mstevens
Toadfish. Splendid is implied but not guaranteed.
Originally Mexico reported a 5% death rate and deaths among otherwise normally healthy people. That is why I freaked out, and why WHO and CDC sounded the alarm. Didn't matter which country it was coming from.
Except that WHO and CDCP didn't at first sound the alarm particularly any more loudly than they have with numerous other health issues over the years. I read MWMR Weekly Reports well... weekly, and have for 20+ years. Sure, they're full of stuff about H1N1 NOW, but prior to the news blitz the reports were quite measured and reasonable - no "alarm" being sounded at all compared to other infectious disease groupings all year. Once the news media started bleating, responses from health organizations had to be louder just to be heard.
Yes, it seems noteworthy that initially a 5% death rate was reported, especially given the age group of those most effective (reminiscent of the "Spanish 'flu" of 1918). However, there was a 75% death rate in crashes on our local highways over the weekend. That's 3 dead in a 2-car crash involving 2 people in each car. That's the problem with small samples: they don't provide statistically significant information. You'll note that as the number of reported infections increases the death rate within Mexico has been dropping. What that means is that as sample size increases we're getting a better picture of the real risks.
To me the scariest part is that the public health measures that authorities all over, including Mexico have been pushing are for the most part very basic, yet we tend not to follow them unless we're terrified of dying. The biggest example is staying home when you're sick - Americans tend to view showing up for work snorfling and horking as some sort of badge of honor.
I promise you more healthy young Mexicans have died of not wearing seatbelts, smoking, drinking, or even using ladders this year than of H1N1 influenza and you don't hear anyone panicking about that.