Now if memory serves me, there was this wide spread panic that US did not supply enough flu shots, and Bush was to blame because he should have allowed Canadian flu shots. The panic spurred on by the election and the fears of death and dying. Within that time frame we found out more about the flu shot then ever before. That most Americans do not get the flu shot, the flu shot is only 45% effective, and that you can not get the flu from the flu shot. We were told that only children and old people should be getting the flu shot. People waited in long lines to get shots.

Questions:

1. Monday Night Quarterbacking, was the panic necessary?
   
2. Is it due to the fact that more Americans are careful not to sick because they do not have the flu shot, that the flu has had a slower start?
   
3. With such a late start, well it be safe to say that the flu season will not be as bad as predicted?

Imagine the following scenario: some big car manufacturer (e.g. GM or Ford) recalls ALL 2004 model vehicles because airbags don't work and seatbelts by are not functioninng as designed, breaking apart at the slightest sign of tension.
Would there be panic and fears of death? You bet. Would all these people who happen to have GM or Ford vehicles have a right to be angry and upset? Absolutely. Would the situation necessarily translate into hundreds of deaths? Of course not. People would probably avoid driving unless absolutely necessary, untill all recalled vehicles are fixed. At the same time I can see CEO of Ford going on national TV announcing that airbags don't always work anyway, many people don't use seatbelts, and, in fact, there have been cases when people have been suffocated by seatbelts.
Oh wait... wasn't there a similar situation recently with Firestone tires?
We are very lucky that the flu season is off to slow start. Does it remove any blame from people responsible for Flu shot fiasco? Not at all. The fact that nobody died from flu (yet) is absolutely irrelevant to the situation.

Monday Night Quarterbacking, was the panic necessary? I think the mass "panic" was unnecessary...considering we're speaking of a yearly event, and not some sort of epidemic like the 'black death' in the middle ages or ebola-Zaire, which the amount of hysteria might indicate. But, let's not kid ourselves. Though we've been lucky so far, flu season is very long. I hope you knocked on wood before starting this thread, Yehoshua...we aren't a quarter of the way over it yet.

Personally, I have only received the shot once in my life (years ago when I worked in a hospital...before I had children). My husband has received it yearly (except this year), and he is still sick whenever the kids are. In fact, I'm usually over the flu before he is. These are only marginally effective vaccines.

Is it due to the fact that more Americans are careful not to sick because they do not have the flu shot, that the flu has had a slower start? I don't know. If so, I hope people maintain these precautions. The flu vaccine is no substitute for hand washing and other preventive measures.

With such a late start, well it be safe to say that the flu season will not be as bad as predicted? ABSOLUTELY NOT! This is like suggesting that a slow start in hurricane season would indicate there will be few hurricanes. Let's hope that's the case, but we are very far from taking that sort of a leap of logic yet.

Monday Night Quarterbacking, was the panic necessary?

It remains to be seen. See below.

Is it due to the fact that more Americans are careful not to sick because they do not have the flu shot, that the flu has had a slower start?

Flu season hasn’t really started yet. November is usually when the first cases are seen. See below.

With such a late start, well it be safe to say that the flu season will not be as bad as predicted?

Flu season is from November to April, so it is far from a "late" start.

Incorrect, DaffyGrl. Flu season can start as early as October (and can last as late as May).

It is also important to remember that those people who are in high-risk groups are by-and-large getting their flu shots; as there was for the most part sufficient vaccinations for the elderly and small children.

Will there be a huge-upsurge in deaths? Most likely not. The "buzz" around this year's flu spread is triggered by two things:

1) Without the vaccinations, a large flu 'outbreak' can and will create a drag on the economy and productivity.

2) There is growing concern in medical community that a true Flu Pandemic is due, with the Avian Flu being the strain most likely candidate. Concerns over a new pandemic, magnified by the weakness in the current innoculation system, has people concerned.

Ok, so that even more definitively makes my point. It's far too early to make any judgments about the severity of the season when it may not be over with for 7 months.

I disagree. Think of all the trickle down effects associated with "flu industry". Not only will there be increased demand for health services but health-related products, both prophylactic and prescriptive, will see higher demand as well. Higher demand means better profits for the health industry which means more money in the market where it counts the most -- the business/wealthy community. People staying at home because they are sick means they will be driving less, thus, reducing demand on gasoline and hence price pressures as well as reducing traffic jams and greenhouse gas emissions. While people who are sick are not working, businesses will be forced to improve their productivity using the healthy workers they do have. And, yes, the sick employees will be a drain on the corporate health care plans, but as productivity increases, the need for those employees will reduce -- making those jobs unnecessary. This will tend to increase profits in those business in the medium to long term which, once again, means more money where it counts the most -- the business/wealthy community. Finally, more sick people means more dead people. Death is a highly profitable state for the funeral and hospice industry as well as for the government with such things as inheritance taxes. Overall, I'd say this "flu epidemic" is looking up.

I'm sorry, but every economist that has ever written on the effects of the flu disagrees with you.

Will the U.S. Economy Catch the Flu?

Ahh, but we all know that Harvard University is member of the liberal elite located in the most liberal of liberal states in the most liberal region of the US. Therefore, anything that Harvard says must be inherently biased against modern [neo]-conservative economic theories. We should discount all studies coming out of that region of the US because the data conflicts with the popular will of the people. We all know that they voted "blue" and since the "red" states won, the reds are also right.

Update on the 2004/2005 flu-season predictions:

Bird Flu Pandemic Could Kill 100 Million People



The Baby Boomer Generation is now entering retirement. There has never been so large a population, nor so large a percentage of the population getting old together as is happening today. Relatively modest percentages of illness could easily overload health care components, from doctors offices to pharmacies. Panic is not constructive: preparedness and appropriate reactions are good.


An individual might be able to dodge a bullet here and there (avoiding sick people, retiring to the cabin), but the progress of flu viruses through the population is at best slowed, even by radical actions like shutting down schools, places of work, public offices and public transportation ... in other words, bringing civilization to a halt. Even then, the outbreak is only slowed.


With predictions now of potentially 100 million dead, maybe not.

Hey I know were the flu is, and I even know part of it's route.

Daughter goes to dance class
Daughter gets sick
Wife tends to daughter
Wife gets sick
I tend to wife and daughter
I get sick (I mean physically, I am well aware of my other issues )

It should be noted that:

A> I rarely get sick and never get the flu (unless I get the shot (see below))
B> I Never get a flu shot.

So, maybe because others didn't get the shot the sickness made it to my house though my daughter (darn kid will drag anything home), but the fact remains that access to the shot, for me, is irrelevant because I never get one.

Every year I was forced to get a flu shot while in the Navy. Every year I got sick right after I got the shot. The way I saw it, I may get sick if I don't get the shot, but I am definitely gonna get sick if I get it. So why bother?

Just some ramblings, marginally on the subject from the bored and infirmed.