H1N1 flu seems to be abating. Some have suggested that it might

[raccoon]

boomerang and come back in the fall, the way the 1918 flu did.

My question is, if someone had H1N1 now, then the strain became more virulent and came back, wouldn't that person be immune?

[liberal N proud]

1. The media will need to find a new sensation to fixate themselves on

[solara]

4. Yeah, for the media, the truth ( about anything) is not nearly as exciting

:patriot:

[Justyce]

2. That's my understanding, that getting the milder strain now

would provide you some immunity against the stronger one that *could* happen in the fall. Let's just hope that doesn't happen...

[patriotvoice]

3. Three things.

1. The virulence of a strain is a function of the number of targets: the fewer people with anti-bodies, the more virulent the strain.
2. A strain doesn't become more virulent: it simply has better or worse transmission vectors. A very virulent strain could be stopped quickly if it emerges in a resistive population (who quash it before it can spread).
3. Someone with H1N1 now has developed anti-bodies, so they would not become sick with it again. Note that "would not" does not imply "could not".

[TZ]

5. Its not really "abating" its just not becoming as virulent as feared

And yes, they do worry about it "boomeranging" back this fall when influenza season starts..The government is ordering flu vaccine manufacterers to produce THREE vaccines this fall..two for H1N1 and one for the normal A strain. Thats ALOT of work in a fairly short time...
As for immunity--most likely those who had it will have SOME immunity. However if this virus jumps back to swine (as it did in one case in Canada) and then mutates again, then no one may have immunity. Influenza is notorious for mutating quicker than immune systems can keep up with. Thats why a new vaccine is produced every year.

[phantom power]

6. There would be increased resistance. Statistically speaking.

[Ready4Change]

7. It has served it's purpose.

No one in the news is talking about torture now. H1N1 has served it's purpose. It will run it's course like any other flu (actually less destructively than many) and fade out.

Why was this news? WHY? Regular flus affect more people, kill more people, last longer. This was only a story because it was MADE INTO a story. To shove another story out of the lime light.

At least that's my tin-hat take on it. :P

[TZ]

8. It IS a story because it was a TOTALLY NOVEL viri

Oh and for us in the immunology field the story isn't fading either. Its now a question of should a vaccine be made? How much? What about the normal A vaccine? Will it come back with a new mutation in the fall and become more dangerous?
Here's what pisses me off about DU and a lot of other places..Just because a scientific story isn't front page news from the MSM doesn't mean there isn't a lot of work and stuff going on with it. In other words, just because the media isn't reporting on it, doesn't mean its not scientifically important.
But our 2 minute attention span society can't seem to deal with that...

[DemBones DemBones]

9. And when the media IS reporting a story, that

doesn't mean that the story is not scientifically important. Nor does it mean that the media is "using" reports about disease as a "distraction."