WHO flu Update for the day

[Hannah Bell]

7/28

As of 19:15 GMT, 28 April 2009,

Seven countries have officially reported cases of swine influenza A/H1N1 infection.

US confirmed = 64 laboratory confirmed human cases, with no deaths.

Mexico confirmed = 26 cases, seven deaths.

Canada (6)
New Zealand (3)
United Kingdom (2)
Israel (2)
Spain (2).



Compare with 7/27:

27 April 2009

United States = 40 laboratory confirmed human cases, no deaths.

Mexico = 26 confirmed human cases, seven deaths.

Canada = six cases.

Spain = one case.


7/26:

United States = 20 laboratory confirmed human cases.
(8 in New York, 7 in California, 2 in Texas, 2 in Kansas and 1 in Ohio).
All 20 cases have had mild Influenza-Like Illness with only one requiring brief hospitalization.

Mexico = 18 laboratory confirmed cases.



http://www.who.int/csr/don/en/

[Forkboy]

1. "Information is not to be feared... "

[Danger Mouse]

2. The important things is the hard numbers...

not the speculated ones.

[FourScore]

3. Yes and no.

Recombinomics experts get very frustrated with the glacial pace of testing. Meanwhile, the virus is spreading exponentially. It gives the populace a false calm.

It would be like the fire dept sending out a driver to see if there really is a fire before sending the firetruck. By the time they get thereand back and then send the truck, the house is burned to the ground.

[Hannah Bell]

5. you know the virus is spreading "exponentially" - how?

[FourScore]

8. There is a fabulous video on this topic.

I recommend the video "The Next Plague" from the History Channel. You can get it from Netflix. (The first video put out by them titled "The Plague" is also noteworthy and can be viewed at Youtube in 18 parts.)

I am using the word "exponentially" somewhat loosely.

If experts wait until tests are confirmed, then proper warnings and procedures are not put into place to minimize the infection rate early on. We are seeing that phenomenon here in NYC where the head of the Health Dept has stated that there are now HUNDREDS of suspected cases in the NYC schools.

Look at your own numbers. In three days they will be MUCH larger. I guarantee it. But let me ad, this is one time I would love to be wrong.

[Hannah Bell]

9. i see, you don't have any data, you're just speculating.

[Danger Mouse]

6. Do you have numbers to back that up?

[readmoreoften]

7. Can you clarify the process at all?

How long does it take to determine the presence of a particular viral strain in terms of testing? How long in the US? Does Mexico have the capacity to test on its own or is it sending tests elsewhere? Does the WHO retest for absolute confirmation? Their numbers are lower than, not only the media, but lesser health officials. For example, in the Austin-American statesman during a live chat between a health writer, Associate Director for emerging infectious diseases at the National Center for Emergency Medical Preparedness and Response, the writer announced the deaths in Mexico as 149 and the director did not challenge this.

Why are SO many "respectable" sources reporting numbers far higher than WHO? Is this because WHO is the *final* official count or because of a breakdown in information processing (aka everyone spouting off crap)?

[Hannah Bell]

10. iow, you're speculating.

[readmoreoften]

12. No. The poster seemed to talk as if he or she has some sort of credentials on the topic.

The question is open to anyone who has experience in the topic and/or links. How long does it take in vitro to determine a virus? Why is there such a discrepancy in numbers not just by lay newspersons but by science professionals who should know better when speaking to the public? Why is there, specifically, such a discrepancy in the numbers for Mexico?

I'm looking for actual, material answers or research links--not hype. Clearly we have a situation with AP, AFP and numerous politicos throwing around numbers. I'm curious where these numbers come from. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. What I'm trying to do is NOT speculate as well as question my general biases, etc.

[Hannah Bell]

13. according to this, within 10 minutes for routine influenza a. probably somewhat

slower for new flu, but reports in news say testing in under 36 hours.

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-technology/Rapid-Flu-Tests-May-Prove-Especially-Helpful-This-Season-13-2/


whatever the posters' expertise, he's speculating when making predictions about the future.

[readmoreoften]

14. I wasn't agreeing, I was looking for info.

Thanks. This looks like an excellent source.

[readmoreoften]

15. If you find any, more specific reports on the time it takes to test this strain, please post.

I didn't see the 36 hour note in this particular report. I did find a news article that claims it takes "a few days" http://www.sunherald.com/world/story/1302620.html

This blog did indicate that the swine H1N1 required additional molecular testing to determine whether it was a more common human H1N1 or the swine flu. Now, where time is concerned, that "additional testing" might mean an extra few seconds or a few more days.

http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2009/04/swine_flu_a_quick_overview--an.php


My interpretation of good old-fashioned materialist science is that the only honest calculation possible is this: there exists an exact number of persons/animals carrying the new H1N1; good science is whatever gets us closer to this number in real time so that it can be dealt with according to its proper magnitude (greater or lesser); good media practice is whatever gets the population in sync with the solutions provided by good science. I think it is bad form (bad media practice) for the head of the CDC to announce that he expects US deaths (unless he backs this up with good science in a way the public can understand.)

[Hannah Bell]

16. i agree.

[Hannah Bell]

17. according to this, 24-48 hrs at a state lab, & if it comes back suspicious it goes to cdc for more

testing.

http://www.emaxhealth.com/1/90/30742/swine-flu-orlando-disney-land-not-confirmed.html


however, there are a 1/2-dozen or so level 3-4 labs in the us, so not sure why everything would need to go through cdc in atlanta.

[Hannah Bell]

18. and according to this, their kit can do a fairly accurate screen:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/qiagen-provides-solutions-swine-flu/story.aspx?guid=%7BCF060413-A71D-4C36-9A0E-43466B860D25%7D&dist=msr_1

which, according to this, would take about 2-4 hrs (rt-pcr, polymerase chain rxn)

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/diagnosis/rapidlab.htm

[FourScore]

19. I get alot of my information from Dr. Nimon.

Here is a video I found where he is being interviewed about the swine flu. Watch this or listen to it while online.

http://www.wpxi.com/video/19313969/index.html

[Hannah Bell]

20. That opens to no video for me.

[FourScore]

21. Works for me.

[Hannah Bell]

22. Don't know what to tell you, it doesn't for me.

[NeedleCast]

11. "False Calm"

HAHAHAHAHAH!

I love it.

[FourScore]

4. k/r