Quote from belgarion
I question the statistics about H1N1 being so much more deadly than the plain old garden variety seasonal flu. Why? Because I am sure that in the past deaths that resulted from the seasonal flu were reported as being caused by pneumonia or other complications, with no mention of the flu. Since H1N1 is a "public health crisis" the tracking system is much more diligent. How can we say that it is more dangerous when we don't really have reliable data from the past to go on?
Your question seems to have more to do with the numbers of fatalities. I would suggest that the deadliness has nothing to do with numbers.
What if you were to just think about who was getting sick now as opposed to who got sick, and died from flu in the past few years. Many of the fatal cases that we are seeing currently are in people who had a prior existing condition. But, generally, these are not the people that you would expect to die of seasonal flu because they are not elderly, or infants. As you may recall, it is the elderly or the very young that are most at risk with seasonal flu.
What is really most amazing to me, is that completely healthy pregnant women, kids, teens and young adults are dying of this flu as well without prior health problems. Pregnant women as a group are being hit hard. It just isn't normal to read of case after case of people dying this way in the spring and summer, and now into the fall. You have perhaps noticed these deaths? They appear to be completely random events. The flu may hit more than one family member yet one lives, and another dies. There is no explanation as to why.
A very important difference between the seasonal flu viruses and swine flu virus lies in the abilty of the swine virus to infect deep lung tissue. You just don't see this as often with seasonal flu. The lungs of some of these cases are so damaged, that ordinary
vents don't help them. ECMO had to be used as a last ditch effort, and treating these cases is tremendously expensive, and labor intensive.
Co-infections with other organisms can occur as the virus knocks out the immune system. This is particularly true if a person has a prior existing health problem. The ability to penetrate deep into the lungs is one reason why this virus can be very dangerous.
Quote from chealth.canoe.ca
Earlier studies conducted in tissue culture and in ferrets - the best animal model for human flu - found the new virus is drawn to tissue found deep in the lung. That's a penchant it shares with H5N1. Seasonal flu viruses attack the upper airways.
Quote from www.digitaljournal.com
...the swine flu actively attaches to receptors in deep lung cells in addition to the receptors of cells in the nose and throat. This deep lung attachment activity is something that the more ordinary seasonal flu variants cannot do.
The findings support the more dangerous nature of the H1N1 virus in that it simply can attach to more cells, giving it greater variability and impact across more cell tissue.
Both seasonal H1N1 and the novel swine flu are Type A. I find it curious that you are reporting that you had confirmed Type A but do not say which subtype. If all that you were told was that it was Type A, then it is likely that you have swine flu simply because there isn't that much seasonal flu around just yet.
Quote from belgarion
BTW, I had the seasonal flu shot back in September and I am now recovering from one of the worst cases of Type A I ever had. And yes Type A WAS CONFIRMED by testing.
Vaccinations are NOT 100% effective, at least not on some people
True, they are not, but though you might still get the disease, your chances of dying are certainly decreased if you developed some antibodies from being vaccinated. Of course, if you have swine flu, the seasonal flu shot is not going to help much.