Lets take a look at the last 3 avian flu pandemics in the USA

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/pandemics.htm

1918-19, "Spanish flu," , caused the highest number of known influenza deaths: more than 500,000 people died in the United States, and up to 50 million people may have died worldwide. Many people died within the first few days after infection, and others died of complications later. Nearly half of those who died were young, healthy adults. Influenza A (H1N1) viruses still circulate today after being introduced again into the human population in the 1970s.

1957-58, "Asian flu," , caused about 70,000 deaths in the United States. First identified in China in late February 1957, the Asian flu spread to the United States by June 1957.

1968-69, " Hong Kong flu," , caused about 34,000 deaths in the United States. This virus was first detected in Hong Kong in early 1968 and spread to the United States later that year. Influenza A (H3N2) viruses still circulate today.

Both the 1957-58 and 1968-69 pandemics were caused by viruses containing a combination of genes from a human influenza virus and an avian influenza virus. The origin of the 1918-19 pandemic virus is not clear. snip


1918-19 happened before the antibacterial effect of penicillin was discovered (1929).

More than 500,000 people died in the United States.

The second pandemic occurred during 1957-58 and happened after the effects of antibiotics were discovered.

About 70,000 deaths deaths in the United States from the 1957-58 .

The third pandemic occurred during 1968-69, and again after the widespread use of antibiotics had begun and there were about 34,000 deaths.

Is anyone starting to see a pattern here?

And now keep in mind that 36,000 people will die in the USA this year from the human variant of the flu just as that many have died every year for the past 10 years from human flu. So who is kidding who here?

Don

[benburch]

1. penicillin has zero effect on a virus. nt

[jsamuel]

2. not necessarily true: can help keep the immune system up

if your immune system is down because of the virus, it can make you more susceptible to other problems, like bacteria.

[MuseRider]

3. But with the flu

often comes bacterial illness and that is part of the problem for many people. Perhaps that was why antibiotics were brought into the discussion.

My experience with type A Influenza is always followed by a bacterial pneumonia. Just my experience but I think it is one shared by many of us who are immunosuppressed and the elderly.

This is only opinion here, not based on my medical knowledge.

Edit because spell check changed immunosuppressed?

[Ladyhawk]

41. Yes. After a cold or the flu, I almost always get a bacterial infection.

I usually get a nasty sinus infection...ack! Last year I was lucky I didn't get sick. I was so careful, washing my hands often and never touching my face.

[Midlodemocrat]

4. But would definitely help a secondary infection, like

bacterial pneumonia.

[NNN0LHI]

5. Most of those people didn't die from the flu. They died from pneumonia

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6315717/site/newsweek/%20

<snip>The worst by far was in 1918, when at least 20 million people died. It was called the "Spanish flu," but a new book by John M. Barry, "The Great Influenza," argues that it actually emerged in rural Kansas, a place where, as in parts of present-day Asia, people lived in close proximity to domestic fowl and pigs.

The 1918 flu—variant H1N1—spread with terrifying speed; in six days at a single Army base, Barry writes, the hospital census went from 610 to more than 4,000. It killed with devastating swiftness: pedestrians literally collapsed in the street; people woke up healthy and were dead by nightfall. It attacked multiple organs in the body, but always the respiratory system first, laying waste to the defenses by which the body keeps pathogens out of the lungs. Most victims succumbed to a secondary infection of bacterial pneumonia, for which there was no treatment in 1918. But in other cases, the virus was fatal in itself. Multiplying explosively throughout the respiratory tract, it provoked an immune response so furious that it devastated the lung's delicate tissues. And it was those deaths that explained H1N1's unique terror. Influenza typically kills the very young and the old, whose immune systems are too weak to fight it off, but Spanish flu killed young men and women in the prime of life.

[Sialia]

13. Flu pneumonia

Many of the 1918 victims died from a sort of self-induced pneumonia. Basically it resulted from a violent overreaction by the immune system that caused lung tissue to become leaky -- a bloody fluid filled the lungs and the patients pretty much drowned in their own body fluid. This could happen within a few days after the onset of flu symptoms, much too quick for a bacterial secondary infection to take hold.

H5N1 has a similar capability -- it frequently overstimulates the immune system. This is one reason that young and healthy people with strong immune systems are particularly susceptible to die from this type of flu.

[NNN0LHI]

14. Are you suggesting that antibiotics would not have helped in 1918? n/t

[chopper]

23. some, but not as much as you'd think.

the 1918 flu killed by infiltrating the lungs and causing such a strong immune response ('cytokine storm') that the ensuing battle completely destroyed the lungs, filling them with fluid.

secondary infections happened as well, but i don't know how effective penicillin would have been in someone fighting off such a wicked tough flu.

[preciousdove]

6. But it takes care of opportunistic bacterial confections ie pneumonia,

meningitis, staff, strep etc.

One theory about the 1918 flu was the large number of young people thought to carry the TB bacillus.

[rodeodance]

9. it takes 8-10 months to produce mass vaccinations. The US is slow on

the draw for this one.

[ArkDem]

12. It's usually not the virus that kills. The secondary bacterial

infection is the killer.

[donco6]

32. True, it doesn't kill the virus, but . . .

If it helps you survive long enough to assist your own defenses, it can be valuable. If we'd had it during the Spanish flu, we would not have see as many deaths - just as the statistics bear out.

[papau]

7. 1918 was a 5% death rate, the new flu looks like a 50% death rate

and no current "cure" works on it - although there is a vacine that is being given WH folks.

The no brainer is to order up the vacine - blow through a half billion $ - and avoid a problem

But in Bush World only non rich unimportant folks are likely to die - and he needs that half billion for other things (the run up to the war with Iran).

This coming "pandemic" could be a 30,000 dead no problem - meaning no bigger problem than usual -

but we are current headed by a Bush that has CDC getting its budget cut as he trys to justify moving more money's into defense (you have heard of our quaranteine via military plan - where the military have not been given the vacine, so such duty is to expose them to the 50% death rate possibility)

Bush could screw up a one car parade....


:-(

[Dogmudgeon]

11. More recent statistics

As the flu has been spreading out, the mortality has been falling. I don't know what does this, but it's common to every flu and just about every other infectious viral disease.

I think the last group of cases from Vietnam had a mortality of under 10%, which is probably more reasonable. But even 5%, the rate under Spanish Swine 1918 H1N1, would be devastating with an easily-transmissible virus.

The big fear should be that in a few years, with more desertification and more famine, that a similar flu could infect hundreds of millions of starving people, and produce mortality rates of 30-90%. I don't think we've ever seen a disease like that.

We lucked out and had an easy flu season last year, but this year's season is still anybody's guess. Normally, 30,000 people die of the flu in a year. If we don't have enough vaccine to go around, and if we have a 100,000 death flu year, Bush might as well just pack his bags and move in with Bob Mugabe.

--p!

[papau]

15. Thanks for the heads up - that 50% was scary - glad to hear it's dropped

:-)

But it is still a no brainer - IMHO - to spend 0.5 Billion and buy up some vacine -

indeed that seems more important than saving a few dollars for next years war with Iran.

[papau]

17. Latest NY Times report on why we should fear/prepare for new Bird Flu

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/05/health/05cnd-flu.html?ei=5094&en=054b7bbcd1082219&hp=&ex=1128571200&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print

[NNN0LHI]

19. Boy that is a relief. If the NYT says its so well it just ain't so n/t

[madrchsod]

8. 1918-19

war,pestilence,and disease. living conditions were no better in many parts of this country than medieval times.
flu itself kills very few healthy people, it`s the very young,old,or those with compromised immunity system that succumb to the flu...

it`s bush`s new terror weapon-use the military to blockade parts of american? he` must be smoking meth...

[Mojorabbit]

18. This type of flu

kills those in their prime not like regular flu. It causes the immune system to go overboard and attack the body. The whole world is preparing for this not just the USA for heaven's sake.

[Silverhair]

25. That was exactly backwards in 1918.

The young and healthy with the best immune systems were the most vunerable. See the post above about the immune system reactions.

Here is a web site with a death chart for 1918 flu. (Link won't work)

Google: 1918 flu mortality

Click on: Luk et al., Mortality during the 1918 Influenza Pandemic

Scroll down and you will see a chart of the mortality distribution that shows the EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU SAID.

[NNN0LHI]

30. All three pandemics initially killed younger people at a greater rate

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/idsa/influenza/panflu/biofacts/panflu.html

All three pandemics were characterized by a shift in age distribution of deaths to younger population under age 65 (at least initially); shift was particularly dramatic during 1918 pandemic (see References: NIH: Focus on the flu; HHS: Influenza pandemics; Simonsen 2004; Webster 1997).

[peacetalksforall]

10. Vacation reading - Military rule

Two months ago we were told that Bush had 4-5 books with him. One was related to a portion of his speech yesterday. But he ended up talking about it in terms of military rule.

Should we jump to conclusions about the foot in the door and whether it is more than a foot?

Do you think the Tri-Lateral Commission leaves it up to individual countries to reach their common agenda for the world and if so, do you think they would consider this bird virus a form of wmd?

By the way, can anyone name anyone who is researching the flare up of untimely deaths of many of the world's more accomplished bio-chemists?

Last questions - do you think the TLC right wing think tankers spend a little time or a lot of time trying to figure out how to convert this country to military rule?

[NNN0LHI]

16. Wonder why the media insist on dwelling on and on about the...

...pre-antibiotics era 1918-19 pandemic while seeming to completely ignore the post-antibiotic era pandemics of 1957-58, 1968-69? Hell we even had a DUer named Pandemic_1918 running around here for a while. Never seen no DUers named Pandemic_1957 or Pandemic_1968 yet have ya?

Don

[Silverhair]

27. About DUer pandemic_1918

DU rules forbid me to say his name. I can tell you a few things about him.

PhD at the University of Southern California

...postdoctoral position at Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation where he developed monoclonal antibody technology

...he developed the flu monoclonal antibody, which is widely used throughout the pharmaceutical, biotech, and research industries

He also produced a broad panel of monoclonal antibodies...These monoclonal antibodies were distributed worldwide to researchers by the National Cancer Institute

He is involved with attempting to invent a vaccine for Avian Flu.

pandemic_1918 is one of the leading world authorities on Avian Flu. He knows what he is talking about.

[LisaL]

20. I do not think healthy young adults die from the human variant of the flu.

[NNN0LHI]

21. If they did they wouldn't be healthy young adults any more n/t

[Silverhair]

28. They did in 1918.

However, the regular flu attacks the weak. The 1918 flu selected the young and healthy to die.

[Lori Price CLG]

22. Yes, but Bush's bioterror team has been busy working on this one...

to get the 150 million deaths worldwide. They want the last of the national resources left for themselves and Halliburton.

Lori Price
http://www.legitgov.org/flu_oddities.html

[progressivebydesign]

24. And people died regularly from simple childbirth in 1918.

I think some posters here have hit the nail on the head when talking about secondary infections and the flu. Pneumonia is treatable, but unfortunately will kill many elderly and infirm. There doesn't seem to be a timeline for this so-called pandemic, but it sure scares the shit out of everyone.

[Timmy5835]

26. That's because.......

People LOVE to be scared.

[Francine Frensky]

33. That's because hand-washing was rare and drs. used to go from cadavres to

putting their hands into women during birth, and *duh* of course there were infections.

[NNN0LHI]

38. Barbers were probably still removing bullets in 1918

[Silverhair]

29. The origin of the 1918 flu IS VERY CLEAR.

It got it's start in Russell, Kansas.

And samples of the 1918 flu have been recovered from bodies buried back then in the permafrost in Alaska. There was a lengthy article about it in Scientific American a few months ago.

[lateo]

31. They talked about this on NPR today.

Scientists have pieced the DNA of the 1918 flu together from various tissue samples. The believe that the modern bird flu is pretty similar and not likely to cause the same amount of death as the 1918 flu. The reason for this is the 1918 flu passed parts of itself along and it ended up in the various strains and we now have immunities that will help.
It could still cause a lot of deaths but nothing like the 1918 flu.

[Silverhair]

35. That's not what the Scientific American article said.

Also, the death rates in Vietname have been pretty high.

[NNN0LHI]

34. This suggests that 1957 pandemic likely made more people sick than in 1918

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/I/Influenza.html

Two pandemics of influenza have swept the world since the "Spanish flu" of 1918.

The "Asian" flu pandemic of 1957 and
the "Hong Kong" flu pandemic of 1968.

(The pandemic of 1957 probably made more people sick than the one of 1918. But the availability of antibiotics to treat the secondary infections, that are the usual cause of death, resulted in a much lower death rate.)

The hemagglutinin of the 1918 flu virus was H1, its neuraminidase was N1, so it is designated as an H1N1 "subtype". Here are some others.

[Carni]

36. Wow! I was three when the hong kong flu hit

I had no idea I lived through that (big deal I guess--not!)

[KitchenWitch]

37. Those pandemics were not the avian flu

Just a point of clarification...

Good work!

[mainer]

39. All flu, in a sense, is avian flu

Birds are the host reservoir of all flu viruses.

[NNN0LHI]

40. From the CDC article in the OP

>>>Both the 1957-58 and 1968-69 pandemics were caused by viruses containing a combination of genes from a human influenza virus and an avian influenza virus. The origin of the 1918-19 pandemic virus is not clear.<<<