The Global State of H1N1 (the Swine Flu )
Hasan A. Yahya, Ph.Ds
This article argue that H1N1 in modern age, like SARS
in the 1930s, need to be globally managed far from narrow national political
policy making. Therefore, This analysis will not deal
with symptoms or methods of prevention. Apart from killing at least 2,185
people worldwide, the H1N1 virus – popularly known as the Swine Flu – has sown
great confusion and more than normal uncertainty about the future. It was
declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a pandemic, which simply
means a global threat.
To report regional comparative analysis, there are
certain notes about data collected or reported. Understanding what data means
among researchers is important to understand the situation of the H1N1 disease.
Because it is limited to certain methods of reporting (
official or non-official), daily or weekly, rates or actual
numbers, regional or global, Therefore,
worldwide tally of deaths can be seen as an indicator for comparative analysis
according to these methods of reporting. However, According to the regional
factor, we may compare Arab and Muslim countries, or the Mediterranean Region
(MR) the rate and numbers of death cases, differ from other nations in the West
or South America regions. While the
highest number of case in Egypt was in June 2009, 185, more than double of that
number was reported in Argentina (453 death cases). The number of deaths in the
United States was 408. Australia 75, United kingdom
33. Brazil 103.
The above data shows that Arab and Muslim countries as
developing countries are more immune than advanced countries such as the United
States as an example (408 deaths). While no death or very small number of death
reported in the Arab and Muslim countries. [Egypt 1,Indonesia
4, Iraq 1,Lebanon 1, Malaysia 8,Qatar 1, and Saudi Arabia 4]. For some Muslim
scholars, they claim, that these numbers give confirmation that Arab and Muslim
countries, who profess Islamic rules concerning swine prohibition have more
ability to immune themselves than other countries [Especially Christian
countries which legally use productions of swine ). But lack of research in
this area of correlation between religion and H1N1 disease, reduces the value
of such claim.
H1N1 and SARS: The H1N1 or the Swine Flu was compared
to other disease known as SARS, were quarantine measures heavily used in the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak, were instituted by countries such as China
in handling the threat of H1N1 as if they were a silver bullet for all
infectious diseases. Quarantine (which is derived from the Italian “quarantina” or about forty in recognition of the number
days of isolation imposed by the City of Venice during the Bubonic Plague of
the 14th century) proved futile to stop the spread of the 1918 Spanish Flu even
when vigorously enforced in military units. The same holds true in the 2009
H1N1 flu pandemic. By June 18 (the date of the most recent epidemiological data
available), only 23 confirmed cases in China were identified through
involuntary quarantine. SARS has been spreading through
populations in Asia and elsewhere. For scientists, the epidemiology is
difficult, in part because of the variable response by individuals,
institutions, and governments to a new and dangerous disease. Nonetheless, a
coherent picture of the epidemic is beginning to emerge. Epidemiologists look
for contemplating a list of basic questions about how and why the disease
caused by this coronavirus SARS. By piecing together
preliminary data on the course of infection, and by making use of accumulating
case notifications, two studies reported by Lipsitch et
al. and Riley et al. in Science Express (May 2003) give the
first quantitative assessment of the epidemic potential of SARS. Their main
message was that this new coronavirus is sufficiently
transmissible to cause a very large epidemic if unchecked, but not so
contagious as to be uncontrollable with good, basic public health measures.
Both groups of researchers make use of dynamic mathematical models in which
individuals progress through mutually exclusive classes containing susceptible,
exposed (latent), infectious, and recovered (immune) individuals.
Historically In September 1988, a previously
healthy 32-year-old pregnant woman was hospitalized for pneumonia and died 8
days later. A swine H1N1 flu virus was detected. Four days before getting sick,
the patient visited a county fair swine exhibition where there was widespread
influenza-like illness among the swine. In follow-up studies, 76% of swine
exhibitors tested had antibody evidence of swine flu infection but no serious
illnesses were detected among this group. Additional studies suggest that one
to three health care personnel who had contact with the patient developed mild
influenza-like illnesses with antibody evidence of swine flu infection. The
H1N1 swine viruses have been known to circulate among pig populations since at
least 1930, H3N2 influenza viruses did not begin circulating among US pigs
about seventy years later (until 1998). The H3N2 viruses initially were
introduced into the pig population from humans. The current swine flu H3N2
viruses are closely related to human H3N2 viruses.
Compared with SARS, , it is
precisely the mildness of the H1N1 virus that poses one of the biggest
challenges to global pandemic planning and control. Due to the high fatality
rate of H5N1 – once considered the most likely candidate for the next flu
pandemic, the WHO pandemic alert system focuses on the geographic spread of the
pandemic flu. A full-fledged pandemic (“Phase 6”) can be announced provided
there is evidence of sustained human-to-human transmission in two separate
parts of the planet simultaneously. The rapid spread of a low virulent H1N1
(instead of a highly lethal H5N1) in 2009 thus lays bare the loophole of the
WHO pandemic alert system. Within one week, the WHO alert level was raised to
Phase 5, suggesting a pandemic was “imminent.” By May 8, the criteria for
moving to the highest alert level had already been met, although the
organization did not announce a full-blown pandemic until June 11, 2009.
In conclusion: H1N1 is similar to SARS. It is not of local concern in one nation’s boarders, it is in fact, a global concern, or it should
be. This statement implies cooperation of
nations and understanding for the pandemic H1N1, where every human being in
this world is concerned, to be protected. This means, that public health threats
should be further compromised as health is transformed from a humanitarian
technical “low politics” issue to one that features prominently on the (pure)
political agenda. In this case, ability of science is limited and directed to
serve national concern rather than global one. Unless policy makers update
their thinking about the threats of H1N1 disease and the strategies aimed at
their solution in a globalized world. (1115 words) www.dryahyatv.com