Swine Flu - General Discussion and how it affects Disney

[ClareH37]

I don't think it's any more wide spread than here in the UK, the only cases here that we hear about are the actual already confirmed cases, and they've recovered anyway.

I still think ever since this thing kicked off, with all the people coming back from their holidays in Mexico, a fair number of them must have already had it but not realised exactly what it was - my neighbour came back from Mexico 4 weeks ago, spent a couple of days in bed with what she thought was a cold, then another week feeling horrible - the dr. now thinks she had swine flu. Also, one more fact about this flu, some strains cause lung problems, this current strain doesn't hit the lungs, it's the throat and the nose, hence some people feeling like they've just got a cold and shrugging it off.

 

[kaytieeldr]

What article is this? I would love to read it. Is it possible you could post the link?

http://www.wftv.com/swine-flu/19342017/detail.html (easily located by Googling the quote )

Gosh, the most interesting fact here...is the 12.5 percent of the population is infected and not feeling symptoms. So...that 12.5 percent are just toddling around the parks.

Not 12.5% of the population - 12.5% of the 25% who become infected with the virus. 25% times 12.5% equals 3.125%; or, 12.5% OF 25% is 3.125%:

even if you're around someone with swine flu, your chances of getting it are slim.
Only about 25 percent of the people exposed to the virus, become infected with it,
and of those only 12.5 percent actually get flu-like symptoms.
That means, for every 100 people who get close to an infected person, fewer than three would feel the effects

I figure, the difference between the article's "fewer than three" and my "3.125%" is that the basic numbers in the article are approximate.

disclaimer: where I quote wftv via Clare, it is in response to maroo (i.e. not any critique of ClareH57's posts!!!!

 

[ClareH37]

disclaimer: where I quote wftv via Clare, it is in response to maroo (i.e. not any critique of ClareH57's posts!!!!

LOL, NP

 

[fla4fun]

Is this correct?
"Officials said people infected with swine flu are most contagious a day before they fall ill, and seven days after recovery."

I'm just trying to understand how long people may really have this and be able to spread it. Up to 7 days incubation period with no symptoms, up to 7 days sick, and according to the above article, 7 days after recovery people are very contagious.

I don't know. But it must be harder to catch than most people think, because in the case of the girl from Mexico here in Orlando, her family was on vacation with her and did not get it. Only she did. So either they did everything right, or it's not so easy to catch.

It's kind of frustrating that it is taking so long to get the test results though. She was already recovered enough to go back home to Mexico before the test results ever came back. I'm assuming they wouldn't have let her fly home if she was still contagious.

 

[Toad_Passenger]

Hey everyone! I was able to stay away from all of this pretty much all weekend. A few checks to CNN proved fruitful as it sounded like the CDC & WHO were starting to take a "cautiously optimistic" approach to all of this.

Even the confirmed case in Orlando doesn't bother me, as I already believed it was naive to think it was NOT in WDW. I've never considered canceling my trip (which is now 18 days away!) and we started the official "packing" last night!

Hopefully the good news will continue to come out about this flu. Even if you get it, it seems pretty mild, so I'm willing to run with that. I do have to say, though, that I'm glad we're going now, since who knows what the Fall will bring. Even if it does show up again in the Fall, though, there are no guarantees it will be any stronger than what it is now.

I was wondering over the weekend though if the WDW-TV channel could bring back the "Zippa-dee-doo-dah Tip for the Day" about using your hand sanitizer and washing your hands frequently!

 

[Alesia]

20%. MUCH higher than the rate of H1N! deaths. Thanks for posting the facts, Alesia!

No problem.

By the way, I completely agree with your signature.

 

[DisneyNewbiie]

So I took a break from this on friday logged into work today.turned on to cnn
and there showing reports on traffic cams are they really safe?Since I work at home I have the tv on and its been 20 min and nothing about the swine flu.


Okay they just mentioned something about it.On a side note wow those little cameras on 1 intersection last year in 1 area brought in 3.3 million dollors in fines in 1 section!!Now thats scary

 

[ntsammy5]

It's still lurking out there, waiting to strike when we least expect it. We're getting back at the pigs though.

 

[Toad_Passenger]

So I took a break from this on friday logged into work today.turned on to cnn
and there showing reports on traffic cams are they really safe?Since I work at home I have the tv on and its been 20 min and nothing about the swine flu.

I think on the cnn.com website the swine flu article had dropped to like 7th or 8th on the "most viewed" list. Sounds like the initial panic has subsided, so the news is moving on, now. I guess it wasn't as deadly as the news media wanted it to be.

 

[praline3001]

I still don't get why my state isn't on the CDC list?
They had 7 confirmed cases yesterday morning ~
I guess cajuns don't count

 

[DisneyNewbiie]

I still don't get why my state isn't on the CDC list?
They had 7 confirmed cases yesterday morning ~
I guess cajuns don't count

 

[maroo]

Ok...let's start over with the whole 12.5% quoting and tell the story in context. It seems there is some confusion about what was said and inferred.

This was the first post:

Just read the article and what I did find interesting, and I quote:

"even if you're around someone with swine flu, your chances of getting it are slim. Only about 25 percent of the people exposed to the virus, become infected with it, and of those only 12.5 percent actually get flu-like symptoms. That means, for every 100 people who get close to an infected person, fewer than three would feel the effects."

Yes, I know in the context of Disney that's still a very large number, but if certainly reads a lot better than 50 in every 100 people

To which I replied...

Gosh, the most interesting fact here...is the 12.5 percent of the population is infected and not feeling symptoms. So...that 12.5 percent are just toddling around the parks.

Am I confused here?

In context, the "population" referred to here was the "exposed population" since I was directly quoting ClareH37.

http://www.wftv.com/swine-flu/19342017/detail.html (easily located by Googling the quote )

Not 12.5% of the population - 12.5% of the 25% who become infected with the virus. 25% times 12.5% equals 3.125%; or, 12.5% OF 25% is 3.125%:
I figure, the difference between the article's "fewer than three" and my "3.125%" is that the basic numbers in the article are approximate.

disclaimer: where I quote wftv via Clare, it is in response to maroo (i.e. not any critique of ClareH57's posts!!!!

I believe you misunderstood what I was saying because my quote was taken out of the context of ClareH57's post.

I have no idea where you are coming in with the 3% numbers...I think the "exposed population" is very, very low...much, much less than 3% of the population.


My only point in that whole thing is that we have people that can be "carriers" of the virus. They HAVE the virus and are not showing symptoms. Which means they can spread the virus and not even be aware. I just want to clarify the point I was trying to make.

 

[Crisgw]

I can tell you I'm SO excited to leave Sunday morning and be at DHS by noon! This just shows how overreacting can make you crazy! I was a bit worried but now, I'm just excited and glad I didn't act hastily about the trip with all the fear mongering and hype!

 

[avahoneybee]

I'm one of those that was in borderline panic mode, but if I had a trip planned tomorrow, I'd be hopping on a plane!

The latest news I've heard is that the virus is just like the seasonal flu. Gotta love the media.

 

[Toad_Passenger]

I still don't get why my state isn't on the CDC list?
They had 7 confirmed cases yesterday morning ~
I guess cajuns don't count

No, it's just that we know all you N'awlins folk are "sick" to begin with.

 

[maroo]

I still don't get why my state isn't on the CDC list?
They had 7 confirmed cases yesterday morning ~
I guess cajuns don't count

Good morning, Brook!

You are already cracking me up this morning! Don't you know LA doesn't count for anything? I bet you guys get updated today.

I see that the "panic inducing media" did a great job surpressing the Orange Co case until the panic subsided. And they did a good job releasing the news on a Sunday, too! Heck..It has not even panicked the DIS! Hilarious. The DIS was FREAKING last week when it was reported that a tourist was sick. When the info is finally released that the same tourist indeed was infected it rolls on over...which is good. Panic at this point is pointless.

 

[JLTraveling]

I have no idea where you are coming in with the 3% numbers...I think the "exposed population" is very, very low...much, much less than 3% of the population.


My only point in that whole thing is that we have people that can be "carriers" of the virus. They HAVE the virus and are not showing symptoms. Which means they can spread the virus and not even be aware. I just want to clarify the point I was trying to make.

Math is not my strongest suit, but I think I understand where the 3% number came from. Hypothetically, let's say that 100 people were exposed. 25% of them will become infected. 25% of 100 = 25 infected people. Now, of those infected, 12.5% will not feel any effects, and an equal 12.5% will show symptoms. 12.5% of 25 = 3.125, or approximately 3 people. Converting it back, then, approximately 3% of those exposed will show symptoms and another 3% will be carriers.

Here's where it breaks down, though. If 25 of 100 people who are exposed become infected, and we've only accounted for 6 of them (3 showing symptoms and 3 being symptomless carriers), what the heck happened to the other 19 people? According to the infection numbers, they're infected. But they're not sick, and they're not symptomless. That's where I think the numbers as quoted don't work.

12.5% plus 12.5% equals 25%. I think that it should read like this: Out of 100 people exposed, 12 or 13 will get sick. Another 12 or 13 will be asymptomatic carriers. 12 or 13 plus 12 or 13 equals approximately 25. That accounts for all of the infected people.

Now, how many are exposed in the first place? That's the 64 thousand dollar question.

Wow, why do I suddenly feel like I'm back in 9th grade -- If train A leaves Boston traveling at 75 mph, and train C leaves Chicago traveling at 61 mph...

 

[Toad_Passenger]

Just a quick story about how this is splitting our own society. A friend of mine is a teacher at a school and one of the teacher's aides just returned from a trip to Mexico. Apparently when she went to return to work, the teacher in the class caused a big scene in front of the children, saying she didn't want her in the classroom at all and to not even "think about touching or hugging a child!"

In the end they had to call in the administrators,the HR staff, and union people to settle all of it. It's a shame that this is what the media has created about this. I'm not saying the teacher shouldn't have been concerned, but to wait until that morning and to cause such a scene in front of the kids is a direct result of the "panic" that erupted from this whole thing!

 

[Stittsville]

Math is not my strongest suit, but I think I understand where the 3% number came from. Hypothetically, let's say that 100 people were exposed. 25% of them will become infected. 25% of 100 = 25 infected people. Now, of those infected, 12.5% will not feel any effects, and an equal 12.5% will show symptoms. 12.5% of 25 = 3.125, or approximately 3 people. Converting it back, then, approximately 3% of those exposed will show symptoms and another 3% will be carriers.

Here's where it breaks down, though. If 25 of 100 people who are exposed become infected, and we've only accounted for 6 of them (3 showing symptoms and 3 being symptomless carriers), what the heck happened to the other 19 people? According to the infection numbers, they're infected. But they're not sick, and they're not symptomless. That's where I think the numbers as quoted don't work.

12.5% plus 12.5% equals 25%. I think that it should read like this: Out of 100 people exposed, 12 or 13 will get sick. Another 12 or 13 will be asymptomatic carriers. 12 or 13 plus 12 or 13 equals approximately 25. That accounts for all of the infected people.

Now, how many are exposed in the first place? That's the 64 thousand dollar question.

Wow, why do I suddenly feel like I'm back in 9th grade -- If train A leaves Boston traveling at 75 mph, and train C leaves Chicago traveling at 61 mph...

Here is the original quote I believe you are basing your numbers on:
"even if you're around someone with swine flu, your chances of getting it are slim. Only about 25 percent of the people exposed to the virus, become infected with it, and of those only 12.5 percent actually get flu-like symptoms. That means, for every 100 people who get close to an infected person, fewer than three would feel the effects."

Note that is says only 12.5% of the 25% get symptoms, 100 x .25 x .125 = 3.125 or roughly 3 get symptoms. The other 22 would feel no effects, and 75 people would not even catch it.

Of course, I don't know how accurate these quoted numbers are.

 

[C.Ann]

I think on the cnn.com website the swine flu article had dropped to like 7th or 8th on the "most viewed" list. Sounds like the initial panic has subsided, so the news is moving on, now. I guess it wasn't as deadly as the news media wanted it to be.

------------------------
Didn't even make the front page of our newspaper here yesterday - a small area that is absolutely starving for news..

I guess the "slow" news week nationwide has moved on to bigger and better things..