Flu in Australia: tears and all

Revere;

Yes you're right. I was shocked and moved when I read this in the local press here. So tragic, so fast. The unavailability of Tamiflu here is an issue. Many are calling for it to be available as an OTC medication, for seasonal flu.

I have been speaking to medico friends here who work in the major hospitals and I suspect the toll from this flu is higher than is currently being reported. We are hearing about the victims who are otherwise healthy, but I believe there are others who have died of flu as a complication to their presenting illness.

This flu season is pointing out quite graphically to those that choose to see, that we are in bad shape for a pandemic re our medical care facilities. Flu sufferers are waiting for up to six hours to be seen in hospital emergency departments now.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22271993-5006009,00…

Heaven help us when the pandemic hits.

Hmmmmm.... So we are to assume that statistically the number of deaths in Aussieland is from H3N2 and H1N1 is within "limits?" Who says so? Its proximity to the Bali and Java situations makes me very, very nervous as this could be herald waves and not the above viruses. Has there been any independent testing done on the samplings for the children that are dead and now Mom ? Or is it a case that we just have to take their word for it?

I am part of the system here in the US and partial information in advance of the announcement that the bug is here is part of this or any disaster. You can hear the question from Helen Branswell now, "Is this H5N1 or is it H3N2 with some antigenic patterns from H5N1?"

AutoAnswer, "H3N2...." This way they get to say they were wrong later, it quiets the mob and they get on for a bit more with their lives in a somewhat normal mode. Thus, the government gets a bit more time to prepare for what is coming and everyone continues being productive. It will save some lives, but it will also kill a few too with that answer. It causes no panic and once its everywhere they pop up and say that a mistake was made and that it was indeed H5N1 all along. They'll call it a lab error and scold the lab people. Only problem with that is that the labs are not so many that can do this kind of testing.

So statistically speaking, I can see from the news that this is far worse than the early 2000's flu in Aussieland from a CFR standpoint. But is it statistically worse than any other year? If its as bad or worse than any other year other than the 50's, 60' and of course the 1918 flu for where we are in time for record keeping, then it might be time to call a big bullshit and just tell the people its here. We are all adults and we can deal with it much better than some shit scared bunch of kids. We can also prepare much better. Everyone will go to work until they call the H5N1 bug alert and then they can deal with it from there.

Losing one Mom is too many and no matter what we do we are going to lose a bunch of them. Every day that we prepare is one less Mom thats going to take a header. The family should have the samples tested independently. I know thats what I have told my kin to do if anyone should die from "flu" in the near future.

Its like the man said, "You want the truth? You cant handle the truth...." I disagree. A fully informed public will start doing more and we are at our best when things are worst and true heroes will emerge from the crowd at a rate as high as the CFR. There will be those that put you first ahead of them and try to keep a lid on things that start to spin out of control. The HCW's will take the first hit, then the responders, then both groups families. After that, its pretty much going to take all that it will. End effect is and will be bad and Mom's who read this can prepare or not. If you have kids then you should, grandparents too because you might be the only ones around if it comes as the lunch table starts at about 5 all the way up to 45 for ensured sickness and even worse death, statistically speaking.

Randy: There are no limits on flu. You may remember my piece on the 1951 outbreak in the UK that was worse than 1918, although it was not pandemic flu. So we need a better public health system, which we won't get without paying for it -- which you don't want to do. Would you rather be bankrupt or dead?

Wont matter Revere. If we put all the money into the governments hands then we are technically bankrupt anyway. But oh-everyone gets covered by something that is ambigous in nature and is nothing but the money pit that it is in every country.

The money you speak of doesnt currently belong to government and you will see the complete destruction of our economy if panflu comes rolling in and we have it in place. Not just from the costs of UHC either. A global worldwide depression would ensue if the CFR's are anything approaching 1918 flu percentages. Then there is the money you would take out of someone elses pocket. Failure to pay for it would be a crime. You can go to prison for stealing but not if you are the government. You can also go to jail for not paying those taxes you feel are immoral or even illegal until they are challenged in the courts. You would turn us into criminals by condition. This will be the ultimate taking in this country. Canadians were stuck with it by the Brits. The Brits are none too happy. Remember, this is the system that can take your children away from you if some social worker thinks your kid is too fat, or that you are not providing proper care for them.

Bankrupt? The whole system has been bankrupt since Johnson in various degrees. You would increase that degree to its highest power. We dont need a better public health system. We need a better private one.

I do remember your piece and you are of course right, 1951 was a horrible year for the Brits and even then it resulted in higher costs to the public for the UHC. It flattened them hard and some would say this was the tipping point for Churchill's party and it started him heading for the door. The usual calls that government didnt do enough, they didnt do this or that. The role of government is to aid the people not to give them the permanent nipple to suck on. Churchill tried to hold the line against costs but alas his own party took him out.

Also, there is no guarantee or indication that being broke or rich will provide you any different outcome in the event of panflu. But you seem to assert that above. If you recall my response to the postings regarding the costs and what it really means. That meaning was that there has been no indication that anything that anyone did other than to spend something on the order of 300,000 dollars on one patient produced a single favorable outcome in China. No one can say that spending the money did it, not Tamiflu, not respirators, not masks, not anything. You assert that beefing up the public health system would do it. As usual Revere old friend, prove that point please. If UHC was in and panflu arrived and we only used Tennessee's CDC projected outcomes of 56,000 dead and only 150,000 bucks its only 8,400,000,000... to produce dead people. That is more than 1/3rd of our state budget each year. This doesnt take into account the ones that would survive. Thats a 5% number. If its higher to 30% then it would account for every dollar in for the next 10 years. Again its not counting the ones that got sick and survived that we have to pay for. $300,000,000,000 for just dead people.

The ones that were left would be stuck with a legacy of probably being older and unable to pay taxes as they would be on fixed income. There would be a helluva lot fewer youngins' too. Then what? The UHC along with the financial system which the government took would be gone. They cant tax any longer, they likely couldnt enforce it and everyone would be 1930's poor. Agrarian society would take over. Those that had no skills or were the office workers of the world wouldnt have jobs. You want to eat, you would have to work in the fields with a Phd.

In many ways, the lucky ones would be dead at anything past 8% because the very rich might only just be middle class. The middle class would sink to poverty and below, the poor would just be in worse shape than before.

I get your point though Revere. Its not far off the mark but it does point to the chilling effect of what UHC WONT be able to do. Panflu ensures the collapse of UHC across this planet.

I think from now on each time it comes up I am just going to comment the reasons that I think its not going to work and post up yet another bad story about it. Far too often I quote the bad about it. Some of UHC's stuff is good. But its an approach to one world government, communism and at the very least socialism.

Look... Here's one now...

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/08/17/no-room-at-the-inn/

We are in the midst of a flu season that is effecting many more people than normal. We have had several deaths reported in the media, some very young children in Western Australia, and some youngish adults. No data has been reported in the media regarding mortalities in older cohorts but we expect that this flu is also doing what nasty flu normally does to the very old.

The media has simply reported that it is type A influenza, admittedly a fairly obvious diagnosis and, I guess, what we are seeing is reasonably consistent with a bad flu year. I am concerned about the lack of specifics but, Raldolf, rest assured that Australia has a first class public health system (free to all who are ill) and has a WHO reference laboratory so we are as well served as any Western nation and probably better served than most.

Our proximity to Bali is irrelevant (in fact about 3,000miles from any populated area). What is relevant is contact with any person who has recently travelled to Bali and I guess this has been investigated, but we just don't know.

mortality statistics gives 2-3 times more excess
deaths in 1918 than in 1951 for England and Wales
for females. (males excluded because to war)
Same for 1929. 1963 was also back, but not quite.

should read: 193 was also bad, but not quite as bad.
1951:1
1918:2.5
1929:1
1963:0.7

Trevor-with all due respect. Its not free. Thats not correct because you pay for it. Here if UHC were in place, that same uninsured bunch would pay nothing and thats the rub. Those that have insurance would be forced into a program that they dont want and be forced to pay for the care of someone else. But back to this.

Bali is only some 400 miles to one of the most populated cities on this planet...Jakarta. About the same distance to Derby, 1500 to Perth. Its quite populated in its own right by some 3.1 million possible patients. Doesnt matter. Its all within an afternoon flight and its already possible that some parts of H5N1 are already in country in Aussieland.

Australia also has a little problem just as all the countries do with the truth.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,22263509-2682,00.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=avDgKkQ1kqMs&refer=…

New Zealand announced it was at its maximum for care capability and has implemented its pan flu plan.

Earl M. and Jonny S. pipe in and let us know whats happening where you are.

Thanks for the stats anon.

Here is the UK's latest on use of new drugs for arthritis.... You cost too much fella, instead of clerk making decisions for your health in the US, you now have a bureaucrat making them.

http://www.maturetimes.co.uk/node/3554

But hey, you are covered....right?