 and not be raised to level 6 in the near future- [44] [45] [46] [47]. Mexico recons it is now in control of the situation [48]. -- 86.25.51.45 ( talk) 16:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
(related to this version) Please reread http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs211/en/index.html and change within lead section from Worldwide the common human H1N1 influenza virus affects millions of people every year, according to WHO officials, and "these annual epidemics result in about three to five million cases of severe illness, and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths" annually.[45] to Worldwide common human influenza viruses affect ... -- Aardappelmesje ( talk) 20:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I have created a special barnstar for swine flu related articles. I felt a special award was warranted due to the unusually large amount of effort required to keep these page up to date. Any user is welcome to award this barnstar to whomever they think has contributed a great deal to the various swine flu related articles.
I have handed out an initial batch, but I am sure I missed a number of deserving editor's. Please visit User:ThaddeusB/Swine Flu Barnstar and correct my oversights.
Thank you -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 20:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Are surgical masks of any value in preventing the spread or reducing the chance of contracting H1N1 flu, or any other flu, for that matter? Supplies of masks are being hoarded already, but I am quite doubtful about the efficacy of masks for the general public. Medical staff can wear respiratory masks, which may be much more effective than surgical masks. Comments? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 21:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The last two pandemics killed around 1 million people each, so why does the table only mention U.S. deaths? The key word here is "pandemic". cyclosarin ( talk) 23:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Cuba is scared of it to- [49]
4 South Koreans are still being tested for the v ioruse [ [50]] [ [51]] [52] [ [53]] and Thailand is checking out all air passengers arriving from Mexico. A Thai woman has now been found to be flu free [54]!
China’s Inner Mongolia region has some cases of Swine flu now! China has also banned pork imports from the U.S.A. and Mexico [55]! Hong Kong has quarantined 300 people in a hotel [56],[ [57]], [58], [59]! China has gagged nosy reporters in the infested regions our side Hong Kong and Macau [60]! 34 Chinese are now dead [61], [62], [63]
Mongolia is Swine flu free! [64], [65], [66]!!! Sadly, Bird flu is in parts of the country [ [67]].
1st confirmed human victim!! [68]!
Somebody needs to change the color image to black for Canada.
Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.94.25.62 ( talk) 14:39, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Death now confirmed to be caused by the virus. First death in Canada confirmed [69] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericleb01 ( talk • contribs) 23:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Norway has got two confirmed cases, according to the latest news. ( http://www.focus-fen.net/index.php?id=n180474 and http://nrk.no/nyheter/1.6602215) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.166.72.98 ( talk) 20:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
The WHO reports just an hour or so 896 confirmed cases for the United States. However, in the table we are already counting 1,714 cases. I mean.. this is nearly 100 percent in difference. Why is the WHO so slow? Or do we have mistakes? -- Grochim ( talk) 18:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Country has more two cases of the new flu, announces Minister
7-year-old girl is of SC and it had rise. Another patient is a friend of young person interned in the Rio de Janeiro
In the total, 6 persons infected with the swine flu in Brazil.
Might anybody update for me there in the article?
-- Rodfanaia ( talk) 23:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
WHO totals 2500[2] N/A 44[2]
The ref says
Mexico has reported 1204 laboratory confirmed human cases of infection, including 44 deaths. The United States has reported 896 laboratory confirmed human cases, including two deaths.
And the WHO map of deaths and cases says 2,500 and 46 deaths.
http://www.who.int/csr/don/GlobalSubnationalMaster_20090508_1815.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.211.181 ( talk) 01:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Costa Rica confirmed its first swine flu related death (in Spanish) -- Vrysxy ¡Californication! 17:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Going over some sources, the total infected numbers were apparently arrived at by taking a percentage estimate of the population, U.S. or world. That's why the three in the chart are around 50 million for the U.S. But there is no confirmed number of cases since most people don't report their flu. However, the total deaths were consistent among all sources. The one I'd recommend looking at is Globalsecurity.org which also has a ton of other useful material, including the current outbreak. In any case, we need to consider whether the mortality rates are accurate enough to put on a chart like this, especially in an encyclopedia. I personally don't think so. It's probably best to just include confirmed totals. And it's true that since the current outbreak is not officially a "pandemic," some footnote should be added. We could even add the 1976 Swine flu "scare," since it never became a pandemic but is of historical mention due to the 40 million vaccinations.
A modified chart without absolute figures. Feel free to modify it for other ideas. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 02:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Chart of pandemics | ||||||
Epidemics (avail. data) | Year | People infected | Deaths | Mortality rate | Data sources | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spanish flu (worldwide est) | 1918-19 | 500 million | 50 million | CDC | ||
Asian flu (U.S.) | 1957 | 45 million | 70,000 | Globalsecurity.org | ||
Hong Kong flu (U.S.) | 1968-69 | 50 million | 33,000 | Globalsecurity.org | ||
Avian flu (worldwide) | 1990-today | 421 | 257 | Globalsecurity.org | ||
Seasonal flu (U.S.) | yearly average | 50 million | 36,000 | .08% | CNN | |
Swine flu (worldwide) [confirmed deaths/confirmed infections] [2] | as of 22:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC) | 1893 | 31 | 1.6% [2] | WHO |
I really like the table but I think the death rate section is inaccurate. We should only use this information if it comes from a research or health care professional. I think it is WAY too early to tell what the death rate is and 1.8% is very high. That is twice the mortality rate of ordinary influenza and there is no evidence of that. -- Hdstubbs ( talk) 03:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The lead is currently seven paragraphs and Wiki recommends no more than four. I took the first three, which seemed like they could be condensed, and rewrote them as one for sandboxing, (new verb?) below. Note that for easier editing, I trimmed out the citations and some wikilinks so it's easier to sandbox.
Existing:
Condensed:
I think we can trim other lead paragraphs also but offer this one for comments. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
What readers are really interested in is current and predicted contagiousness, spread, lethality, and morbidity —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.95.139 ( talk) 01:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
...
While searching for sources for the Historical context section, I found this information through pubmed:
The epidemic behaviour of influenza has been so erratic and difficult to understand that there are still a few scientists who consider that extraterrestrial influences operate. These views are not taken seriously by most virologists but there are puzzling aspects of influenza that are not yet understood.
— Beveridge, W.I. (1991). "The chronicle of influenza epidemics". History and Philosophy of the life sciences. 13 (2): 223–34.
Should we add this critical content to our article ? :) Abecedare ( talk) 02:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes I was kidding; thought other editors might enjoy the diversion.
To be clear: I don't hink this belongs in any of the Influenza related articles; the fringiness can be covered adequately at the pages of its proponents
Fred Hoyle,
Chandra Wickramasinghe or perhaps at
panspermia.
Abecedare (
talk) 03:04, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
It is posible that it was a anilen virouse.-- 86.29.243.170 ( talk) 09:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
On the other hand, depending on how you define "extra-terrestrial" agents, we can also note that they're already here. We've got cosmic rays, X-rays, gamma rays, uv rays, ozone holes, etc. which cause mutations, cancers, and a host of evolutionary unknowns. The sun is probably a key extra-terrestrial agent of change. But as Louis Brandeis said, sunlight is also the best medicine. Take your pick. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 03:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a confirmed case. -- 190.49.117.246 ( talk) 14:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
1.) Color - I think that black is not a good color for confirmed deaths. Especially now that Canada is likely to have confirmed death soon this means that the entirety of North America is black for less fifty deaths. Maybe I've played too much Pandemic II but I think this is a little over the top. My suggestion is red = death, green = confirmed, and yellow = suspected
2.) Territories - Should territories be colored even if there are no cases there? Ex: Alaska, French Guiana, etc. -- Hdstubbs ( talk) 16:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations to all the editors; in real life, I have received numerous compliments today about the quality and usefulness of this and related articles. Graham Colm Talk 21:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Whereas most influenza strains affect the elderly and young children worst, this strain has primarily caused deaths in people aged 25–50.[158] -- is this statement, which refers to that outdated report, still considered valid? By the way, it looks like the original report is slightly misrepresented here. Colchicum ( talk) 17:44, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
A chart I put together for some quick perspective and comparison. Feel free to revise or expand. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 01:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Chart of pandemics | ||||||
Epidemics (avail. data) | Year | People infected | Deaths | Mortality % | Death rate/10,000 | Data sources |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spanish flu (worldwide est) | 1918-19 | 500 million | 50 million | 10% | 1000 | CDC |
Asian flu (U.S.) | 1957 | 45 million | 70,000 | .16% | 16 | |
Hong Kong flu (U.S.) | 1968-69 | 50 million | 33,000 | .07% | 7 | |
Avian flu (worldwide) | 1990-today | 421 | 257 | 61% | 6100 | |
SARS (worldwide) | 2002-03 | 8,096 | 774 | 9.6% | 960 | |
General flu (U.S.) | yearly average | 50 million | 36,000 | .08% | 8 | CNN |
Swine flu (worldwide) [confirmed deaths/confirmed infections] | as of 01:17, 6 May 2009 (UTC) | 1767 | 31 | 1.8% | 180 | WHO |
I like this alot. I think we should make a historical context section and place it after the introduction. It would go over previous pandemics and outbreaks prior to this one. What does everyone think?-- Hdstubbs ( talk) 03:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Many people compare it to 1918 pandemic of H1N1 variant. H comes from hemagluttenin and N comes from neuroaminidase (sp?). I BLASTed most recent HA and NA sequences against their 1918 counterparts from 3 strains mentioned in flu database at NCBI. Neuroaminidase has 83% nucleotide sequence identity and hemogluttenin has 81% to their counterparts. That is pretty low. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.174.217.67 ( talk) 03:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
For the version modified and used in the article, there's a big problem I see. Since the available figures include worldwide or U.S. totals, the other columns makes less sense as a comparison tool unless there is some ratio column with it, such as % or /1,000. I added both here since there was plenty of room. Some people are used to seeing stats as a % (i.e. investors) and others like the per thousand (i.e. crime rates.) In fact, the reason I added "(avail. data)" was because I only found accurate data for that demographic, although other estimates may be still be available.
It would also be easy to add another column as a place to include one or more source links to avoid OR issues. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I went ahead and added a colum for sources to see how it might look. Note that the sources can easily be changed and other sources can be added, since the column will just expand to fit (but abbreviate the source name if possible.) -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
This analysis seems to be a case of synthesis, with numerators and denominators from different sources. There is little accuracy or consistency in the number of "cases" since only the most ill come to be included. Mild cases resolve at home with chicken soup and no medical attention. The fatality rates for some varieties are absurd original rsearch. Edison ( talk) 02:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC) Edison ( talk) 02:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I think the basic consept of the chart is very good given resent events.-- 86.29.255.77 ( talk) 08:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I have put an NPOV tag on the section re source of the virus. It is WP:SYNTHESIS at its worst. Also, the quality of sources is very poor. What happened to the original, reliable sources? This section now functions as a link farm for blogs. -- Una Smith ( talk) 18:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
This section is now much better. -- Una Smith ( talk) 14:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link).I also made a logarithmic chart, it shows better the numbers in the first days. But I think if we place it into the article, it's too much. Any ideas? -- Grochim ( talk) 09:02, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
WHO_level5
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).The vertical axes need labeling. Somebody's going to come along and get freaked out that the disease is 90% fatal. In fact, putting the deaths on the same chart with a different scale may be a bad idea entirely. -- Cyrius| ✎ 20:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
The World Health Organization will be raising the threat level to 6 at noon tomorrow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.110.9 ( talk) 03:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
It will blow over, just like this one did! [74] -- 86.25.50.119 ( talk) 10:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
For many searchers, "Swine Flu" is the only search term they know. That search delivers them to a technical swine flu page, not the 2009 outbreak page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.11.186 ( talk) 17:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
see the links to ncbi genome page for updated flu sequences and the promed site for infectious disease information from workers in the field. It took forever to load so I posted to wrong page :) Nerdseeksblonde ( talk) 21:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I am concerned that some countries may seriously under-report cases to the WHO. For example, Mexico cases do not follow the epidemiological curves seen in other country data.
Under-reporting can be due to lack of lab equipment or access to labs and lack of medical screening / reporting infrastructure, but also due to local political / economical reasons. I would hope, that folks at WHO could comment on that.
Country listings: Instead of the current confirmed / suspected lists, it would help to break up data according to whether the subject caught the flu while visiting another country, or from catching it in their own country.
Country listings: It would help, to list the median age, +/- sigma.
Fk52b ( talk) 00:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Aaaaaaaaaaah! It's the end of the world!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkgirl411 ( talk • contribs) 00:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, we got trough pandemic flu in 1918-1919 and medical science is even better now.-- 86.29.255.85 ( talk) 02:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
A 53 year old man, who never went to Mexico [ [75]] during the plague has now died!-- 86.29.247.157 ( talk) 10:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
A China/Macau/Hong Kong vidio confrence was held. Macau is flu free [76].-- 86.25.53.147 ( talk) 11:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I do not see the value of a chart which has an aggregate of confirmed cases compared to confirmed deaths. First of all, the chart is unclear as to what it is tracking. Is it worldwide deaths or cases? It is not good enough to know that it is cases but my point is that the chart does not clarify this at all. Second, what is the reasoning in comparing suspected cases to deaths? This is not clear as to why it should be included in a single chart. Overall, the chart is ambiguous and should be removed. I request opinions on this since I am for removing the chart. GaussianCopula ( talk) 03:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Some clerics blame "God's vengeance on the infidels" (or whatever people mean when they say things like that) for swine flu
[ [77]] -- 86.25.53.147 ( talk) 11:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Could someone add a list of those countries in which there were human-to-human transmissions? I know of Mexico, USA, Germany and Spain, but probably there are more.-- Roentgenium111 ( talk) 14:38, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
why does every link go to globalsecurity.org ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.211.181 ( talk) 18:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
All still there, just a link to a website with no references or sources and some spelling mistakes in the article. And selling items from the US Cavalry store.
Why is this the upmost site for the 1968 Hong Kong Flu for example? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
94.194.211.181 (
talk) 13:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
[ someone deleted this from earlier, lots of edits today]
I didn't know wiki covers current events and was impressed by amount of stuff here. Are there general means to auto-generate this type of content harvest from machine or even human readable sources? Also, the NCBI has a sequence library,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/FLU/SwineFlu.html
and these guys have some good resources, not sure of opps to coordinate,
http://www.promedmail.org/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1000:
and personal interest looking for coding opportunities
for dealing with infectious diseases :)
Nerdseeksblonde ( talk) 19:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I thought I may have missed it but I tried to check. Promed is a great resource
and I'd like to think there would be a way to get automated counts- if they
can tally votes and other stuff in real time, why not verified and putative case
reports?
Nerdseeksblonde (
talk) 21:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
How do I edit the table? I wanted to update that Canada now has 330 cases per the same source referenced but I didn't see the table in the article, nor was I able to bring it up as a Wikipage. CycloneGU ( talk) 20:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/artikkeli/Suomessa+varmistui+kaksi+sikainfluenssatartuntaa/1135245884424
2 confirmed cases in Finland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.128.216.246 ( talk) 06:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that most of the time the External Links and templates following the References section do not appear while I view this page with User:Lupin/popups.js, using updated Firefox and Vista. I'm curious if anyone confirms this bug? Mike Serfas ( talk) 09:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Regard this medical fact to [ [79]]!!!
Palau's Health Minister has issued a health alert and increased screening of passengers entering the country for swine flu [80]]!-- 86.29.253.163 ( talk) 14:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC) I hope the tinny Pacific can cope with it all!
If someone would like to add this I think it could be beneficial to the article. The source is CDC http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5817a1.htm
As of May 5, using an updated case definition of fever plus cough or sore throat for a suspected case and real-time reverse transcription--polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) or viral culture for a laboratory-confirmed case, Mexico had identified 11,932 suspected cases and 949 cases of laboratory-confirmed novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection, including 42 patients who died.
The figure above shows the 822 confirmed and 11,356 suspected cases of novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in Mexico with dates of onset from March 11 through May 3, 2009. Both confirmed and suspected cases rose sharply from April 19 to April 26, then decreased sharply.
Daveonwiki ( talk) 21:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
You are right, Teahot. And I would like to find a reference for the confirmed cases in March. I have never heard of any CONFIRMED case in Mexico before April. Anyone has a reference (apart of the report of the CDC that doesn't really mention anything about it)? As far as I know the first confirmed cases in March are from California only... I (and maybe others) would be interested in a reference confirming that.-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 23:31, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
BTW, this chart covers only Mexico, so probably doesn't belong in the main article. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 00:09, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
There's a new map available... File:H1N1 map by confirmed cases.svg
76.66.202.139 ( talk) 05:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Mike Serfas ( talk) 09:11, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
obviously as the flu spreads more it will become impossible to track the exact number of cases even if a every country reported all the cases the detect... it's something we'll have to put up with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.253.113 ( talk) 11:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I personally don't like either map for reasons stated above, and agree that unless a map shows cases per thousand then it's useless at best and misleading at worst. But even with cases/M, the stats are now already becoming questionable and troublesome: Mexico and Canada are now ignoring suspected cases; international politics are being affected; countries like China who once kept SARS a secret, are now possibly overreacting; countries like Egypt are slaughtering their pigs and have been accused by their minority (10%)Christian population of using the swine flu as a pretext for discriminatory injury; countries that rely on tourism will have an incentive to underreport after seeing how Mexico's economy was badly hit by world censure; countries, like India or most of the African ones, don't have the medical infrastructure to provide accurate data (i.e. AIDS); and some governments that decide they don't want to have their Wiki map colors turn black, like the U.S. and Mexico, may opt out of relaying accurate data. Anyway, as a minimum, if we want our numbers to be meaningful, we should only map cases/M IMO. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 18:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
The original global map with countries coloured for suspected, confirmed and fatal cases should be removed. The same data is more accurately rpresented on the page that has individual country breakdown: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_outbreak_by_country I think there should be one global map that uses density of infection (cases per million population). This then shows the intensity of the spread on the global map, and the (as good as can be) locality of the spread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.253.112 ( talk) 14:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I have compiled a graph of the flu progress in Canada. Quite interestingly, from day 6 of the outbreak till now, the progress is very linear and doesn't seem to follow any exponential trend (even a weak exponential doesn't fit). This is rather strange, but looking at the global picture, the worldwide trend looks exponential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.220.148 ( talk) 18:43, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Here is my data. I've tried to gather information from the 24th, and these data come from the CBC, Radio-Canada, La Presse (Montreal) and radio station CBF 690. First column is the date (day of the month). Second column is the day (from day zero, April 23th). Third column is the total number of cases from day zero to the specific day. The linear trend is established between days 6 and 7.
DATE; DAY; TOTAL CASES;
23; 0; 0;
26; 3; 6;
28; 5; 13;
29; 6; 19;
30; 7; 35;
1; 8; 51;
2; 9; 85;
3; 10; 101;
4; 11; 140;
5; 12; 165;
6; 13; 201;
7; 14; 214;
9; 16; 281;
10; 17; 286;
11; 18; 330;
12; 19; 358;
(author: Hugo Dufort) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.83.220.148 ( talk) 02:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
The article currently says 500 pigs were slaughtered. Is that correct? Word choice here is very important. Animals destined for human consumption are slaughtered, animals not fit for human consumption are rendered, and animals fit for no use at all are destroyed. -- Una Smith ( talk) 06:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a table listing the number of confirmed cases and the number of deaths by country. If the U.S. has the most cases, why is Mexico listed first? What is the sort rule? It appears arbitrary. Edison ( talk) 02:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Please read here: http://www.exonline.com.mx/XStatic/excelsior/template/content.aspx?se=primera&su=pulsonacional&id=590520&te=nota (it is in Spanish). In brief: There were earlier cases in California at the end of March (as we already know). Now health authorities of California question the Mexican origin, since those children didn't have contact to pigs, nor have a travel history to Mexico. The strain already existed in California, before it was detected in Mexico. Maybe something for the article, useful reference...?-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 14:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Surely, it is to find in English, too, because the health authorities of Claifornia say so, not Mexico. I just came across this by accident, not because I looked for it. Weird, that you say that Mexico tries to blame. I have never seen anything like this (but the opposite: others blame Mexico and call it the origin of the flu with patient zero, who can obviously not be the first person who fell ill since there were evidently earlier cases - in California). I get quite sad with these kind of comments that just shows how biased people are with languages/nationality.-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 15:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
You don't expedct me to answer that, do you? ;) Anyways, I wanted to point out this article (there are others on the same topic) so it can be considered and added if it is of any use.-- 201.153.19.149 ( talk) 13:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Pandemic parity of articles
I see that a lot was done on the swine flu outbreak. However looking at other pandemics (especially TB and HIV, which are ongoing and killing far more people) there does not seem to be parity of reporting on deaths, confirmed cases etc. Also the way they are separated is different.
It would be good if wikipedians could source in the same way and try and get accurate figures for these other pandemics. They might be useful for improving wikipedia's standing and commonality allows accurate comparisons as to how bad flu really is not in this case.
I am wanting that as an ENCYLOPEDIA ARTICLE there is a similarity given that all 3 are in fact current events this would be expected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.246.66.223 ( talk) 13:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
First there are any number of epidemics in various areas of the world, cholera being one that is being seen quite frequently.
Second, any kind of 'comparison' really has no merit.
-Influenzas are RNA viruses that are primarily spread through the air, though surface contamination and body fluid contact are also major ways of transmission. There are vaccines, but much depends on which viruses are used, and when certain viruses make the rounds, in terms of efficacy. Influenzas can be caught by all populations, though those in a weakened state or without good medical access will likely have more deaths occuring.
-Tuberculosis isn't a virus at all, it is a mycobacteria, and someone that is vaccinated against it will not get it through exposure. Also, tuberculosis is often latent, with some people being asymptomatic and never developing it fully. Tuberculosis is also predominantly a problem in developing nations that don't have access to vaccines and anti-biotics.
-HIV is a virus, but it is one that suppresses the immune system, is transmitted by direct body fluid, and in many cases can be prevented with proper care taken in areas of sexual contact, medical procedures, etc. There is no 'cure' for HIV or AIDS, and until recently almost all HIV carriers developed full-blown AIDS, and almost all people with AIDS died. There is still much to be understood about the exceptions that have been appearing where some people are life-long HIV carriers, or where someone with AIDS is living a very long time.
/end of educational rant, but seriously, lets be careful about 'comparing' things... as the saying goes, apples vs oranges. Kavri ( talk) 20:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
found on the Spanish wikipedia:
76.66.202.139 (
talk) 06:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
It has a good, clear and impressive colour scheme and authoritative style to.-- 86.25.53.120 ( talk) 17:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
How often is the data table updated? I feel it should be a regular update eg. midnight everynight, so that the data shown is always up-to-date as far as the previous day. Of course i don't know whether someone has to read all the sources and do the update manually which makes my suggestion impractical. comments please wuku ( talk) 10:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I reverted that entry. The CDC says there is no evidence to support that claim. Nothing in the reference says the WHO is taking it seriously. There is a long intro about the author of the theory that is not pertinent to the article. The contributor reverted the revert. I suggest it get removed again. What do you think? Daniel.Cardenas ( talk) 17:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
A notable virologist who even participated in the creation of Tamiflu has shared a paper which the WHO has considered credible enough to consider investigating. It's been reported by Bloomberg, AP, and other notable news sources. Please refrain from removing it as a fringe theory; it has not been rejected and while it has not had a full critical review from the scientific community, the study's author is a noted virologist. If it were a fringe theory the WHO would have disregarded this researcher. He's a well educated with a long track history in this field. You might not feel comfortable with the idea, but the Virus has been called notable by many doctors for its unique genetic make up. This researcher has put together a paper detailing his findings and its being investigated seriously. Feel free to expand the section, but for now, it is notable, it's in the news, it is pertinent to the article and it provides an explanation for how its genetics came to be. Maybe I'm wrong but I would assume this to be important to the genetic aspects of it. Yawaraf ( talk) 17:10, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I have listen several rumors about A-H1N1-2009 is a human created virus. Amazing! synthetic biology is believed to be very mature to design and create a new malevolent virus.
A-H1N1-2009 is in fact a human created virus, it is the result of evolution by the interaction of birds, pigs and humans in farms.
Some research is done in studying virus sequences in order to predict future mutations. Given the predicted mutations it is possible to synthesize the new sequence to produce vaccines with `dead' attenuated viruses before the virus evolves to the predicted mutation. As far as I know this method is not mature yet.
My suggestion is you can add information about such theory in the article, just be careful checking citations, being serious not alarmist. It means, be clear about the context in which it may be true, and the possibility of the hypothesis.
This is a proposed revision to this section which I feel is warranted now that the flu is steadily growing. The links that were deleted were no longer needed as they dealt with timely news facts, dates, places, stats, etc. which are now mostly history. Because this section is one of the most important to visitors, I recommend keeping it simple and uncluttered. All of the facts are paraphrased from the CDC site and redundancy trimmed out. I also felt that bulleted lists are worthwhile.
The CDC has stated that the symptoms of this new H1N1 flu virus are similar to the symptoms of seasonal flu and include the following:
A significant number of people who have been infected with this new H1N1 virus also have reported diarrhea and vomiting. People at higher risk of serious complications include people age 65 years and older, children younger than 5 years old, pregnant women, people of any age with chronic medical conditions (such as asthma, diabetes, or heart disease), and people who are immunosuppressed (e.g., taking immunosuppressive medications, infected with HIV). [1]
If you show symptoms for the flu, expect them to last a week or longer. You should stay home and avoid contact with other persons, except to seek medical care, if necessary. If you leave the house to seek medical care, you should wear a mask or cover your coughs and sneezes with a tissue. In general you should avoid contact with other people as much as possible to keep from spreading your illness. The CDC believes that this virus has the same properties in terms of spread as seasonal flu viruses and may likely be contagious from one day before they develop symptoms and up to 7 days after they get sick. Children, especially younger children, might potentially be contagious for longer periods.
Any comments or suggestions would be helpful to see if this would be good replacement text. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 02:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree that the suggested layout and facts above, which you don't like, was more "guidelike" than before. But with a section called "Symptoms and severity," using primary sources like the CDC, which was aimed at the average visitor needing basic information, and which itself uses the "guidelike" format, I'm not sure it's accurate to say this is not encyclopedic. The article already has graphs, charts, and lists which are meant to keep the details organized for readability and reference. So it would seem that if there's a list of symptoms, then there's a purpose to keep those in a neat list also, even bulleted, due to potential the value to many readers. Being in the TOC means that anyone could just skip over it.
The alternative presentation of facts for this section are like the typical paragraph below, which you put back in. Are you saying that this sample paragraph is more useful and relevant to a topic on "symptoms and severity" than the earlier one? Personally, if I kept it in, I'd put it into a new article called something like "2009 swine flu statistics."
The alternative would be some hybrid of the two formats, but unless and until someone writes one out, then we should consider what we have. Any comments or suggestions? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 16:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
it was added as fringe.are you out of your mind.its mainstream news.WHO is investigating it and it is fringe. dont censor the truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.8.212 ( talk) 13:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I think a brief summary of the genetic makeup of this virus should be kept in the article, but most of the Genetics section - oriented more toward biologists - should be moved to influenza virus where it seems to have a much more relevant context. However, if it's moved, it should probably go into the talk page so redundant material can be surgically removed and new facts grafted in by one of their resident editors. Comments? -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 06:34, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
The content referred to is about the genetics of a single specific strain at the point of its creation of a single subtype of a single species. It is far too specific to belong in any article other than this one. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 21:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I have pasted all the text into a new article
H1N1/Influenza/A/B96.3 as there is simply too much info for an existing article. The article needs some cleanup, ref fixing, and probably a better name, but its a start. --
ThaddeusB (
talk) 00:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the source, Australia and Thailand appear to be properly specified as "1+" infections, but they are showing up with the colour of the "50+" category. Anyone know what's going on? -- π! 14:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I think a map showing the number of infections in a country per 1000 of the population would be a good addition to this page. I think it would be very interesting to see which countries have the highest proportion of their population infected, this is generally far more interesting than the overall number of infections in acountry. Does anyone agree/disagree and would anyone be able to create it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.217.164.171 ( talk) 14:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is this page not updated as soon as news about confirmed cases in countries not listed breaks. People use this page as a reference and need the page to be updated within minutes of news breaking
See subject line —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.21.22 ( talk) 07:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Is the pandemic just getting to big for Wikipedia/Wikipeia users to handle? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.21.22 ( talk) 07:48, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Look, Wikipedia's purpose is that anyone can edit it. Even new users and IPs. This means that the information can only be updated when someone does it. We're not paid to sit here and type about pandemics. We do it as a hobby. Demanding the page be kept updated is pointless and using it as a source - particularly with ever-changing information - is more so. So why not cease complaining and start updating? GARDEN 11:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I was just wondering why Greenland is not marked when Denmark is? Like how Svalbard and Alaska are marked because Norway and the main US is. Aleco ( talk) 13:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add to the list that in Belgium we have a 5th person infected. 91.180.26.13 ( talk) 19:45, 16 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.180.26.13 ( talk) 19:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Bio-Medicine CDC says confirmed cases, including 2 new deaths, may not reflect true reach of the disease
"SATURDAY, May 16 (HealthDay News) -- While the official tally of confirmed U.S. swine flu cases topped 4,700 on Friday, experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now estimate the true number of infections at more than 100,000 nationwide." --
Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 23:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Concerns about the Mexican Health System Mexican public health system is oversaturate, an important lack of drugs forces physicians to prescribe what is available not what is needed. Physicians in the public health system never have time to upgrade their knowledge, no research is done. The IMSS (Mexican Institute of Social Security) used to do some medical research, a recent director forbid any research activity, in his opinion it was unnecessary.
Many people have died of curable diseases just because they did not got immediate attention. I know cases of people that have died of cancer because they got an appointment 3 months after they ask the service at the IMSS, at that time the curable stage changed to a terminal stage. Under this conditions as a patient would you ask help just for a cold? What could be your attitude as a physician working in an oversaturate clinic, when you receive a cold patient? Take paracetamol and go home!
This facts should be discussed in the article. The A-H1N1 is not the unique killer, a destroyed Public Health System not providing correct attention to public health. This irresponsible omission is a latent danger to develop new resistant strains of pathogen agents. Apart of all the people dying of curable diseases, just for lack of medical attention.
A bad quality and insufficient Health System is an important cause of diseases in this flu sprout.
Please include this information in the article.
Update the main page table - 2 more deaths in US TX and AZ. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6425771.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.194.21.159 ( talk) 17:36, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Just a question, not a proposed addition or anything, but it seems we should be in alert level six. The criteria for level six is described as sustained community outbreaks in two or more WHO regions. Obviously North America is sustained, and now there are 100 confirmed cases in spain along with the various numbers reported by neighbooring European countries. Sounds like a sustained community outbreak in another WHO region to me. So whats up with this? Is the WHO sleeping? Drew Smith W hat I've done 10:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Came across this nicely done graph and thought maybe it could be used in the article in place of ours (top right). I suspect that because it took Reuters a lot of time to create this, they'll update it continually. If others like it, we should consider some options: whether a screen capture would be "fair use" to upload; request permission; recreate our own; or just add a link. And of course they would get full credit mention so they might be more than willing to have Wiki post it.
Any thoughts?-- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 22:12, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Some scientists seem to be very concerned about mutations of H1N1 mixing with H5N1 in Asia. Is this worth mentioning in the article anywhere? Perhaps a section dedicated to topics of concern? I mean the WHO made a pretty big deal about letting everyone know a new virus had arrived. This might be a good place to put such speculation. Just my 2 cents. Yogiudo ( talk) 01:41, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Below is my proposal for a third section under the heading "Initial outbreak in the US and Mexico". An earlier version had been deleted by Abecedare who judged it OR. I have now added more and more authoritative refererences. I do think an update on the US situation is sorely needed. As my earlier attempt was controversial , I will post my proposal here first. Please check for problems (and please give concrete reasons and/or sources for your critique), and suggest amendations if possible. The following text (the proposed new content) has its html tags on the references removed so the references show in the text. This is because footnotes are apparently not visible on discussion pages and I wanted you all to be able to see the references. As you may note, I have given a number of quotations(later to show in the footnotes), if this isn't ok in WP please tell me. Geometer9420 ( talk) 13:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Ø ===US Situation in May=== By mid-May, the Virus appeared to be widespread and freely circulating in much of the United States. About half of all cases of influenza tested turned out to be swine flu, and in some areas, flu activity was reported to be as high as in peak influenza season, an unusual pattern for May. ref"The fact that novel H1N1 activity is now detected through seasonal surveillance systems is an indication that there are higher levels of influenza-like illness in the United States than is normal for this time of year. About half of all influenza viruses being detected are novel H1N1 viruses." CDC A(H1N1) update May 15th 2009; http://www.enewspf.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7538:h1n1-flu-swine-flu-cdc-update-may-14-2009&catid=88888984:swine-flu&Itemid=88889934, accessed 5-16-2009,/refref" "But what we're seeing is that there are some areas that actually have reports of the amounts of respiratory disease that are coming into their clinics that are equivalent to peak influenza season, and so that's an indicator to us that there's something going on with the amount of influenza disease out there." Dan Jernigan of the CDC in the Canadian Press, http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5iSxR2p2Bjjs0h_PBiLSrhiVOA7kg, accessed on 5-16-2009). On May 6th, US schools closed because of flu outbreaks were encouraged to re-open, as the virus was then no longer perceived as a threat by officials. ref"Schools shut by flu can reopen: Outbreak may be milder than feared", Washington Post 5-6-2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/05/AR2009050500719.html, acessed 5-16-2009./ref Ø According to a CDC report on May 6th, the US as well as the Mexican swine flu cases show an unusually high proportion of severe illness with hospitalization in the middle age group, while seasonal flu is a problem mainly for the elderly.ref"First, the percentage of patients requiring hospitalization appears to be higher than would be expected during a typical influenza season (3). Second, the age distribution of hospitalizations for novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infection is different than that of hospitalizations for seasonal influenza, which typically occur among children aged <2 years, adults aged ≥65 years, and persons with chronic health conditions (3). In Mexico and the United States, the percentage of patients requiring hospitalization has been particularly high among persons aged 30--44 years." Quote from: Update: Novel Influenza A(H1N1) Virus Infections Worldwide, May 6, 2009, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.ref By mid-May, three schools in Queens, New York City were closed after an outbreak in one of them that caused life-threatening disease in an assistant principal. The school most affected is located within a two-mile radius of the prep school severely hit by the earlier NYC school outbreak (initiated by students returning from Mexico). According to the ill principal's wife, who is a teacher at one of the schools closed in mid-May, her principal had wanted to close her/his school as soon as a surge of flu-like illness among the students became known, but was told not to by city health officials, who said that would only cause a panic. Another of the schools was forced to stay open despite confirmed cases of swine flu among the students. refWashington Post, May 15threfrefhttp://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/05/15/2009-05-15_queens_assistant_principals_other_health_issues_preclude_treatmentswine_flu_cond.htmlrefrefNew York Daily News, http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/05/15/2009-05-15_queens_assistant_principals_other_health_issues_preclude_treatmentswine_flu_cond.html, accessed 5-16-2009/ref Geometer9420 ( talk) 13:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Let me (roughly) summarize what the proposed sections says:
The problem with this is that:
In summary, I think this section violates WP:SYNT and is undue her; although some parts may be relevant in 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States if the content is not already covered there. Abecedare ( talk) 17:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Mild U.S. Flu Cases May Exceed Official Tally
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/16/health/16influenza.html?hp
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
NYT Published: May 15, 2009
The real number of swine flu cases in the United States could be “upwards of 100,000,” a top public health official estimated on Friday — far higher than the official count of 7,415 cases confirmed by laboratories.
The official, Dr. Daniel Jernigan, head of flu epidemiology for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at a news conference that the official number gave an inaccurate picture of the outbreak because so few mildly sick people were being tested.
... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.101.142.131 ( talk) 00:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Remove [15] GTNz ( talk) 05:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Towards the bottom of "Symptoms and severity" is a sentence which reads In all, 36 three people died. I'd fix it myself if I knew what it meant. A case for experts I think. Fainites barley scribs 22:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
There are 8 confirmed death in the US, 3 in TX, 2 in AZ, 1 in WA and NY and Missouri and 1 is under investigation in NY ( [84]..-- Vrysxy! ( talk) 23:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I see that in the article's opening sentence the word epidemic has been changed to pandemic. The WHO have not yet raised the Pandemic Alert level to 6: we are still at level 5, 'Pandemic preparedness'. Was there a reason to change from epidemic to pandemic at this point in time? -- Dionliddell ( talk) 09:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
To add to this. As soon as I saw that the article was now talking about a 'pandemic', I thought straight away that the WHO had raised the alert level. For others that view this page (sometimes obsessively as I do) they may also think that that is the case. I personally think that the article should be reverted back to epidemic, and only changed to a pandemic if we go to level 6. -- Dionliddell ( talk) 11:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree. I just saw a recent article just a few minutes ago clarifying that the WHO has still not raised it to a pandemic, so it would seem that this page should either use epidemic or refer to the 'Pandemic Preparedness' state. I'd change it myself, but for the fact I'm a relatively new user on a massively viewed page. Lost puppies ( talk) 17:37, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Some WHO doctrine (
"Pandemic influenza preparedness and mitigation in refugee and displaced populations" (PDF). 2008.) seems to have drawn from (Reynolds B, Seeger MW (2005). "Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model". Journal of Health Communication. 10: 43–55.) (if someone can check that). Back in 2005, raised the issue of ambiguity in this definition, but it doesn't seem to have been addressed anywhere I can find.(WHO-AFRO Division of Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases (April 2005).
"Report on the 1st Consultation of the Technical Advisory Group on Measles and Rubella Control in the African Region" (PDF). WHO.{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: date and year (
link))
LeadSongDog
come howl 17:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Why does WHO have to say its a pandemic for us to say its a pandemic. If we used the definition of pandemic ourselves then we would call it pandemic. WHO's criteria for phase 6 are filled to be honest i don't know why it hasn't been declard yet. i say leave it as pandemic... as that is what swine flu now is. Wuku ( talk) 08:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
All this panic is senseless.More persons were killled by suicide, than for this kind of flu. Agre22 ( talk) 03:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)agre22
Regardless, your opinion on whether the panic is senseless or not has little to do with whether it's a pandemic or an epidemic. Yellowlarakin ( talk) 07:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
This obviously IS a pandemic. It doesn't matter what level the WHO says we are. We could be at level 10 million, it wouldn't change anything to reality. 206.47.141.21 ( talk) 13:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I'd be interested to see some mention of individual cases. What is the age group, how long was the patient sick before dying, did they go to the hospital, how long had it been since they got sick until it was diagnosed as swine flu. etc.. Hreinn ( talk) 01:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
First can someone tell the bot to stop archiving so quickly?
What do you think of the previously healthy person passing away? Did he seek medical attention early? Did he take care of himself? Was it cold in New York like it was in Mexico City? According to his family he had fairly mild pre-existing conditions which were gout and high blood pressure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/05/15/ST2009051503651.html Daniel.Cardenas ( talk) 03:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
May I add the information that (except in media reports and soothing statements by health officials) there is no indication that severe disease is absent or rarer in healthy than in unhealthy people. Let me cite the CDC: "Information is available on the clinical course of illness for 22 patients with laboratory-confirmed illness who were hospitalized, including seven patients who died. Five of the 15 surviving patients and one of the seven patients who died had underlying chronic medical conditions."( http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5817a1.htm)In other words, six of the seven dead had no underlying medical conditions. By the way, one US pregnant woman who died was reported to have been "chronically ill", but the case report (also published by the CDC) shows that her chronic illness, if any, certainly wasn't serious: "On April 15, a woman aged 33 years at 35 weeks' gestation with a 1-day history of myalgias, dry cough, and low-grade fever was examined by her obstetrician-gynecologist. She had been in relatively good health and had been taking no medications other than prenatal vitamins, although she had a history of psoriasis and mild asthma." ( http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5818a3.htm) Geometer9420 ( talk) 06:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
please expand h1n1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.89.103.12 ( talk) 15:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Currently, "Symptoms and severity" includes the following:
"Differences in the viruses or co-infection are also being considered as possible causes. In 1918, influenza weakened the infected, and it was then lung infections such as pneumonia which killed 3% of them. In the current outbreak, the first deaths (13 and 21 April) were diagnosed as 'atypical pneumonias', a pneumonia which, helped by the flu, becomes more dangerous."
All of this, as far as I can see, is unsourced. It is also at least partly wrong and/or misleading.
1."In the current outbreak, the first deaths (13 and 21 April) were diagnosed as 'atypical pneumonias', a pneumonia which, helped by the flu, becomes more dangerous." This sounds as if the patients had died of a pneumonia causally unrelated to the flu. This is untrue. The patients died of viral pneumonia caused by the flu; eg, they died of the flu. "Atypical pneumonia" was the first (incorrect) diagnosis in the first patient and reflects the fact that seasonal flu does not normally cause severe non-bacterial pneumonia in healthy adults. They believed she had SARS, but it turned out she had swine flu.
2. "In 1918, influenza weakened the infected, and it was then lung infections such as pneumonia which killed 3% of them." That is the way influenza normally kills, especiually seasonal flu: bacterial pneumonia (a superinfection) is the usual immediate cause of death in seasonal influenza cases. What was special about 1918 was the fact that many especially among younger people died of viral pneuimonia (i.e. pneumonia caused by the flu virus itself) and/or a cytokine storm related to it. The statement is misleading in this context.
3. The pragraph is meant to explain why the disease was more fatal in Mexico than in the US.However, it is far from clear whether the disease was in fact more lethal in Mexico than in the US. US and Mexican lethal cases show the same young age pattern, and the fact that the US has a slightly lower rate of dead vs infected now may be due to sampling error or some other statistical artifact. Geometer9420 ( talk) 18:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
(Sorry, the footnote is invisible. The reference is to an official CDC report which includes all of the above information: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5817a1.htm.)
It looks like Canada has stopped reporting daily figures of A H1N1. Since last Saturday, all we can get is sporadic data from just a few provinces (Nova Scotia, Quebec mostly) with the local number of cases rising at a steady rate. But Health Canada has not updated its website since May 15th/16th, and the officials keep using outdated figures (from May 16th) in press conferences and press releases ever since. From local medias, we know that new cases were found in Nova Scotia, Quebec (at least 16 new cases Monday in Quebec). According to a linear growth model projections, the number of cases in Canada should reach 575 as of Tuesday May 19th. 70.83.220.148 ( talk) 20:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
There were reports of this being Biological Terrorism, but I don't see any info here about that?- NootherIDAvailable ( talk) 07:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I made a lot of revisions to the lead so feel free to suggest or make any repairs. The goal was to trim out excess details already in the main body, to update with more current news summaries, and to simplify for readability. Adding the Bloomberg quote (with cite) was questionable but it seemed to be a nice summary of what might be happening in other cities, here and abroad. -- Wikiwatcher1 ( talk) 23:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The introduction states that " there is mounting evidence that the symptoms are even milder than the seasonal flu." The statement is OR and I think unwarranted, certainly in this exposed position in the article. I have not seen a single dependable source saying that swine flu is milder than seasonal flu, and I haven't found the statement in the newspaper article given as the source for the paragraph, though admittedly I perused the article rather quickly; an LA Times article that cites Mayor Bloomberg as an expert is certainly not an authoritative source on the epidemiology of swine flu. On the contrary, available data currently points to a somewhat higher case fatality rate in swine flu. (Given as 0.4 vs. 0.1 by Science/WHO, although that is still very uncertain). Swine flu may be milder for people above 65. So far all of the US fatalities and most hospitalizations were of young and middle age, the reverse pattern is seen with seaonal flu. (The newly published immunological data show 33% immunity against swine flu in the oldest age cohort, and practically no immunity in the rest of the population.) Younger adults rarely require hospitalization with seasonal flu, but suffer disproportionatly in the current outbreak. So current data indicate that at least for adults below 60, swine flu seems to be more problematic than seasonal flu. Also, swine flu could affect more people as the population is largely immunologically naive; swine flu was thus judged to be more contagious than seasonal flu.
All in all, an unqualified statement that it swine flu is milder than seasonal flu is clearly wrong at this point in time.
The same (OR?) section in the introduction also states that of 201 confirmed cases in New York, only one was a fatality (and of 279 in Japan, none was); apparently citing this is as evidence that swine flu is less severe than seaonal flu. This does not makes sense statistically. Seasonal flu has a case fatality rate of 0.1%, i.e. one death per thousand cases. 201 New York flu patients do not a statistic make; but if they did, they would indicate a case fatality rate of 0.5, five times higher than with seasonal influenza. (Note that I am not saying that this is a valid statistic.) The sentence as it stands now is plain nonsense.
I think the whole statement including the part about New York and Japan needs to be deleted. The judgemental sentence about Japan overreacting (according to whose standards?) has no place in an encyclopedic article. If one does want to speak of the fatality rate or the severity in the introduction, it would be appropriate to say that the fatality rate is probably not very much higher than the one fatality per thousand seen in seasonal flu, although younger adults may be disproportionately affected. Geometer9420 ( talk) 07:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following three sentences from the lede:
As of May 21st, for instance, despite 201 confirmed cases in New York City, most have been mild and there has been only one confirmed death from the virus. "New York City officials struggle for balanced response to swine flu", Los Angeles Times, May 21, 2009Similarly, Japan has reported 279, mostly mild flu cases, and no deaths. "Spread of Swine Flu Puts Japan in Crisis Mode", New York Times, May 21, 2009 And in Mexico, where the outbreak began last month, the government lowered its swine flu alert level as there have been no new infections for a week. "Mexico City ends swine flu alert, no cases in week" Associated Press, May 21, 2009
which violated wikipedia guidelines againsts
synthesis, by selectively and incorrectly citing examples to try to establish that "there is mounting evidence that the symptoms are so far milder than health officials feared." After all, why do we cite 1/279 deaths/cases in NY and not 3/500 deaths in Arizona ? Also the last example is simply wrong - the newspaper report is about
Mexico city not the country as a whole!
I believe the earlier statements in the paragraph (as reworded by Wikiwacher1) are true, and therefore haven't removed them from the article. However we need to add a reference for those statements, and perhaps remove the POVish adjective mounting, unless it is specifically supported by the source(s).
Abecedare (
talk) 09:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
The new version as revised by Abecedare and Wikiwatcher is fine. Thank you both. "Milder than feared" is perfectly okay (because what virologists feared was Spanish flu or even bird-flu like virulence); what I objected to was "milder than seasonal influenza" which is not supported by current stats. Thanks for collecting the citations, Wikiwatcher, but note they don't say milder than seasonal flu. (By the way, the WHO's wording "most of the cases at this time continue to be mild cases, where people recover without needing hospitalization although there are some people that do get fatal and serious illnesses" would have been true even of the Spanish flu, which had a 97,5 % recovery rate yet still managed to kill millions of people.) I dont think anyone in the know still wonders "why the disease was worse in Mexico", Mexico has 78 confirmed fatalities, the US now has ten, simply because the epidemic started later, and at a time when normal influenza season was over. What you still read occasionally is that victims in Mexico were mosty healthy while most (but not all) US victims are reported having chronic disease, however, that is probably due to the fact that conditions like mild asthma, being overweight, pregnant or having sleep apnea were not counted as chronic disease in Mexico while with the US cases they were. (Which is of course OR which is why I won't post it in the article! ;-)) Cheers. Geometer9420 ( talk) 12:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
NEJM
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).