There ARE pedis who aren't recommending the H1N1 vaccine

[Anonymous]

And it could be anyone's kid to have an adverse reaction or unknown consequence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:30% have had no underlying conditions. That is VERY substantial.

.

How do they know?

autopsy????

what about undetected congenital abnormalities?

I don't see how this is a useful debating point. Even if some of those 30% had some underlying abnormality, there's an equal chance that YOUR child could have a similar hard-to-detect abnormality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for starting this thread. People have been way too hysterical about the swine flu. It's the flu.

Tell that to the parents who have lost HEALTHY children to H1N1.[/quote
This is totally THRUTH

[Anonymous]

Re: the query re: autopsies. Anyone dying under suspicious circumstances is autopsied. It's req'd by state law. And when some seemingly healthy person gets what seems to be the flu, and dies, that would trigger an autopsy. Btw since it's not been raised in this discussion, the healthy folks aren't dying from the flu, per se. The H1N1 flu makes you atypically susceptible to opportunistic infections. The ultimate culprit tends to be a virulent strain of pneumonia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re: the query re: autopsies. Anyone dying under suspicious circumstances is autopsied. It's req'd by state law. And when some seemingly healthy person gets what seems to be the flu, and dies, that would trigger an autopsy. Btw since it's not been raised in this discussion, the healthy folks aren't dying from the flu, per se. The H1N1 flu makes you atypically susceptible to opportunistic infections. The ultimate culprit tends to be a virulent strain of pneumonia.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4521060.stm

- "Patients with higher vitamin D levels in their blood had significantly better lung function, a University of Auckland team found in a study of 14,091 people."

- "Unlike other vitamins, it [vitamin D] can be made in our bodies as a result of exposure to sunlight, providing the necessary starting materials are there to start with."

How many of our kids are actually outside each day for a significant period of time?



You've got to wonder what's missing in some of these so-called healthy kids to have them succumb so easily to the secondary effects of a virus that many suffer through for about 5 days on average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: the query re: autopsies. Anyone dying under suspicious circumstances is autopsied. It's req'd by state law. And when some seemingly healthy person gets what seems to be the flu, and dies, that would trigger an autopsy. Btw since it's not been raised in this discussion, the healthy folks aren't dying from the flu, per se. The H1N1 flu makes you atypically susceptible to opportunistic infections. The ultimate culprit tends to be a virulent strain of pneumonia.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4521060.stm

- "Patients with higher vitamin D levels in their blood had significantly better lung function, a University of Auckland team found in a study of 14,091 people."

- "Unlike other vitamins, it [vitamin D] can be made in our bodies as a result of exposure to sunlight, providing the necessary starting materials are there to start with."

How many of our kids are actually outside each day for a significant period of time?



You've got to wonder what's missing in some of these so-called healthy kids to have them succumb so easily to the secondary effects of a virus that many suffer through for about 5 days on average.

We would like to think there is a type of person with a hidden defect that makes them vulnerable and therefore makes us safe. But it may just be bad luck, or maybe a matter of how we treat the illness.

Many fatal cases probably involve getting a secondary infection. For that to happen, all you need is to be sick and congested enough and then get unlucky enough to get exposed to something that gives you a respiratory infection.

As for prevention of secondary infections, the difference here might not be the person's system, but how they treat their flu symptoms. For instance, if I use hot showers and drink warm liquids to loosen my congestion, I can get the crud out and recover quickly. When I have been stupid enough not to do that regularly, my symptoms have gotten worse and I have gotten bronchitis as a result. I'm sure I probably got pneumonia once, too, which was probably both bad luck and bad management on my part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is always someone who is the lowest scoring med school student.

And from your response, I'm gathering that you, too, were at the bottom of your graduating class.

Valedictorian, actually. And from an Ivy.

And I'm an astronaut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for starting this thread. People have been way too hysterical about the swine flu. It's the flu.

Tell that to the parents who have lost HEALTHY children to H1N1.

Oh yes, because of the just over 1000 people who have died of this flu, TONS of them were healthy children.

I think healthy children will have more chance of winning the lotto than dying of swine flu.

Tons? Like 30, if that were healthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re: the query re: autopsies. Anyone dying under suspicious circumstances is autopsied. It's req'd by state law. And when some seemingly healthy person gets what seems to be the flu, and dies, that would trigger an autopsy. Btw since it's not been raised in this discussion, the healthy folks aren't dying from the flu, per se. The H1N1 flu makes you atypically susceptible to opportunistic infections. The ultimate culprit tends to be a virulent strain of pneumonia.

What state law is that? My FIL passed away in January after a surgery went wrong, he caught MRSA and we walked in on him blue, not breathing and not being monitored. We decided whether or not he had an autopsy and we declined. It is up to the family.

[Anonymous]

you tell me the state, l'll find you the law. When my dad died unexpectedly at 85, they didn't req an autopsy and would have chalked it up to natural causes, had we not opted for an autopsy. Given what you describe about yr FIL, it sounds like they knew enough to assign a cause of death w/ out an autopsy. As I said above, in the instance where an otherwise seemingly healthy person -- particularly a child --dies from something that's not typically deadly, you bet there's an autopsy. Otherwise, both murders and public health crises (like H1N1) go undetected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:you tell me the state, l'll find you the law. When my dad died unexpectedly at 85, they didn't req an autopsy and would have chalked it up to natural causes, had we not opted for an autopsy. Given what you describe about yr FIL, it sounds like they knew enough to assign a cause of death w/ out an autopsy. As I said above, in the instance where an otherwise seemingly healthy person -- particularly a child --dies from something that's not typically deadly, you bet there's an autopsy. Otherwise, both murders and public health crises (like H1N1) go undetected.

Maryland. And no they did not know the cause of death. He went in for minor out patient surgery. Was in recovery. We went to lunch. Came back he was not breathing. Had not been breathing for at least ten or 15 minutes. They revived him but he never came back to us. We have NO IDEA what caused the episode but of course we know he died because he turned his machines off and watched him suffocate. We were given the CHOICE to do an autopsy. Unless there is a crime YOU ARE NOT forced to perform an autopsy on a loved one.

[Anonymous]

I've included in caps below, the relevant sections. It would appear that your father in law's death, is covered by an exception in the second capitalized section. The first section is as I indicated: an autopsy would be required for anyone who was deemed healthy or if the death would be characterized as suspicious or unusual. The only exception here is if the family has religious objections.

http://www.dhmh.state.md.us/ocme/law.htm

Title 10

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE
Subtitle 35
POSTMORTEM EXAMINERS COMMISSION

Chapter 01 Medical Examiner's Cases
Authority: Health-General Article, §§5-301 et seq., 10-714, 18-213;
Estates and Trusts Article, §§4-509 and 4-509.1; Annotated Code of Maryland
.01 Definitions.
A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated.
B. Terms Defined.

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

(2) Medical Examiner's Case.
(a) "Medical examiner's case" means any death which is the result, wholly or in part, of a casualty or accident, homicide, poisoning, suicide, criminal abortion, rape, therapeutic misadventure, drowning, OR A DEATH OF A SUSPICIOUS OR UNUSUAL NATURE, OR OF AN APPARENTLY HEALTHY INDIVIDUAL, or a case which is dead on arrival at the hospital.
(b) "Medical examiner's case" does not mean:
(i) A stillbirth or a neonatal death, or accident room or HOSPITAL DEATH IN WHICH THE CAUSE OF DEATH HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE HOSPITAL PHYSICIAN AND IS DUE TO DISEASE, and FREE OF EVIDENCE OF ACCIDENTAL OR CRIMINAL NATURE;
(ii) A case which is dead on arrival at the hospital and the physician who pronounces death has been in previous attendance on the patient; or
(iii) A death which occurs in a hospital within 24 hours of admission merely because the death occurred within 24 hours.