This is True
Randy Cassingham

Randy Cassingham's Blog

Historical Details and Author's Notes from This is True®
— Weird News Online Since the Internet's Dark Ages.

bullet  Swine Flu

Yeah: Looks Like I Got It!

I've been out of the office for the better part of a week, and am even farther behind on e-mail and other work than usual. Last Thursday I drove with a friend to Reno, where we were both speakers at the Mensa "gathering" put on by a friend of ours there. I'll have more to say about that later, but my talk went very well. We drove back Sunday, through a couple of snow storms and a sand storm in the Utah desert, and again straight through -- I only took over at the wheel for a few hours. (My paramedic buddy Norm is a road warrior!)

Monday I could feel my allergies flaring up from what I figured was a combination of the sand storm and heavy winds at home, but by Monday evening I realized that no, it was a virus that I picked up in Reno; we were at the biggest hotel there, and I was around a lot of people. By Tuesday I was whacked by it: fever, body aches, horrible fatigue, and the most alarming of all: shortness of breath -- the flu. The current presumption in North America right now is that if you have flu this early in the season, you most likely have Swine Flu. (And I did get the regular "seasonal" flu shot last month....)

And yes, I am going to call it "Swine Flu" rather than the "H1N1 flu virus" -- mostly because I refuse to bow to the panicking pork industry's pandering to public ignorance. Yeah, some people actually think they might get "swine flu" by eating pork. It doesn't happen like that, of course, but pork producers are having their own fever, body aches, and shortness of breath over it, and demand everyone say "H1N1" instead. Pfui, as Nero Wolfe liked to say. The only way you could get influenza from pork is to eat infected pig meat raw, and that's already considered a completely unhealthy thing to do. And really: do any of you (outside the doctors!) have any idea what "H1N1" even means? Some of you may -- I do, in part because I was on our county's pandemic disease disaster planning committee two years ago, and I took the trouble of looking it up so I'd understand it.

How Swine Flu Spreads (from Jumbo Joke)Type A influenza virus strains are categorized according to two proteins found on the surface of the virus: hemagglutinin and neuraminidase -- the H and the N. Each Type A strain is assigned an H number and an N number based on which forms of these two proteins the strain has; there are 16 H and 9 N subtypes known in birds, for instance, but only H 1, 2 and 3 -- and N 1 and 2 -- are commonly found in humans.

"Birds?" you might ask. You likely remember that "bird" (or "avian") flu was supposed to be the big scare a couple of years ago. But this one is swine flu, right? Well, sorta: genetic sequencing has shown that the current H1N1 pandemic virus is an amalgam of four different strains: North American swine influenza, North American avian influenza, human influenza, and a swine influenza virus typically found in Asia and Europe. In other words, half swine, a quarter bird, and a quarter plain ol' human influenza, strains found around the world all mixed together. It's that mix that helps make it so easily passed around.

(And when I sent out a note to some friends saying that I was recovering from Swine Flu, one of the wags, knowing the above, replied that it wasn't pure swine flu, but one mixed with bird flu, and thus it was more properly termed "Flying Pig Flu". Yeah: I like hanging around smart funny people. :-)

The 1918 "Spanish Flu" pandemic, which killed 50-100 million people in an age before jet travel, was also an H1N1 flu, but obviously it's not exactly the same strain; thankfully the current one is much less of a killer. The Spanish Flu also started with a mild version, but then came back much worse the next year. How did we know this year's H1N1 wouldn't do the same thing? We didn't. That's why it was so important to prepare, just in case it did. We dodged a bullet; we may not be as lucky next time.

The media has done a poor job helping people understand all of this, and both apathy and panic has ensued. But frankly, it's very difficult to get people to stop and pay attention to the important stuff without freaking them out, so I have a lot of sympathy for the task. I've found most people don't even have a clue as to what the difference is between an epidemic and a pandemic. An "epidemic" -- from the Greek epi ("upon") + demos ("people") -- is an infection that spreads rapidly and extensively and affecting many individuals in an area or a population at the same time. (The key is that limited area.)

A "pandemic" -- from the Greek pan ("all") + demos ("people") -- is an epidemic of infectious disease spreads through human populations across a large region: like a continent, or worldwide. Medically it doesn't really mean "all" people, as the Greek root implies, but enough so to be a real health problem. The World Health Organization declared the current Swine Flu a pandemic on June 11, 2009 -- the first global pandemic since the 1968 Hong Kong Flu, which killed about 2 million. (Even seasonal flu is a killer, though: it takes out up to a half-million people per year worldwide, about 36,000 in the U.S. alone -- yeah: every year.)

My case was pretty mild, despite the shortness of breath. (I have a blood oxygen monitor that I use on EMS calls, and I could see that I was getting enough air; that was reassuring.) It may just be that I'm older. Seasonal flu usually kills older people, but the current Swine Flu is killing kids more -- aged into their 20s and 30s. The younger you are (and the more health problems you have, especially respiratory problems, like asthma), the more you need to get the vaccine. I've seen quacks on TV say that the shot will give you the flu (it doesn't: the virus in it is dead), or that it will give kids autism (long ago disproved: the UK "study" that "proved" that was completely discredited). Those quacks are betting with your (and your kids'!) lives; don't let them panic you.

If much of this is truly new to you, you haven't been paying enough attention. See the Centers for Disease Control's Key Flu Facts page for basic and clear information that doesn't take much time to read.

The bottom line: there truly is no need to panic. There is a need to pay attention to what's going on, and make informed decisions about how you're going to react. If I'm offered the Swine Flu shot, I'm going to take it -- it's possible that what I had this week wasn't Swine Flu, and I'm not going to pay for a DNA test to make sure, since it doesn't really matter. I've made my decision; what are you going to do?

Most Recent Comments

Posted by naleta, Michigan on October 15, 2009:

"The dinosaurs want their planet back and they're not above using germ warfare to do it."

I thought the dinosaurs became birds!

Posted by Michael, Boulder on October 16, 2009:

Randy wrote: "No, this is definitely not the same situation as with antibiotics. It is natural for flu to mutate and change year by year. -rc"

They why has the seasonal flu mutated to become 99% resistant to Tamiflu in only three years? 2007-2008 flu season showed 16% of the virus samples were resistant. 2008-2009 showed about 50% were resistant. The CDC says this year, 2009-2010, is showing 99% resistant.

This IS exactly the same situation as antibiotics, except viruses mutate faster than bacteria.

---

You have taken my comment out of context. Dan in Virginia pointed out there are meds that reduce flu symptoms, and I replied "True, but like antibiotics do with bacteria, such meds will increase the strength of the viruses over time." Then Marcie in California asked, "It seems that every year, there is a new flu, and we have to develop a new vaccine for it. Do you think that we might be handing out flu shots the way we did antibiotics many years ago before we knew that that was actually exacerbating the problem?", to which I replied, "No, this is definitely not the same situation as with antibiotics. It is natural for flu to mutate and change year by year." Yes, flu mutates, and it will, over time, become immune to Tamiflu and its ilk. But it is not because of Tamiflu that they have to develop a new vaccine every year. They've had to do that anyway, year after year, because flu mutates so fast on its own. That's very different from bacteria, which are mutating in response to antibiotics. -rc

Posted by Alex, Germany on October 19, 2009:

Randy wrote: That's very different from bacteria, which are mutating in response to antibiotics.

While the general statement is true (administering antibiotics/antivirals is not the same as vaccines), there's one "important detail" which is wrong.

Bacteria do not mutate in response to antibiotics. It depends on how is interpreted. If it is read (and meant) as "bacteria [actively] mutate and generate an antibiotic resistance mechanism", then it's wrong. What happens is that mutations are already present in the (bacterial/viral/cancerous cell) population. If one of these mutations enables the OFFSPRING of this organism to better survive in the presence of the drug, then this offspring will have more offsprings and will pass on the acquired mutation (or "gene", if you wish). However, this mutation existed prior to the contact of the organism with the drug and, should we not have used the drug, the mutation would, most likely have vanished from the population by being diluted out.

So, in short, we are actively selecting bacteria/viruses which happen to be resistant to whatever drugs we use to fight them and not the bugs mutate in response to the antibiotics. I'd say this is an important point, especially since it's a pretty nice example of Darwinist evolution firsthand.

[as a side note: it seems that bacteria can, under stress situations, generate more mutations, probably an active mechanism to generate more diversity and, with a bit of luck, a resistant offspring]

---

Yes, I necessarily had to simplify. Bacteria don't mutate in response to antibiotics, but their offspring survive due to mutations when their "parents" survive the antibiotic, such as when the person "feels better" and stops taking it early, before the infection is fully killed off. The details are interesting ...and detailed. And indeed it's evolution at work right in front of our eyes. -rc

Post a Comment

Read this before posting a comment! Comments are of course the opinion of the poster. All comments must be approved by the site owner before they appear. Only interesting, pertinent comments that have to do with the entry will be approved. Read the existing comments before posting your own to ensure you're not saying something that's already been covered.

Blog Updates