Hiney-Virus Fears

Comment by BlancheNoE on October 11, 2009 at 6:34pm

I couldn't hear what you were saying 'cause Bouncer was jumpin' around amorously squeaking at the monitor, but hey,... has the flu thing affected your neck of the woods yet?
been meaning to ask you.

Comment by SydTheSkeptic on October 11, 2009 at 6:38pm

Oh hell yeah. A quarter of my students are absent on any given day. How's 'bout you?

Comment by SydTheSkeptic on October 11, 2009 at 7:23pm

lol- those are great Sara!

Comment by SydTheSkeptic on October 11, 2009 at 7:24pm

Comment by SydTheSkeptic on October 11, 2009 at 8:15pm

Fell better, Mel! :o)

Comment by photo2010 on October 11, 2009 at 9:52pm

Did anyone else ever hear that sanitizer's like Purell can actually kill the 'good' bacteria on your hands? Good old Ivory hand soap and water may be best.

Comment by Chig on October 12, 2009 at 1:01am

You are obviously watching a different media in action than I am.
We had a pediatric death here. In the obit the family said they were surprised that he lived as long as he did. That suggests that there was something else more serious wrong to me.
I had posted PEDIATRIC flu numbers from the CDC regarding previous flu seasons before in a blog. Right now we have over zealous doctors ordering flu testing on everyone who steps in the door. What does that do to any statistics? Yes, indeed the numbers climb. Live attenuated vaccinations are risky. The same people who point out that we have better and more pure methods these days (in answer to the 70's swine flu treatment killing more people than the flu), ignored the fact that HIV started in the same populations that Salk tested his early versions of Polio vaccines on (there could not have been any kind of impurities there). Wash your hands plenty. Eat your garlic and take care of your immune system. You will be okay, and so will the kids. Put more of your faith in the human body instead of the people out to make a buck.

Comment by SydTheSkeptic on October 12, 2009 at 1:07am

So the numbers are bloated?
and Salk is responsible for HIV?

Comment by Chig on October 12, 2009 at 1:18am

I don't know if Salk is responsible, but I do not discount the hypothesis. Many others did, despite the statistical correlation in populations. He is a rock star saint. You know they used simian kidney lines to make that vaccine. There could have been impurities, or not.

I can't say numbers are bloated. I can say that last year of the year before that people got the sniffles and no one made a diagnosis or had tissue cultures grown. I can say people watch the news, including doctors. The next thing you know they are swabbing everyone. They are trying new PCR methods never used before to "target" virus genome.

I saw one "news" program with a doctor talking about 260 people dying per day of flu in previous seasons, and so far we had 4 people dying per day of this one now. The news moderator pointed out, "if you were related to one of the 4 then that would be one too many." There is no stopping people from dying of the flu. You stem the spread through limited contact with the infected, and washing your hands. Oh by the way, how many people are dying per day in Afghanistan or Iraq compared to that 4 number? Interesting what gets the media spotlight at any given time.

Comment by Chig on October 12, 2009 at 1:46am

I should say it was not Salk's test subjects, but someone in direct competition for the polio vaccine with Salk and Sabin. I can't recall his name. In my eyes, it is the same difference.
My point is, somethings get swept under the rug, and others blown out of proportion. People can do anything with data, and they do.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page