Posted by
Andrews on Saturday, October 03, 2009 2:50:27 PM
When will the media join the rest of the world in giving up on flu panic? I know we have had SARS and "avian flu" (aren't they all either avian or porcine?), the new swine flu and whatever others, but so far, in the developed world, they have caused a handful of deaths, just as the "regular flu" does every year. And, despite constant media panics, there has been no repeat of 1918.
Then again, it is absolutely absurd to think a "pandemic" will cause a repeat of 1918. That was pure doom-mongering nonsense. In 1918 we had no penicillin, we could not treat opportunistic infections, Europeans were suffering from malnutrition, cholera, typhus and many other consequences of years of trench warfare and economic hardship caused by war. Not to mention that in an era with inadequate refrigeration, lack of out-of-season fresh fruits and vegetables and other things we take for granted, nutrition in general was rather poor compared to today. To think even the worst flu would somehow cause deaths comparable to 1918 is just absurd. (And, in fact, we have had two "pandemics" since 1918 that caused nothing of the kind. A fact the fear mongers often fail to mention.)
The truth is these new flus are just the flu. Yes, we may have slightly less resistance as they mutate, but they are not some super bug, they are the flu. If we are healthy and well fed, and receive treatment for opportunistic infections that arise, we will survive. A few sick or weak or elderly may die, and so those groups should probably be vaccinated (as they should be for normal flu as well), but for healthy adults it is remarkably unlikely the flu will do you in. A few might draw the short straw and through bizarre circumstances die from the flu, but that happens with the "ordinary flu" as well. So it is not remarkable when it happens, whether from ordinary seasonal flu, or a new variation.
There are plenty of things that are frightening, most of which the news ignores (a nuclear Iran, North Korean missiles that can reach the west coast, our lack of missile defense, an expansionist Russia attacking our now-former allies in eastern Europe, socialized medicine, continued inflation, and so on), but the flu is not one of them. That the media continues to push this tells me two things. That I cannot trust the media to realistically evaluate relative risk and that they have very little concept of what worries the average American. Yes, we had our bout of flu panic, but after several years of doomsdays that never materialized, I know no one still worrying about the flu (at least who wasn't a hypochondriac already), yet the media keeps reviving the flu and dubbing it our worst threat. It makes me wonder what they would think the worst threat was should the flu vanish. Alien abductions? Mad cow disease? They seem pretty oblivious to much greater and very real threats.
POSTSCRIPT
I forgot that I already wrote on this same topic back in April. However, as the media keeps pushing it, I suppose I am justified in continuing to rebut it. If you want to see my earlier thoughts, read "
Already Sick of Hearing "Pandemic"".
UPDATE
In responding to a silly comment that ascribed a 25% mortality rate to H1N1 I found
a very interesting post arguing that even the reported rate of slightly less than 1% may be too high. There are also interesting points made in the comments
following this post. In sum, it appears H1N1 may be slightly more lethal than the seasonal flus to which we are used, but not by much, and many of the numbers we see are statistical artifacts.
Funny, I just wrote about statistical artifacts last night in "
The Wrong Way to Look at Issues". Odd how everything seems to come together some days.