Can anyone tell me why a novel H1N1 strain should be tracked exactly like the seasonal flu?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

I keep seeing this argument pop up that the CDC is making up numbers by adding from different flu seasons. Novel H1N1 didn't follow the normal seasonal flu pattern so why should we count it using those dates. Just curious, I'd love to hear some reasoning on this.

[NJmaverick]

1. H1N1 strain while novel is still just another influenza virus

the flu surveillance systems in place are more than capable of tracking it (as it is other strains). Anyone claiming the CDC is making up numbers, have no clue about epidemiology works.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

6. I'm talking about those who insist on using the seasonal flu dates to count H1N1 cases.

[NJmaverick]

22. H1N1 is captured with the seasonal flu data

and based on how samples of the tested viruses break out, they develop their numbers

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

23. Question was poorly worded. I'll try again.

Some here are insisting on comparing 6 months of novel H1N1 (2009) data (Apr-Oct) with past seasonal flu data which is compiled Oct-Oct. It seemed purposefully disingenious and misleading to do so. I was hoping one of the H1N1 deniers would come here and attempt to justify this practice.

[dhpgetsit]

2. I'm no expert, but...

Seasonal flu is seasonal for a reason. It spreads from person to person through casual contact. It spreads mor efficiently whan peaple are working and living in close quarters, sneezing and breathing the same air. It tends to spread more in the winter months.

H1N1 is transmitted the same way, and therefore can be expected to spread more during "flu season", at least until more people get shots or naturally develop antibodies.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

5. You misunderstand (my fault). Why insist on using the seasonal flu dates to count H1N1 numbers?

[pnwmom]

3. There's really no such thing as a "seasonal flu." The "seasonal flu" vaccine is

the one the CDC had put together after observing whatever strains of flu seemed most prevalent in the spring; then the vaccine is prepared for the summer to be available for the fall. Unfortunately, the H1N1 virus didn't start to pick up steam till after the CDC had ordered the vaccines; otherwise, it would have been included -- as it will next year.

This isn't an unusual thing to happen. The problem this year is that the virus not covered in the vaccine also happens to be one that most people, especially younger people, don't have built up immunity to.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. Why insist on using traditional flu season in counting the H1N1 cases?

Since it didn't follow the traditional seasonal flu pattern.

[pnwmom]

7. There are always outliers, though, and they've always been counted this way.

I'm not sure what the problem with that would be. Is there a concern you have about this?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. Some here are accusing the CDC of inflating the numbers by using 2009 and 2010 numbers.

[pnwmom]

9. How could that be since we're not in 2010 yet? n/t

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

10. The 2008-2009 flu season ended October 3, 2009.

They make the argument we can't count any H1N1 statistics since then because it's now the 2009-2010 flu season.

[kestrel91316]

11. Unless tracking of flu strains is over the same sort of time period each year,

there is no way to compare data.

They pick a time frame and they stick with it. The real question is, why on earth would they pick a different time frame for this or any other strain????

Oy. I am betting you have no science research/statistics background, at least at the college level.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

14. Data is easily compared when using the same amount of time.

Why would the dates have to correspond?

[uppityperson]

25. Count using 12 months rather than Oct-Oct. So long as it is 12 months,

it should show what happens in those 12 months. I see what you mean since CDC chose Oct-Oct for the seasonal influenza 12 months, but hini has come, peaked, spreading on during a different 12 months, so why not simply use "12 months"?

On the other hand, deniers will find something else to c/o about.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

26. I'm glad someone finally understood my point. As badly worded as it may have been.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

17. Here is a link post #14 is what I am talking about.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7182766#7186757

The accusation is made that the CDC is using the numbers from 2 flu seasons to make H1N1 appear worse. H1N1 started half way through the 2008-2009 flu season in April by most accounts. It makes no sense to count H1N1 from April 2009 to October 2009 and then compare the numbers to historic seasonal flu records which are counted for a full 12 month period. I don't think I need to be a statistician to realize that comparing 6 months of data to 12 months of data isn't going to result in an accurate comparison.

[kestrel91316]

12. Actually, my real question is: why do you have such a bee up your butt about the CDC??

You've perhaps got a BETTER source for flu data?

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. I'm here defending public health from anti-vax attacks.

I posted another story today about a court victory over discrimination. My support of civil rights is unquestionable. Perhaps you need to read more of my stuff.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

18. What liberal issue do you think I attacked here?

[pnwmom]

This is a personal attack and it's dragging other disagreements into this thread.

You might want to check the rules.

[pnwmom]

delete (dupe)

[pnwmom]

19. delete (dupe)

[pnwmom]

20. delete (dupe)

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. I have a problem with those here accusing the CDC of trying to inflate the numbers.

If there is a better source I don't know of one, I link to the CDC in nearly every flu post that needs a link.

[Celebration]

21. I thought we stopped testing for H1N1

This is more of an issue.......

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/21/cbsnews_investigates/main5404829.shtml

In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?

Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains.

CBS News learned that the decision to stop counting H1N1 flu cases was made so hastily that states weren't given the opportunity to provide input. Instead, on July 24, the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists, CSTE, issued the following notice to state public health officials on behalf of the CDC:

..................

When CDC did not provide us with the material, we filed a Freedom of Information request with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). More than two months later, the request has not been fulfilled. We also asked CDC for state-by-state test results prior to halting of testing and tracking, but CDC was again, initially, unresponsive.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

24. Nope still testing and counting pediatric cases and a representative sample of serious adult cases.

[yxa]

27. H1N1 patterns and Disneyland Resort workers

This is a great question, and I'm not sure how to answer it. But I am very interested in how the H1N1 flu pattern will affect workers over the coming months. I just watched a short film about workers at the Disneyland Resort who remain concerned about the threat of contracting or spreading H1N1, and about company practices related to the issue. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbdQCHUH3IU

Has anyone seen a similar film, that puts epidemiologists and workers into conversation with one another?