Attack Rates?

[sara.smiles]

Severe Flu Pandemic May Cost World Up to $2 Trillion
________________________________________
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...=latin_america

June 29 (Bloomberg) -- A flu outbreak killing 70 million people worldwide may cause global economic losses of as much as $2 trillion, a World Bank official said.

-snip-

The Bank's scenario of a severe pandemic assumes about 35 percent of people worldwide would be infected. Of those, 3 percent, or about 70 million people, may die.
_______________________________________________________
Referring to the above posted article...

May we please have a factual discussion of attack rates...is there any credible data out there on the attack rate of H5N1?

And, considering the news for the last 9 years has consistently reported a very high mortality for this virus, why are preparedness exercises continually using a lower than apparent mortality rate in their calculations?

Lastly, is anyone addressing tertiary mortality?

Mortality from after effects of having H5N1, which subsequently cause death i.e. pneumonia, sepsis, COPD, cardio complications, etc. is considered a secondary mortality.

When I say tertiary mortality, I mean non infected persons dying from lack of medical care, lack of available food or drugs necessary to life, or other complication of a disabled civilization infrastructure?

 

[Racter]

Re: Attack Rates?

is there any credible data out there on the attack rate of H5N1?

Nope. Currently, the gross attack rate is such a vanishingly small fraction of a percent that calling it zero is close enough. That doesn't mean a whole lot though, because a pandemic strain has yet to emerge. The definition of a pandemic is an epidemic affecting significant portions of populations over a wide geographic area. We not only don't know what those portions will be, we don't even know for sure if this virus will aquire the ability to be easily transmitted between humans at all.

And, considering the news for the last 9 years has consistently reported a very high mortality for this virus, why are preparedness exercises continually using a lower than apparent mortality rate in their calculations?

Maybe they're just try to prepare to respond to the worst thing they could realistically hope to respond to effectively. But a high case fatality rate doesn't automatically mean a high mortality rate. The latter is the product of multiplying the CFR by the attack rate. (see above).

Lastly, is anyone addressing tertiary mortality?

Boy, are they ever. It's all speculation of course; how could anyone hope to accurately predict such a thing? Even in retrospect, estimating the numbers of people whose deaths were directly attributable to the pandemic would require making tough judgement calls at every turn. Driving an ill family member to a hospital, I am killed in a car accident. Am I a tertiary casualty? How about if I was drunk? What if I was only a little drunk, and the traffic lights were out due to a power failure? By tweaking the parameters, you could get a ridiculously wide range of numbers. See what I mean?

Just because there aren't any good answers doesn't mean these aren't good questions, by the way.

 

[Laidback Al]

Re: Mortality Count

Re: Mortality Count

For us novices can you provide a layman's distinction between primary and secondary mortality from H5N1. Is primary mortality a function of H5N1 infection causing ARDS, dehydration and death through diarrhea, and possibly brain infections? And secondary mortality a function of bacterial infection due to compromised immune systems?

Based on the existing H5N1 deaths how many have been primary versus secondary?

Tertiary deaths during a pandemic (i.e. dying from non-H5N1 infections) can not just be derived from counting all the non-H5N1 death during the pandemic period. People will die from car accidents, heart disease, lung cancer, etc. whether there is a pandemic or not. These numbers need to be removed from the tabulation.

I am afraid, however, after removing these "normal fatalities", indirect fatalities attributable to a pandemic will be large. In western civilized societies with JIT economies the tertiary mortality count may be much higher than the count directly attributable to H5N1 infections, especially if we experience a collapse of infrastructure.

 

[Jeremy]

Re: Attack Rates?

Tertiary cases are always problematic.

For example:

Let's say my cousin get's sick from the pandemic strain of H5N1. I then decide to drive down to assist my cousin in their time of need.

Before I leave I decide to take a friend along with me to help assist.

Along the way I encounter an ice storm and I lose control of my car, which causes me to spin out of control. Coincedently, my friend had just unbuckled their seatbelt 10 seconds before to change shirts and because of this they were thrown 50 feet from the car, which inevitebly caused thier death.

Was their death caused by H5N1?

One could argue yes.