<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ten Things I Think I Think about H1N1</title>
	<atom:link href="http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/</link>
	<description>The Practical Disaster Preparedness blog of Globaliist Inc.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:08:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Prutsalis</title>
		<link>http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/#comment-143</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Prutsalis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 15:49:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://living-prepared.com/?p=457#comment-143</guid>
		<description>Thanks Frank for the additional info and fact corrections.  I wondered where I got the 0.5% figure from, and it is cited in several places - most often cited as the percentage of the total population that died from the 1918 pandemic (50 million people - though that would still be too low) not the MPR of those infected.  Anyway, thanks for the correction.  The additional info you provide just feeds the &quot;Don&#039;t Panic&quot; response here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Frank for the additional info and fact corrections.  I wondered where I got the 0.5% figure from, and it is cited in several places &#8211; most often cited as the percentage of the total population that died from the 1918 pandemic (50 million people &#8211; though that would still be too low) not the MPR of those infected.  Anyway, thanks for the correction.  The additional info you provide just feeds the &#8220;Don&#8217;t Panic&#8221; response here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Ceo</title>
		<link>http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/#comment-142</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Ceo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 14:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://living-prepared.com/?p=457#comment-142</guid>
		<description>Keep in mind that even in the 1918 flu, where an estimated 675,000 Americans died, most people did not get sick, and of those who did 98% had a miserable week and then recovered completely.

Also, the number of &quot;Confirmed and Probable&quot; cases is a small percentage of actual cases.  Many people with the flu never see a doctor, and of those who do, very few get the lab test needed to make a confirmed diagnosis of H1N1.

CDC flu expert Dan Jernigan last week estimated that about 100,000 people were sick with the flu, about half of those with H1N1, and it is continuing to spread.  The good news is that as the number of people sick with H1N1 goes up, the CFR is even lower than reported.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep in mind that even in the 1918 flu, where an estimated 675,000 Americans died, most people did not get sick, and of those who did 98% had a miserable week and then recovered completely.</p>
<p>Also, the number of &#8220;Confirmed and Probable&#8221; cases is a small percentage of actual cases.  Many people with the flu never see a doctor, and of those who do, very few get the lab test needed to make a confirmed diagnosis of H1N1.</p>
<p>CDC flu expert Dan Jernigan last week estimated that about 100,000 people were sick with the flu, about half of those with H1N1, and it is continuing to spread.  The good news is that as the number of people sick with H1N1 goes up, the CFR is even lower than reported.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Ceo</title>
		<link>http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/#comment-141</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Ceo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 14:30:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://living-prepared.com/?p=457#comment-141</guid>
		<description>#6

In the U.S., the Case Fatality Rate from the 1918 influenza pandemic is estimated to be 1.9%, not 0.5%</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#6</p>
<p>In the U.S., the Case Fatality Rate from the 1918 influenza pandemic is estimated to be 1.9%, not 0.5%</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Ceo</title>
		<link>http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/#comment-140</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Ceo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 14:27:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://living-prepared.com/?p=457#comment-140</guid>
		<description>#5- The harder you look, the more you&#039;ll find.  The US has been looking very hard for cases, so its not surprising that they are finding more and more.  

The definition of a &quot;confirmed or probable case&quot; involves testing a specimen from the sick person in a lab.  In the first weeks of this outbreak, only one lab in the US could confirm a case, and that was CDC in Atlanta.  After CDC distributed test kits and procuedures, there are almost 50 labs in the US which can confirm novel H1N1, so it&#039;s not surprising the number of lab-confirmed cases continues to grow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#5- The harder you look, the more you&#8217;ll find.  The US has been looking very hard for cases, so its not surprising that they are finding more and more.  </p>
<p>The definition of a &#8220;confirmed or probable case&#8221; involves testing a specimen from the sick person in a lab.  In the first weeks of this outbreak, only one lab in the US could confirm a case, and that was CDC in Atlanta.  After CDC distributed test kits and procuedures, there are almost 50 labs in the US which can confirm novel H1N1, so it&#8217;s not surprising the number of lab-confirmed cases continues to grow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank Ceo</title>
		<link>http://living-prepared.com/2009/05/25/ten-things-i-think-i-think-about-h1n1/#comment-139</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank Ceo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 14:22:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://living-prepared.com/?p=457#comment-139</guid>
		<description>Hello Mark!

You are doing an excellent job with your blog and postings.  I wanted to provide you wih some additional insights:

Item 4: You write &quot;Now, I am not an epidemiologist, but to me this suggests that as the H1N1 virus has spread, it has become less lethal as it has mutated.&quot;  Problem is, although many speciments of this H1N1 have been sequenced, the molecular virologists are not finding any significant mutations, and the reason it seems to be more  virulent in Mexico is unknown.  I say &quot;seems&quot; because we rally don&#039;t know how many cases there were in Mexico.  This is important, because the case fatality rate (CFR) is number of deaths divided by number of cases.  If 100 people died of H1N1 in Mexico, is that severe?  It depends.  If there were 200 cases and 100 deaths, that would be a  CFR of 50%, very high and comparable to H5N1.  If it were 100 deaths out of 100 million cases, that would be 1 out of a million . .  and not much to worry about.  Sinvce Mexico was not looking for cases before April, we know hown many people died in hospitals of H1N1, but we don&#039;t know how many didn&#039;t die.  The Mexican CFR could easily be similar to that of the rest of the world, we just don&#039;t know.

But one thing we do know, researchers have found no mutations which could account for a decrease (or increase) in lethality, and believe me, they are looking!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Mark!</p>
<p>You are doing an excellent job with your blog and postings.  I wanted to provide you wih some additional insights:</p>
<p>Item 4: You write &#8220;Now, I am not an epidemiologist, but to me this suggests that as the H1N1 virus has spread, it has become less lethal as it has mutated.&#8221;  Problem is, although many speciments of this H1N1 have been sequenced, the molecular virologists are not finding any significant mutations, and the reason it seems to be more  virulent in Mexico is unknown.  I say &#8220;seems&#8221; because we rally don&#8217;t know how many cases there were in Mexico.  This is important, because the case fatality rate (CFR) is number of deaths divided by number of cases.  If 100 people died of H1N1 in Mexico, is that severe?  It depends.  If there were 200 cases and 100 deaths, that would be a  CFR of 50%, very high and comparable to H5N1.  If it were 100 deaths out of 100 million cases, that would be 1 out of a million . .  and not much to worry about.  Sinvce Mexico was not looking for cases before April, we know hown many people died in hospitals of H1N1, but we don&#8217;t know how many didn&#8217;t die.  The Mexican CFR could easily be similar to that of the rest of the world, we just don&#8217;t know.</p>
<p>But one thing we do know, researchers have found no mutations which could account for a decrease (or increase) in lethality, and believe me, they are looking!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
