Overhyping the flu

Over at Instapundit Glenn posts a doctor’s comment,

The main way that flu kills is by predisposing its victims to “superinfection” by bacterial illnesses - in 1918, we had no antibiotics for these superimposed infections, but now we have plenty. Such superinfections, and the transmittal of flu itself, were aided tremendously by the crowded conditions and poor sanitation of the early 20th century - these are currently vastly improved as well. Flu hits the elderly the hardest, but the “elderly” today are healthier, stronger, and better nourished than ever before. Our medical infrastructure is vastly better off, ranging from simple things like oxygen and sterile i.v. fluids, not readily available in 1918, to complex technologies such as respirators and dialysis. Should we be concerned? Sure, better safe than sorry, and concerns about publishing the sequence are worth discussing. Should we panic? No - my apologies to the fearmongers, but we will never see another 1918.
instapundit

Gosh I hope the good doctor is right. He certainly has a point that the “elderly” today are in much better shape than they were in 1918. (Not to mention the fact that four years of WWI was not at all good for the populations in Europe and the worry was not good for the Canadian or American population.) And he is certainly right to say that the medical infrastructure is vastly better than it was in 1918 when medicine was barely scientific.

However, as we saw with the SARS outbreak in Toronto, it does not take many severe respiratory cases to overwhelm or come close to overwhelming that medical infrastructure. An outbreak in which, say, 1 in 10 people caught the flu would put paid to the medical infrastructure. Thee are not 30 million high tech acute care beds in America.

Just as importantly, what is known of the avian flu suggests that fully 50% of those infected die from the disease. Which strongly suggests this is a rather different proposition from the 1918 flu where the mortality was considerably lower and may well have been caused by pre-existing conditions.

The point of writing about avian flu is to try to improve the chances that very early in an outbreak government will take the measure necessary to ensure a) that travel is restricted - shut off completely - from regions where the flu has broken out, b) that internal quarantine is imposed very early on to try to limit, or at least slow, the spread of the flu, c) that schools and public places are shut tight as soon as possible,

This all requires planning. It requires people to be thinking in terms of an entire school year where every child is a home schooled child. Or where groceries are delivered curbside and people dash out to pick them up.

In the absence of a vaccine or any really effective treatment, the only way of slowing the spread of the flu - or any other pathogen - will be very strict quarantine with the full support of the population. It is not fearmongering to consider how this can be implemented. it is simply prudent.

Update: From the Guardian

If that’s not sufficiently scary, there’s more. Epidemiologists estimate the 1918 virus killed 2.5% of those infected. But we know that GenZ kills 70% of the people it infects. In other words, the true worst-case scenario based on 1918 could be 1 billion deaths worldwide. This is what Davis means by the monster at our door and why he believes scientists, and the press, are right to sound the alarm.
the guardian

Written by jay on October 18th, 2005 with 4 comments.
Read more articles on bird flu.

• [+] Digg: Feature this article
• [+] Del.icio.us: Bookmark this article
• [+] Furl: Bookmark this article

Related articles

• Oh Great… (May 24th, 2006)
• Turkey troubles (January 9th, 2006)
• Ethics before the fact: Talking about Pandemic (November 28th, 2005)
• Of Splogs and Content (October 27th, 2005)
• Python makes this headline impossible (October 24th, 2005)