Sun Editorial:

Preparedness is key

Swine flu declared an emergency so nation will be ready if outbreak worsens

Tuesday, Oct. 27, 2009 | 2:07 a.m.

Being prepared is essential to facing everything from routine power outages to natural disasters.

That’s why it was necessary for President Barack Obama over the weekend to declare swine flu a national emergency. There was no sudden development that prompted the declaration, administration officials said, other than a sense that if the outbreak gets worse, health officials should be able to make decisions without being hamstrung by federal rules that govern procedures in normal times.

Normally, for example, hospitals would not be able to set up treatment sites in schools, community centers or tents without following a time-consuming permit process. The emergency designation gives Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius the power to swiftly authorize such actions if hospitals request them.

This is a smart move. No one can say how the H1N1 virus that is causing swine flu might mutate. Hospitals, to protect their patients from catching swine flu, will need to move fast if the outbreak suddenly accelerates.

Compared with seasonal flu, which causes an average of 36,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalizations every year in the United States, swine flu is not yet statistically alarming.

Since its outbreak in April, millions of Americans have been infected with swine flu but deaths hover in the 1,000 range and hospitalizations in the 20,000 range. Preparedness is vital, however, as proved by the unexpected shortage of vaccine.

This summer the federal government predicted 160,000 million doses would be ready by now. But the manufacturers underestimated the time it would take to grow the vaccine in chicken eggs. Currently, only about 16.5 million doses are available, although Sebelius said Monday that the vaccine is “coming out the door as fast as it comes off the production line.”

The positive news is that the vaccine works, according to health officials. But until the vaccine is more widely available, more serious outbreaks than have been seen yet are possible, meaning preparedness is a matter of life and death.

Discussion: 17 comments so far…

By Future

10/27/09 at 2:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

"The positive news is that the vaccine works"

So why did Obama hold back production exposing so any of us to exposure.
By fremmasmind

10/27/09 at 4:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

If H1N1 is such an emergency and the vaccine is so safe, why hasn't our Prez, his wife and two daughters taken the vaccine yet?
By LarryVegas

10/27/09 at 8:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Just another crisis for the Obama Administration to get involved in...

Hey Obama, don't forget about our troop in Afghanistan waiting for you to make a decision on whether you are going to support them or not...
By uddeboda

10/27/09 at 8:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why only 160 millions flu doses, and then only 10% of that figure is ready??????
By robert_lv

10/27/09 at 9:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Because you are getting a small sample of our future government run health care. Overpromise, overpay and underdeliver.
By mschaffer

10/27/09 at 10:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

For other readers:
Future is lying when it says the Obama administration has held back production of the vaccine. Get the facts here:
http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/p...

As for the President's daughters, please note that as parents they want to maintain privacy for their children just as you would. I am sure, as they listen to health professionals and not the quacks online here, that they will get all vaccinations on the schedule NIH and CDC suggests as proper for children. I have also left a comment on the Whitehouse site regarding this. As to the President not getting (as far as we know) the H1N1 shot, he is in the same group I am in and other groups, at higher risk are getting the shot first.
uddeboda,
See the link above to have your questions answered.
By LarryVegas

10/27/09 at 10:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

It was Bush and Cheney who held back production of the H1N1 vaccine. Don't forget that you can still blame them for the next three years...

As I recall, most drug manufactures were reluctant to produce the vaccine because of potential law suits that might develop by the swarm of attorneys who are waiting for business...
By uddeboda

10/27/09 at 10:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

mschaffer,
Thanks for the link, and I am assuming that the jabs are free ??
By Burrittobandit2

10/27/09 at 11:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bird flu, swine flu, what's next?
By Future

10/27/09 at 2:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

"Get the facts here:" does not explain why the Obama underestimated the time it would take to grow the vaccine in chicken eggs.

They make this stuff year after year after year growing thr vaccine is not new.

The regular vaccine has been widely avaiable for more than two months.

If we had the vaccine we would not be turning people out into RUBB tents in the parking lot
By mschaffer

10/27/09 at 2:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

The argument that lawyers were interfering is interesting but apparently with competent people working at the head of NIH and CDC this has suddenly become a non issue. This leads me to ask if it was actually just an excuse by the incompetent people appointed by the incompetent Bush administration.
uddeboda,
My wife and I have received the normal annual flu shot, paid for in full by her health insurance. I believe there are other low cost/no cost options to receive the shot, as there should be given the net positive economic benefits of making sure the population has herd immunity.
Burritobandit2,
Given the evolutionary nature of the flu virus the point is there will always be a "what's next" every year. Mutation assures us of this.
By gmag39

10/27/09 at 5:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

I was unaware that the President of the United States is in charge of when the world develops and manufactures flu vaccines.
Of course, from what I have been hearing, the neo-cons are not going to take the vaccine anyway, as it has some secret ingredient that will make them vote Democrat in the next election or sumsuch. It also apparently would allow this secret government project to exert some kind of control over them. It's been in all the papers.
By larry5

10/27/09 at 6:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

The Sun is always willing to buy into the mass media hype without doing any research. There's evidence that this "emergency" is being fed primarily by misinformation.

http://products.mercola.com/swine-flu-ar...
By LarryVegas

10/27/09 at 6:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

I knew someone would blame the Bush Administration for the lack of H1N1 vaccine available today...

Gmager... Last week, my wife and I received the annual flu shot, but at this time we will not be taking the H1N1 flue shot because I was told it would make me lose my equilibrium and I would start leaning too far to the left. Back in 1976, I took the swine flu shot and haven't been the same ever since. I voted for Carter and a straight Democrat ticket for six years before I came to my senses. Once in a while, I still have the urge to play in the mud with my friends on the left.
By gmag39

10/27/09 at 9:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Yes, larry, I also got "swined" in '76, the great year of our Bicentennial, and I also voted for Carter in my first election. Similarly, we had come off of a very, very rough patch in which the Republicans had made a mockery of things, and the alternative seemed fresh, if not ideally suited to the task. I sincerely hope we are not left with that 1980 feeling again in 2012. You mentioned Ollie North earlier today, I believe he had some murky, shadowy hand in the 1980 debacle.
By uddeboda

10/28/09 at 12:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Mschaffer,

Good wording you had....""population has herd immunity.""
By mschaffer

10/28/09 at 6:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

Larry5,
You need to carefully read the following information from Quackwatch regarding Mercola:
http://www.quackwatch.com/search/webglim...
Hi uddeboda,
This is the proper term used within the medical community as it is accurately descriptive.
herd immunity (hurd)
n.
1. Resistance to the spread of infectious disease in a group because susceptible members are few, making transmission from an infected member unlikely.
2. The immunologic status of a population, determined by the ratio of resistant to susceptible members and their distribution.
The American Heritage Medical Dictionary Copyright 2007, 2004 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.