Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Aussie 'Flu - Much Worse than Mexican 'Flu
#21
I wouldn't get my hopes up. There's been a last gasp winter 'wog' knocking people over the last few weeks.

The majority of oldies got shots against the current strains but a few managed to catch other varieties.

But the people going down in heaps for a week with it have been the health care workers!

You'd think they'd all have been vaxed but at least one said no, she hadn't, she was young and wanted to let her own immune system take care of it. I kind of agree with that for something like flu, but shit, she's a community nurse and is carting it around with her and passing it on to others. siiiigh.

There are at least 8 community home visit nurses in this area, 6 of them went down with the flu! So did 2 of the doctors in town!

Wrong vaccine or didn't they bother?
Reply
#22
(10-31-2018, 06:00 AM)Di Wundrin Wrote:  You'd think they'd all have been vaxed but at least one said no, she hadn't, she was young and wanted to let her own immune system take care of it.

I thought that is what your immune system did with the help from the vaccination.
"when you think you've lost everything... you find out you can always lose a little bit more." - President Bush
Reply
#23
(10-31-2018, 05:38 AM)grayman Wrote:  Why the flu of 1918 was so deadly

Quite interesting, being the centenary of the 1918 'flu as well as Armistice, but I'd say most people had no idea the 'flu wiped out so many people.

I've been reading a few stories on it, and they all seem to fit the puzzle pretty well. The study of populations that missed major problems as a result tends to emphasise that influenza is one of those diseases humans have built up a natural resistance to. Makes sense, all the viruses are closely related.

It also seems to me that with influenza now being an annual thing as opposed to the '60s & '70s, when the HK & Russian bugs were so devastating (HK killed people at ten times the rate of recent epidemics/pandemics) that people have become less likely to badly affected by it. Even in bad years, the numbers are a fraction of any of the 20th century's outbreaks.

I'd say the big danger isn't another 'flu pandemic so much as another disease already in the human population suddenly becoming transmittable by human-human contact. A Sars or Mers pandemic is something you wouldn't want to think too deeply about.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#24
(10-31-2018, 10:16 AM)The Atheist Wrote:  
(10-31-2018, 05:38 AM)grayman Wrote:  Why the flu of 1918 was so deadly

Quite interesting, being the centenary of the 1918 'flu as well as Armistice, but I'd say most people had no idea the 'flu wiped out so many people.

I've been reading a few stories on it, and they all seem to fit the puzzle pretty well. The study of populations that missed major problems as a result tends to emphasise that influenza is one of those diseases humans have built up a natural resistance to. Makes sense, all the viruses are closely related.

It also seems to me that with influenza now being an annual thing as opposed to the '60s & '70s, when the HK & Russian bugs were so devastating (HK killed people at ten times the rate of recent epidemics/pandemics) that people have become less likely to badly affected by it. Even in bad years, the numbers are a fraction of any of the 20th century's outbreaks.

I'd say the big danger isn't another 'flu pandemic so much as another disease already in the human population suddenly becoming transmittable by human-human contact. A Sars or Mers pandemic is something you wouldn't want to think too deeply about.


My dad was seven when that hit. It took his brother.
He's told me stories about that time.
Funny how you really remember the rough shit.

After his brother died, Pa's mom forced him to drink some whiskey with honey.
He took one taste, and refused to down it.
"Why Ma? Why do I have to drink this?" he cried.

"Because if you don't, you will die."

so he drank it.
And lived.

amazing he didn't develop a taste for the stuff later on, but he was a pretty sober guy.
(Had his first toke of weed at 95. That was funny. I didn't do it btw...it was circumstance.)



not making claims btw, for the effectiveness of the whiskey and his survival.
purely anecdotal stuff.
Reply
#25
Whisky sounds legit, I've heard the joke that it's good for killing worms.
My ancestors were all rural dwellers around that time so no stories of any being affected but I believe there were a lot casualties in the cities.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)