Number of cases remains low
If you catch swine flu at the moment, you really are among a tiny minority. There is such little H1N1 around that health officials are able only to give a very general estimate. For the third week in succession, they believe the number of cases in England is below 5,000. The rate of GP consultations for flu-like illness was a tiny 12.1 per 100,000 for the week ending 17 January.
Anything below 30 per 100,000 is regarded as "background" levels, and the rate is tiny for this time of year. Rates of swine flu are falling in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The vast majority who get infected have a mild illness or no symptoms at all.
Having said, that there are 211 patients in hospital with swine flu in England, 62 of whom are in critical care. The total number of deaths stands at 390 (279 in England, 66 in Scotland, 28 in Wales and 17 in Northern Ireland).
Vaccination
3.7 million people in priority groups in England have received the H1N1 vaccine (out of around 12 million eligible).
Of those, 132,000 pregnant women and 214,000 children aged six months and under five have been immunised.
Rates of swine flu are so low that the Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam Donaldson no longer gives journalists a weekly briefing. This has been replaced with a fortnightly statistical bulletin from the Department of Health. Despite the low levels of swine flu, Sir Liam urged those in priority groups to have the jab:
"When the virus returns in the 2010 flu season, those who develop complications or die will be doing so from a vaccine-preventable disease. I strongly advise that those eligible for the vaccine who have not yet had it get the jab and protect themselves."
Global picture
The World Health Organization says the death toll from the swine flu pandemic has risen to at least 14,142 - up 588 from a week ago. It says North Africa, South Asia and parts of Eastern Europe are now seeing the most intense transmission of the H1N1 virus.
• Swine flu figures for Northern Ireland
• Swine flu figures for Scotland
• Swine flu figures for Wales
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~50~RS~)
I'm 
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Does anyone have an the specific number of cases this week ? I found that their was 3,770 new cases this week. I don't know how reliable it is or if it's only England.
But in the past week theirs been 26 deaths across the UK. This would give a fatality rate of 0.7% This is quite low, but seeing as most weeks it's been way under 0.1% this is concerning.
Complain about this comment
Hi Ryan, I appreciate your concern regarding the increased fatality rate, but we have to consider that many of those who have sadly died this week have probably been in an intensive care unit for weeks on a ventilator and therefore the statistics can look more bleak than they are. Also, this along with the low number of recorded cases will obviously give a higher percentage rate due to calculated ratio's. I work in a very busy city hospital and the numbers of suspected cases has definatley declined dramatically over recent weeks.
Complain about this comment
Thanks Vicki, your comment made me much more reassured. At my school this week a boy got hospitalized with swine flu, and a teacher developed a serious chest infection after having it. So after seeing yesterdays figures I was even more worried.
Complain about this comment
How many patients are in hospital with a normal flue?
What was the ratio normal flue:H1N1?
Mainstream couldn't resist to follow a gigantic marketing coup.
So much for professional journalism!
The worrying issue is that more or less the whole globalised world got fooled in own go.
Complain about this comment
Interestingly but not widely known, the first World War I outbreak started in 1916 and killed a small number of people. Like this year?
In 1917 hardly anyone died.
In 1918-19 Swine Flu killed more than the Great War.
Source book "Living with Enza"
Insert worrying conclusion here.
Complain about this comment
#5:
That is worrying, but not hideously worrying. It's certainly possible that H1N1 could come back this year much more strongly than it did last year. However, there is a big difference between 2010 and 1918. In 1918 there was no vaccine available. We have the vaccine now. If those in high risk groups get vaccinated, then the impact of any resurgence of the virus will be much less than it would be if we didn't have the vaccine.
Not only that, but we also have much more sophisticated ways of keeping people alive now if they do get severe complications of flu, principally antibiotics.
This is not to say we have nothing to fear from a resurgence of H1N1 this year, and there is no reason to be complacent. Some people will probably die from the disease. However, it's not going to be anything like as bad as 1918.
Complain about this comment
#4 rockenergy - Are you one of those funny conspiracy theorist people by any chance?
Doctors openly admitted early this year that they had no reliable way of predicting the extent to which the virus would spread. The Government did not act on the worst case scenario but did take reasonable precautions in the face of a POTENTIALLY devastating pandemic. Thankfully, it has turned out to be less severe than the majority of medical professionals feared.
You can imagine risk management to be a bit like a line in the sand, to fall short of the line would be not taking enough precaution and to go over the line would be being over-cautious: Risks are by definition not 100% knowable. Anyone planning for a risk is unlikely to look back and say their actions were right on the line in retrospect - they will almost always be one side or the other. In the case of Swine Flu, the government have ended up looking like they have gone a long way across the line and been too over-cautious and people have duly started accusing them of scare-mongering and being irresponsible with tax-payers money.
Bear in mind though, just how unknowable the risk from Swine-flu was and consider what side of the line you would like your government to end up on. There are two behaviours that people with simple minds often fall back on: Being very wise AFTER the event and simply criticising and having a go at others when they have no insight or relevant views of their own to offer.
Complain about this comment
Our two young children are due to be given the H1N1 vaccination this week, but we are increasingly worried about the safety of this jab. There are a number of reports on UK parenting websites (e.g Mumsnet) of children being quite ill afterwards. Message boards on U.S websites contain several reports of persistent numbness and tingling following H1N1 vaccination. This sounds eerily like a neurological complaint, and given that the vaccine was linked to Guillane Barre syndrome in the 1970s, is worrying. We understand that all vaccines can cause side effects, but these sound particularly severe. Is anybody else aware of reports of adverse side effects following the jab? Or conversely, of children receiving the vaccine and being fine. We desperately want our children to be protected against swine flu, and are very pro vaccination in general, but are concerned that the effects of this new vaccine cannot possibly yet be known.
Complain about this comment
My little boy had his 2 weeks ago and had no side effects. I know of at least a dozen others who have had it with no effects. My husband has also had the jab. I heard of one baby that had a short term temperature. In the end it is your decision but I'm confused as to why you should think this vaccine is any more risky than others. The net is full of doom mongers, choose a subject and there'll be a chatroom full of people obsessing about it.
Complain about this comment
#8:
I wouldn't take any notice of what you read on internet forums about vaccine side effects. There are a great many anti-vaccination campaigners who post scare stories about side effects at every opportunity.
Read the peer-reviewed literature instead (Google Scholar is a good place to start if you're not used to medical literature searches).
As for GB syndrome, there has been some research showing a tiny increased risk of GB syndrome after flu vaccination (although it's not always been replicated, and may only have been a problem with the vaccines used in the 1970s). What is sure, however, is that if you get flu, then you can end up with GB syndrome as a complication of flu, and the risk of that is far higher than the risk of GB syndrome after vaccination.
Complain about this comment
Angle - my pregnant wife, 7 year old and 3 year old have all had the swine flu inoculation. The worse side effect was a sore arm for a few days and the 3 year old did not suffer any effects whatsoever. The latter was off tobogganing the day after...
There are a lot of Mums and Dads thanks to the MMR fiasco who are only too willing to wrongly believe there must be something wrong with jabs - any jabs...
Complain about this comment
I fully understand Angie's concerns. We are very pro vaccination but have agonised over this for a week now delaying our appointment. As Angie has said there are a lot of disturbing comments out there from some reputable forums so they are not all cranks. I suppose the key issue is that this is a NEW vaccination so the full extent of its affects cannot be known yet. We also welcome any information from anyone about what their experience have been especially with children. Also as the seasonal flu vaccine is updated yearly to take into account new strains will next years include swine flu? We so want to make the right decision for our children so will welcome more comments on this. Many thanks!
Complain about this comment
Now that initial fears on this second wave have subsided somewhat I wonder if it's time for some analysis of what went right and what went wrong?
For my part I am surprised to find little comment re: Celvapan and the process for those children with an egg issue. It's use seems to be little mentioned and there seems to be equally little about how it has been administered in practice. In my experience this was somewhat shambolic.
My son was seeing an immunologist who deemed that he should be high priority for the SF vaccination and wrote to my GP to say so. He has a known issue with eggs although his current status with this is unclear. Both MMRs were issued in hospital under supervision in case of a bad reaction albeit that both were fine.
The GP says that they don't consider him a priority under government guidance despite what the immunologist says and so invite him into surgery for Pandemrix from the on site nurse. Just like MMR she changes her mind and suggests he needs to be treated cautiously and seen elsewhere to have the non-egg version (unlike MMR). So, delay number one.
We chase the PCT who initially advise they have insufficient supplies and are writing to GPs to establish nos. of children needing the non-egg based version before they make arrangements to vaccinate. This of course was November/December. The work described could have been done in Summer! The PCT suggest it could be more than a month before anything happens. A complaint is lodged. The complaint never follows official processes and has never been concluded. Mysteriously we are suddenly offered the opportunity to call at a drop in clinic inside two weeks that has been arranged "primarily for NHS staff". Funny how those supplies were suddenly sufficient.
Jab number one administered on a first come first serve basis to a clinic that clearly is not targeting NHS staff. A leaflet is provided describing potential side effects. He has had Celvapan. The leaflet is for Pandemrix and has no reference to the former. We are told we will be notified of jab number two. Delay number two. This never happens.
Celvapan requires two doses at least three weeks apart. After three weeks have elapsed I chase the PCT. A clinic mysteriously materialises in the same place within two weeks. By this time the government has long since instructed that vaccination of all children should commence. So, what was the advantage of being in a priority group again?
In the midst of this our GP writes to ask if we would bring our child in for a SF jab. Excellent stuff.
Jab number two is done. Son number one is fine (at least once he has stopped cowering!). I am given another leaflet about Pandemrix. I contemplate that perhaps this is a leaflet that should be provided when people are invited rather than after they have had a jab but anyway I ask again for the correct info. Nurse goes and checks and says they have no idea whether there is a leaflet and whether the potential side effects are similar.
Anybody else able to share similar experiences with regard to priority groups or Celvapan?
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure what the general rule is for which vaccine but my 4 year old was given Pandemrix. They aren't giving kids 2 vaccines any more because the second was causing temperatures. Your children will only need one jab.
Complain about this comment
My 2.5 year old was given Pandemrix on Jan 18th and has had no serious side effects so far except a sore leg (he was jabbed in the leg)later that evening. But we were outside playing and running around after his jab. By the next morning no stiffness or pain.
Complain about this comment
It looks as if most of you are ready to pack up and go home, except for a few who have niggles about the side effects of vaccination. I on the other hand, am not prepared to give up the daily ritual of checking that the coast is clear. I shall stay as a lookout in our global village.
Complain about this comment
Hi Grannie, good to see you are still around. I also check daily but have little to offer to the people posting here as none of us have been offered the vaccine (my girls are 12 and 14) and are not likely to be now. I guess the regular posters are enjoying the positive news on reducing figures and taking time out from this blogg. I hope the blogg remains open 'just in case' as it will be the first place I refer to if the situation worsens.
Take care all XX
Complain about this comment
Ooops! Sorry for the typo!! I don't know why blog suddenly has two g's!
Complain about this comment
7. At 12:44pm on 26 Jan 2010, Deep-heat wrote:
"#4 rockenergy - Are you one of those funny conspiracy theorist people by any chance"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246370/Drug-firms-drove-swine-flu-pandemic-warning-recoup-billions-spent-research.html#ixzz0e04NVz0o
"Drug companies, which spent up to £2.5billion developing a vaccine, then pushed their interests within the WHO, leading to the definition of a pandemic being softened and an outbreak declared."
"He told the hearing: 'It was stated in panic- stricken terms that this was a flu that could threaten humanity and a great number of humans could fall ill.
'This is why billions of dollars of medications were bought."
"The claims, which emerged during the first of several Council of Europe hearings into the handling of the swine flu pandemic, were strongly rejected by the WHO."
Conspiracy theory,as so often is the case,turns out to be conspiracy fact.
The drug firm paid internet shills who`ve been machine-gun posting the BBC and other sites should be prosecuted.
Complain about this comment
hello lurkingmumoftwo,
I am always here. ;-)
There is a lot of mumps going around at the moment, just to add to the confusion.
I have been closely watching the events going on in the middle and far east since the beginning of the year, hoping that they are the usual tides of ebb and flow. If there is any changes I will be straight here. At the moment they do appear to be falling into the usual patterns so don't worry, just be aware. xx
Complain about this comment
I am aware that anyone posting anything on this site that suggests that the Swine Flu virus has been hyped is automatically labelled a conspiracy theorist .. or "funnie" ....... What strikes me as "funnie" is the simple fact that all the people that completely ignore the fact that the stories some of us attempt to make people aware of are all published in mainstream press ... and have reputable medical people behind them .. Here is another one .. :
A leading health expert said the swine flu scare was a "false pandemic" led by drug companies that stood to make billions from vaccines, The Sun reported Monday.
Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, claimed major firms organized a "campaign of panic" to put pressure on the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic.
He believes it is "one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century," and he has called for an inquiry.
An emergency debate on the issue will be held by the Council of Europe later this month.
The Council of Europe covers 47 European countries and seeks to develop common and democratic principles between the nations.
Wodarg said, "It's just a normal kind of flu. It does not cause a tenth of deaths caused by the classic seasonal flu.
"The great campaign of panic we have seen provided a golden opportunity for representatives from labs who knew they would hit the jackpot in the case of a pandemic being declared.
"We want to clarify everything that brought about this massive operation of disinformation. We want to know who made decisions, on the basis of what evidence, and precisely how the influence of the pharmaceutical industry came to bear on the decision-making."
He added: "A group of people in the WHO is associated very closely with the pharmaceutical industry."
The WHO recently reaffirmed its stance that the pandemic is not over. However, the number of swine flu deaths is dramatically lower than expected.
In an interview with France's L'Humanite Sunday, Wodarg also raised concerns about swine flu vaccines.
"The vaccines were developed too quickly. Some ingredients were insufficiently tested," he said.
"But there is worse to come. The vaccine developed by Novartis was produced in a bioreactor from cancerous cells, a technique that had never been used until now.
"This was not necessary. It has also led to a considerable mismanagement of public money.
"The time has come at last for us to make demands on governments. The purpose of the inquiry is to prevent more false alarms of this type in the future."
"We must make sure people can rely on the analysis and the expertise of national and international public institutions. The latter are now discredited, because millions of people have been vaccinated with products with inherent possible health risks."
Biography
Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg is a german national. Born in 1947. He studied medicine in Berlin and Hamburg and obtained his medical degree and a doctor´s grade from the University of Hamburg. He obtained his postgraduate qualifications in internal medicine and pneumology, in public health, social medicine, hygiene and environmental medicine in Germany and further training in epidemiology at Johns Hopkins University/ Baltimore, USA.
He worked as a ship´s doctor, port health authority and in the Bernhard-Nocht-Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Hamburg. He practiced medicine in several clinics and was the director of a public health institute in Northern Germany for 13 years before getting elected for the German Bundestag.
He was MP from 1994 till 2009, for the whole time a member of the Health Committee and since 2005 in the Committee for Economic Cooperation and Development. He initiated and was the speaker of the Enquete Commission "Law and Ethics of Modern Medicine" of the German Bundestag.
From 1998 until January 2010, Dr. Wodarg has been a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE), since 2002 Vice-Chairman of the Socialist Group, since 2006 speaker of the German Social Democrats and deputy head of the German delegation in Strasbourg. He has been also the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health and a Member of the Political Affairs Committee and the former Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Culture, Education and Science of the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe.
He was recently rapporteur on "Private military and security firms and the erosion of the state monopoly on the use of force” for the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, and on "Palliative care: a model for innovative health and social policies” for the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee.
Oh and what is wrong with asking the simple question about how many people died of normal flu this past few months .... I think because it might put the whole thing in perspective ??
Complain about this comment
and to Dr Wodarg I would say what a wonderful thing hindsight is. I think a lot of the panic was media driven in the first place. Parents understandably want to protect their children, its just natural. I would rather over react than think if only. Who knows if it does mutate maybe I've done the best thing protecting my child.
In a utopian world drugs companies would offer their services free but unfortunately its commerce that drives new cures.
Complain about this comment
19. At 09:46am on 30 Jan 2010, BiiBoidshateu wrote:
"Conspiracy theory,as so often is the case,turns out to be conspiracy fact.
The drug firm paid internet shills who`ve been machine-gun posting the BBC and other sites should be prosecuted."
No. Conspiracy theories generally thrive because they play on people's fears and are, almost by definition, unproveable. Figures and opinions can be twisted quite easily in order to 'prove' a point.
Interestingly, the link you have posted as some kind of 'proof' of your argument doesn't actually state anywhere that what you are saying is true. It actually reports an allegation that has led to a hearing, which has not reached a conclusion. On top of that it comes from the Daily Mail, who would report anything that might serve to slightly undermine the government. Great work mate! Feel free to come back with the 'no smoke without fire' excuse (a standard fall-back of the conspiracy theorists), but do bear in mind that if you do, it would mean that the moment a rumour starts about ANY person or organisation then they should automatically be presumed guilty.
Oh, and yes, I'm fully aware that the pharmas will have made a good amount of money from Swine Flu. They're private companies and they exist to make money. Like it or not, we need them. I assume you'd want Britain to have its own Nationalised pharma so there was no profit involved? Wouldn't work, and you'd only come up with your own conspiracy theories about that as well.
Maybe just go back to proving that the moon landings were fake, George Bush personally flew the planes on 9/11 and the Queen is actually a CIA mole.
Complain about this comment
#21:
Just to add to the good points already made at #22 and #23, I would add that it's not really accurate to describe Dr Wodarg as a "leading health expert". If you look at his bio, you'll see that he hasn't practiced medicine since 1994. Furthermore, most "leading health experts" might be expected to have published many papers in the peer-reviewed literature. A quick search on PubMed for Dr Wodarg's papers reveals only one hit, and that is from 1989. I don't think you could reasonably call someone a leading health expert if they haven't published anything in the last 20 years.
It would be more accurate to describe Dr Wodarg as "a politician". Doesn't sound quite so trustworthy now, does he?
If you've got any actual evidence that there was some kind of "conspiracy", then we'd all love to see it. Some unproven allegations by a politician, however, is not the same thing as evidence.
Complain about this comment
#19:
"Conspiracy theory,as so often is the case,turns out to be conspiracy fact."
When you say "as so often is the case", I wonder exactly what you have in mind here? I can't actually think of a single case where a conspiracy theory turned out to be fact. MI6 did not bump off Princess Diana. NASA didn't fake the moon landings. George Bush didn't mastermind the 9/11 attacks. The CIA didn't assassinate Kennedy.
Which conspiracy theories have turned out to be based on fact?
Complain about this comment
Oh, and on a more serious (and less combatative) note, to those who are still concerned about the SF jab for their children or themselves all I can say is that I have three doctors in my immediate family. They all acknowledge minor risks with the vaccine but suggest that they are so tiny compared to the risks associated with Swine Flu (or even seasonal flu) that the jabs are the best option. They had all their children vaccinated and, as suggested above, the worst side effect was sore-arms.
I had my 6 month old vaccinated before Christmas and we did agonise long and hard about it even after talking to my family, but I'm glad we made the choice we did. Whether you choose to do it now, bearing in mind the decrease in numbers contracting SF is obviously a personal decision. I suppose the consolation is that regardless of your final decision the information you have now means that you can take it knowing that the risks on either side are not as great as they may have seemed a few months ago.
Its worth bearing in mind what we're now hearing about the last major conspiracy theory relating to vaccinations, i.e. MMR. Effectively, one person managed to create a completely unfounded rumour that led to thousands of parents declining the MMR jab for their children. People listened to this rumour despite the statements of the Government and the medical evidence available because it played on their fears. Sadly, when fear is involved we generally decide not to take action and many children suffered as a result of this man. This may be one of the conspiracy theories our friend above believed in.
I apologise if I sound aggressive on this matter, but while conspiracy theories about moon landings etc are pretty harmless, the scaremongering about the SF jab could have been potentially catastrophic for some people and the conspiracy theories around the MMR jab genuinely did have serious consequences for some. People can obviously choose who they wish to believe, but need to bear in mind that their cynicism creates fear in others. They could also do with presenting some facts on occasion (something that the anti-MMR brigade never managed to do and yet still caused so much trouble).
Everybody has personal choice in these matters, but that choice should be informed by reasoned debate and factual analysis, not by fear and conjecture. I hope that you are able to make a peaceful decision about the SF jab and that your little ones stay as fit and healthy as normal.
Complain about this comment
#20 Thanks Grannie, pleased to hear you are still keeping watch.
#22-26 Thanks for your very sensible posts; you make a lot of sense.
My main question, now things are settling down, is why aren't the rest of the population being offered the SF jab? I would really like to know the reasons behind this decision.
If we already have the vaccine why is it not being distributed; is it because of the cost/man power involved in vaccinating the rest of the population or some other reason?
We are lead to believe that this vaccine is a good way to protect our most vulnerable, and I totally agree that these groups should be the priority, but surely this protection should also be offered to everyone else!! Is there anyone out there who could shed some light on this?
Thanks X
Complain about this comment
#27:
The reason why people who are not in at-risk groups are not being offered the vaccine appears to be that it isn't considered cost effective. Have a look at the 17 November statement on this page.
Not an unreasonable position really. It would be very expensive to vaccinate everyone, and given that the threat from H1N1 now appears to be low, I imagine that mass vaccination simply doesn't make economic sense. Just consider how difficult it would be to get a GP appointment for something else if all the surgeries were tied up with flu jabs for the whole population.
Complain about this comment
I travel overseas a lot with my work. For example, I'm going to Ethiopia in a couple of weeks. I would like to have the H1N1 vaccination before going but am unable to as I am not a high risk category person. I pay every year to have the seasonal flu jab at a travel clinic so I would like to see some of the spare H1N1 vaccine available privately for those of us who travel and are able/willing to pay for it. I do not relish being stuck in a hospital in East Africa with the virus. I can't even get tamiflu to take with me unless I buy it over the internet - no guarantee that what I'm buying is the real stuff. My concern is that the stock of vaccine we have will simply be destroyed. So why not let those of us who want it pay for it - the seasonal flu jab only costs around £15.
Complain about this comment
Hi. Just like to add that whilst I have had an H1N1 jab (at risk, heart condition) my Husband like Gillie travels abroad alot for work has been unable to get vaccinated, our GP says he does not qualify as I am not immunocomprimised. We would gladly pay for his jab if we could.
Complain about this comment
#28 Thanks for that; I thought that cost/man power may be the main reason.
#29 I tend to agree with you Gillie. Whilst I don't believe in a National Health Service were you can only get the jab if you pay for it, it makes perfect sense for people who travel, like yourself, to be able to access any surplus supply of vaccine via the private health network. If the cost was similar to the seasonal jab I am sure many would find the money. This way the governement could recoup some of their costs.
It would seem such a simple solution but I am wondering if it is that simple! For example are the staff who give out these private jabs actually also employed by the NHS? In a similar way to if you go privately to see a consultant they also do NHS work.
It would be a great shame if this surplus vaccine does go to waste; maybe they will donate it to poorer countries instead.
Complain about this comment
The travel clinics I use are not involved at all with the NHS. Similarly, if you go to a private doctor that would also be the case. I guess the issue would be if you paid for the jab at your local doctors then it would be NHS staff giving it. All I ask is to have the choice!
Complain about this comment
If you regularly travel across continents then you should be first in line to get vaccinated, surely? Doesn't it make sense to reduce the risk of disease migrating from one zone to another through work commuting? A vaccination costs a lot less than the cost of mopping up the potential spread of infection from returning travelers. The cost of quarantine is also more expensive than a quick jab or two. With the increase of more virulent pathogens, the strategies to avoid them should be greater. Is it merely a question of political correctness? If someone questions why a traveler would get priority over a person who never travels, the reasoned argument would be as I have suggested.
Complain about this comment
Completely agree Grannie but logic does not seem to work here. Seems as if the powers that be would rather destroy or sell what we have rather than allow its citizens to buy what we want. What a load of rubbish!
Complain about this comment
The issue of travelers getting the jab could be resolved quite easily. When you make the booking, you pay a fee to be directed to a jab facility. I say it in this way because it might not be a doctors surgery. If the travel company or the airline company are the umbrella company, they could set aside the money to hire people to do the jab service within the airport complex, within close proximity of the airport or within a mile of the travel agency. Any ideas to improve on this? Some people have to go abroad at short notice and will need to access vaccination ASAP.
Complain about this comment
As a follow up to my post at #24, in which I pointed out that Wolfgang Wodarg is not actually a health expert but rather a politician, I've just seen that I'm not alone in this assessment.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Regarding point (8), I cannot beleive you would NOT consider the Swine Flue jab because of a bit of localised numbness to your childs arm for a couple of days after the jab and a day of your child being a bit under the weather.
Compare this to ten days of controlling your child's temperature, your child losing 10% of thie bodyweight and all that goes with flu, and I can tell you that a jab is a very VERY small price to pay.
Get it done. No pain, no gain !
Complain about this comment
Just a curious question that I would like an answer to.
Which countries do we import our duck and chicken meat from?
I would sincerely hope we only import from local countries and that import standards are ultra strict.
As for H1NI, there is an interesting analysis about it on the World Health Map, from Finland and Pro Med.
Complain about this comment
The fallacy that the Drugs Strategy will save us from a Pandemic
The facts are and the USA as an example,
Detection
Time Scale - 0 months
Swine Flu first detected – Influenza A, Novel H1N1 "swine flu" was first detected in Mexico City and was made public March 18, 2009. Therefore the first causality was probably at the beginning of march 2009 taking into account the incubation period.
First Death in USA
Time Scale + 2-months later
at the end of April 2009
1st Vaccine Approved
Time Scale + 6 months 2 weeks
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the new swine flu vaccine for use in the United States on September 15, 2009.
Vaccine 1st ready for use in USA
Time Scale + 7 months 1 week
The vaccine was first ready from mass production and used on 5th October 2009 in the USA
Most Vaccinated City in the USA by 22nd March 2010
Time Scale + 1 year 1month 1 week
Massachusetts vaccinated more residents against the swine flu and seasonal flu in the fall and winter than any other state.
Up to the end of Winter (March 2010) - The Massachusetts Department of Public Health says 36 percent of residents were inoculated against the swine flu, also known as H1N1, compared with 21 percent nationally. Seasonal flu vaccinations were administered to 57 percent of the population, compared with 37 percent nationwide.
A mere 36% in one USA city and where nationally only 21% had the vaccine by March 22nd 2010.
The Spanish flu of 1917/18 did its worst between week 16 and week 26. Up to 100 million died.
Considering this fact by the time we get any vaccine, most of us will be well dead. Fact not fiction. Therefore the vaccine strategy is totally flawed and we have to move from this stupid strategy to a standpoint of never letting it happen in the first place – the preventative strategy not cure strategy and the only strategy that will actually work.
That strategy is - [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]f
Complain about this comment
I have heart disease (metal valve) and have asked the doctor on atleast 5 different occasions to book me in for it. I just get told it'll come in the post. Sick of it.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS