It is if you braise it in bacon grease…
-XT
Question - they* just reported a confirmed case in “Northern Indiana”. It was reported by a Chicago station, so I’m betting it’s in Northwest Indiana. I am in NW Indiana…fantastic.
However, they are not releasing any information about the “young adult” who’s infected. I understand privacy issues and all that, but they won’t say if it’s a student, a worker, a man, a woman, what town, anything. Why not? Can’t I better plan if I know more information - if it’s in the other half of the state, no worries. If it’s in my town, then I might stay indoors more, wear a mask, something. Is there a reason for this?
*CBS 2 is reporting it as of now - no updates on the CDC lately. And it’s reported the victim hasn’t been to Mexico, or been traveling at all - scary stuff.
45% of the population of Europe died of plague in the 14th century. Is that less than the Spanish Influenza in 1918?
Well, so am I, but I’m not overly concerned. Of course, I no longer ride mass transit to work, either. If I still took a commuter train daily I’d be more worried.
Perhaps the patient in question requested total anonymity?
What are you going to do different? Wash your hands, avoid sick people. If the mailman and the local cops start wearing gloves and masks then that’s the point I would, too. You are, of course, free to stay indoors as much as you wish at any point in time, and to avoid crowds (wonder if the box office will take a hit this weekend?)
Not really - this flu didn’t suddenly come into existence last week, it’s undoubtedly been around for some time. It’s probably only recently it’s become more infectious to humans, but it’s entirely possible this “young adult” was infected via contact with someone with a very mild case, who might have also been infected with a very mild case, and so one back to its point of origin. Part of the sudden “jump” in infections is the fact they’re actively looking for it now and are finding it. People have probably been falling ill with it for a couple months now, here and there, and if we had known about it and looked for it two months ago we would have found cases of it. Not everyone who contracts this virus becomes deathly ill, in fact most people don’t. It’s a good idea in principal to avoid the flu when possible, but even if you contracted this one the odds are very high all you’ll need to do is go to bed for a few days and you’ll get over it just fine (presuming you’re a normal, healthy human being).
As a percentage of the population (though I’ve always heard around 30% total for the average in Europe), I’d say that the Black Death was more deadly. Total deaths though world wide were more for the Spanish Flu in absolute terms and over a much shorter period (the Black Death was a series of plagues from the 1320’s to the 1340’s IIRC, while the Spanish Flu was from something like 1918 to 1920). From memory the Black Death caused something like 20-40 million deaths in Europe…while the Spanish Flu probably killed something like 100 million (over two years) world wide.
Sorry I don’t have precise figures (and they are probably wrong or I’m misremembering them), I’m not at a place I can even do a quick google search easily. From my memory though the Black Death killed less people over a greater period of time…though it did kill a higher percentage of the population over that time period.
-XT
Herownself, if you’re still posting in this thread, and you don’t mind giving a little free advice*, would you recommend canceling travel plans to Mexico (San Luis Potosi, which has has the highest per capita swine flu rate so far, according to reports)? I plan to be there May 13-20, and I am now on the fence about going.
(*This would not violate SDMB rules concerning medical advice, I don’t think, but correct me if I’m wrong about that.)
“Many hundreds” of schoolchildren are sick with suspected cases of swine flu, said New York City Health Commissioner
It’s spreading, but still it doesn’t seem very fatal so far in the U.S. I wonder why so many have died in Mexico, but not here.
It’s like the SARS epidemic…it was really bad in Asia, but wasn’t much of a blip here or Canada. I think for similar reasons…diet, nutrition, general health, availability of health care. I’m betting that most of those dieing in Mexico are not from the wealthy, privileged classes.
-XT
Until Herownself shows up, you might check out the CDC:
There’s also lots of advice for anybody who does go.
The number of new cases being reported in Mexico appears to be declining, which is good news.
Is it also a possibility that the reason why the cases in the US have been mild is they might be ‘down the chain’ a bit – in Mexico the virus was breaking out for a month before any warning were issued, and many people could have been multiply or heavily exposed without having any idea.
What about the fact that many of the US cases got it from someone else, who had been to Mexico, but they hadn’t gone themselves? Could the person-to-person transmission actually be less virulent?
I have no idea if any of these are possible explanations. I’m sure a larger part of it is better general health and more willingness to go to the doctor, as well as quicker and better treatment.
Uninsured Americans tend to do the same thing. :smack:
Now for a really morbid & panic inspiring question; what would it take to overwhelm the funeral industry? 
Should mortury staff be concerned about handling dead flu victims? Will this lead to mandatory closed caskets/cremation/plague pits?
Dead people don’t cough and sneeze. They do, sometimes, exude bodily fluids and such but latex gloves and the like should provide adequate protection for those handling the dead.
More likely than closed caskets and cremation and such we’d park the “surplus” dead in refrigerator trailers or some such, much as occurred during that year Chicago had a massive heat wave and the dead overwhelmed the morgue. They parked the overflow in refrigerated trucks until they could process them all.
I’ll bet the Army, guard or the Civil Defense folks have plans for that sort of thing from the Cold War.
It seems the Thai government, afraid of the hit the local pork industry could take, has made a request to the WHO that it be called the Mexican flu instead of the swine flu.
Looks like we have one case here. Ironically, it’s the official in charge of things like swine flu. The doctor had attended a conference in Mexico City earlier this month.
Yeah, I know. But I’m thinking it is the connotation that the sickness came from swine that is most upsetting to them all the same. I still don’t agree that the term is offensive, it’s just descriptive. I’m just trying to figure out where the idea that it’s offensive might have come from.
American bigwigs are also thinking about a name change.
More interesting of what he’s said is this:
Part of the open question is not knowing the denominator in Mexico. How many cases have been there for how long undiagnosed?
The good news is that Summer will very likely slow it down, and by Winter a vaccine may be ready in some numbers anyway. Same article:
The positive side of swine flu: We’re getting a lot more cute pictures of pigs in the newspapers now.
But America is The Greatest Country on Earth[sup]tm[/sup]*, surely everyone there has fantastic health insurance and those few that can’t afford it are helped out by the more fortunate?
*cite: Toby Keith, Lee Greenwood, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Dallas Cowboys Fans, Stephen Colbert, etc
It’s a big nothing! I can’t recall any religious Jewish diabetic refusing to take insulin, in the days when insulin was extracted from porcine pancreases! 