Swine Flu Quarantines and Immunizations in Fall 2009????

[ralphfurley]

[quote=Arraya]
4: 1/3 of it’s victims are young and have no underlying condition. Pregnant women are most susceptible. 90% are under 65
[/quote]
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t agree with this one.

I work in a children’s hospital and all the kids that died from complications related to the swine flu also had some underlying condition. In essence, their immune systems were super run down.

We get a lot of kids with it, but I haven’t seen an otherwise, normal, healthy child die from it yet (but being under 6 weeks old or over 65 and decrepit wouldn’t help, that’s for sure).

Pregnant women who have trouble with H1N1 also have an underlying condition. I’ve seen some die from complications related to it, but only ones that were preeclamptic.

So in my experience, it takes something else to push you over the edge. But, I guess we’ll see. Cuz I’m sure we’ll get shithammered with swine flu kids when school gets back in session.

[Arraya]

[quote=ralphfurley][quote=Arraya]
4: 1/3 of it’s victims are young and have no underlying condition. Pregnant women are most susceptible. 90% are under 65
[/quote]
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t agree with this one.

I work in a children’s hospital and all the kids that died from complications related to the swine flu also had some underlying condition. In essence, their immune systems were super run down.[/quote]

Hmm, this is interesting. That sounds like cykotine storm. Which would be bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm
It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for many of the deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed a disproportionate number of young adults.[1] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset

The 1/3 number I quoted from an Canadian Doctor, can’t find the arcticle, and the age bracket was just from casual observation. He actually said it was a misconception that only people with underlying conditions died. Which worked with my casual observations from here

http://flutracker.rhizalabs.com/

The big question is, will or is it cykotine storming which is what got the victims in 1918.

http://www.recombinomics.com/News/07130901/H1N1_2009_1918.html
Thus, the growing list of similarities between 2009 pandemic H1N1 and 1918 pandemic H1N1 continues to cause concern.

[Arraya]

[quote=ralphfurley][quote=Arraya]
4: 1/3 of it’s victims are young and have no underlying condition. Pregnant women are most susceptible. 90% are under 65
[/quote]
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t agree with this one.

I work in a children’s hospital and all the kids that died from complications related to the swine flu also had some underlying condition. In essence, their immune systems were super run down.[/quote]

Hmm, this is interesting. That sounds like cykotine storm. Which would be bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm
It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for many of the deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed a disproportionate number of young adults.[1] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset

The 1/3 number I quoted from an Canadian Doctor, can’t find the arcticle, and the age bracket was just from casual observation. He actually said it was a misconception that only people with underlying conditions died. Which worked with my casual observations from here

http://flutracker.rhizalabs.com/

The big question is, will or is it cykotine storming which is what got the victims in 1918.

http://www.recombinomics.com/News/07130901/H1N1_2009_1918.html
Thus, the growing list of similarities between 2009 pandemic H1N1 and 1918 pandemic H1N1 continues to cause concern.

[Arraya]

[quote=ralphfurley][quote=Arraya]
4: 1/3 of it’s victims are young and have no underlying condition. Pregnant women are most susceptible. 90% are under 65
[/quote]
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t agree with this one.

I work in a children’s hospital and all the kids that died from complications related to the swine flu also had some underlying condition. In essence, their immune systems were super run down.[/quote]

Hmm, this is interesting. That sounds like cykotine storm. Which would be bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm
It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for many of the deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed a disproportionate number of young adults.[1] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset

The 1/3 number I quoted from an Canadian Doctor, can’t find the arcticle, and the age bracket was just from casual observation. He actually said it was a misconception that only people with underlying conditions died. Which worked with my casual observations from here

http://flutracker.rhizalabs.com/

The big question is, will or is it cykotine storming which is what got the victims in 1918.

http://www.recombinomics.com/News/07130901/H1N1_2009_1918.html
Thus, the growing list of similarities between 2009 pandemic H1N1 and 1918 pandemic H1N1 continues to cause concern.

[Arraya]

[quote=ralphfurley][quote=Arraya]
4: 1/3 of it’s victims are young and have no underlying condition. Pregnant women are most susceptible. 90% are under 65
[/quote]
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t agree with this one.

I work in a children’s hospital and all the kids that died from complications related to the swine flu also had some underlying condition. In essence, their immune systems were super run down.[/quote]

Hmm, this is interesting. That sounds like cykotine storm. Which would be bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm
It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for many of the deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed a disproportionate number of young adults.[1] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset

The 1/3 number I quoted from an Canadian Doctor, can’t find the arcticle, and the age bracket was just from casual observation. He actually said it was a misconception that only people with underlying conditions died. Which worked with my casual observations from here

http://flutracker.rhizalabs.com/

The big question is, will or is it cykotine storming which is what got the victims in 1918.

http://www.recombinomics.com/News/07130901/H1N1_2009_1918.html
Thus, the growing list of similarities between 2009 pandemic H1N1 and 1918 pandemic H1N1 continues to cause concern.

[Arraya]

[quote=ralphfurley][quote=Arraya]
4: 1/3 of it’s victims are young and have no underlying condition. Pregnant women are most susceptible. 90% are under 65
[/quote]
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I don’t agree with this one.

I work in a children’s hospital and all the kids that died from complications related to the swine flu also had some underlying condition. In essence, their immune systems were super run down.[/quote]

Hmm, this is interesting. That sounds like cykotine storm. Which would be bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm
It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for many of the deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed a disproportionate number of young adults.[1] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset

The 1/3 number I quoted from an Canadian Doctor, can’t find the arcticle, and the age bracket was just from casual observation. He actually said it was a misconception that only people with underlying conditions died. Which worked with my casual observations from here

http://flutracker.rhizalabs.com/

The big question is, will or is it cykotine storming which is what got the victims in 1918.

http://www.recombinomics.com/News/07130901/H1N1_2009_1918.html
Thus, the growing list of similarities between 2009 pandemic H1N1 and 1918 pandemic H1N1 continues to cause concern.

[Author]

Posts