Posted on 12/04/2017 5:26:24 PM PST by BenLurkin
Murrieta began feeling sick last Sunday, and was sent home from her job at a warehouse to get some rest.
...
"My daughter called and said that Joie was sent home early on Sunday after working a few hours at the warehouse because she was really sick, and that she went home to rest," Gonzales said.
On Monday, her sister took her to an urgent care clinic, where they diagnosed Murrieta with the flu and sent her home with medicine.
"They got there in the morning and waited for a while, then they told her she had the flu and gave her a prescription for the medicine Tamiflu," Gonzales said.
Tamiflu is an antiviral medication used to treat and prevent infection with influenza A and B viruses. It is most effective when taken within 48 hours of contracting the flu.
...
"She was very healthy and never got sick, she worked six days a week and her job was at a warehouse so she was very active at her job," said Gonzales. Murrieta was seemingly not at a higher risk for hospitalization or death from the flu...
... Murrieta did not get a flu shot, Gonzales said, but her doctors said that there is no way to tell now whether that would've made a difference.
Murrieta leaves behind her two sons, one two-year-old and one six-month-old. "She would do anything for her sons and it breaks my heart that the little one, who's only six months, will grow up without her," Gonzales said. "She was just a beautiful person and we want to express our gratitude for everyone who has shown support for our family."
(Excerpt) Read more at buzzfeed.com ...
Thank you for the great info.
I bought a bag of dried Elderberries a few years ago, for this purpose. They smelled a little like cranberries.
They’re probably stale by now.
Read this:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/pneumonia/symptoms-causes/syc-20354204
Sure, I would agree that smoking increases ones risk for pneumonia but there are other risk factors as well. Interestingly in the early 1900s -1900 to 1919, cigarette smoking wasnt all that popular although cigar smoking was along with chewing tobacco and snuff. But that doesnt explain why that strain of influenza was so deadly.
A couple of years ago my nephew came down with the flu. Hes in his early 30s, he eats a very healthy diet, exercise regularly and doesnt smoke. Ironically I also contracted that same flu bug around the same time, we were both sick at Christmas, but it was one of those rare years that I hadnt gotten a flu shot. I wish I had gotten one.
My nephew after getting the flu, developed pneumonia and was laid low for several weeks, with two trips to the doctor and one to the ER and missed a lot of time at work as a result. I was then a 2 pack a day smoker, middle-aged and overweight and ate a terrible diet I got the same flu bug as my nephew but I didnt get pneumonia and recovered much quicker, only missed about 4 days of work which was still more than I wanted to miss. Go figure.
As to the rest of your post above, it is plain gibberish and truly ignorant.
It was that deadly because it could be? It was easily spread and acquired. There was no evolutionary benefit in mutating into a strain that was less lethal to its host.
lolol ;)
Ah yes. The Spanish flu pandemic. 1918.
But would you not agree that sanitary hygiene and western civilization’s general understanding of how diseases can be controlled and even manipulated has come a long way since then?
If you are going to accuse me of posting plain gibberish and being truly ignorant you should include what it is I wrote that conflicts with your superior knowledge and understanding.
I do understand that there are many other causes of pneumonia. Simply put, flu can turn into pneumonia in both healthy people and those with compromised health; although it is much more common to “turn into” pneumonia in the elderly, those with asthma or other breathing issues, COPD, etc.
Whatever her situation, unless there is more at the link, other factors are unknown at this point.
I don’t think that the flu/pneumonia connection is new at all; it was connected back in the so-called Spanish flu, too.
From my arduous reading about flus on a dedicated flu forum which started at the middle or latter part of 2006, the CDC list of flu deaths is totally exaggerated, I mean way, way off, and gotten by figuring out “extra” deaths during flu season that are not attributable to obviously something else. IMHO it is to scare people into getting flu vaxes. Noteworthy is that the head of the CDC at that time (Nancy something or other) retired as head a couple of years later to work at one of the big pharmaceutical companies in their vax division. Revolving door....
After more than a week(8 days) the wife and I are very congested—chest mainly—and coughing. We are over in n FL panhandle and there is an area over here that has a small outbreak. We both had shots two months ago, and as I mentioned earlier, we never get sick. So, that makes it even worse.
BTW here is the CDC flu map:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/usmap.htm
It hasen’t been updated for week 48 but shows GA as “widespread” so that is close to us.
Pneumonia killed my first wife. She was 37. Its nothing to be trifled with.
L
Wow...how sad. Sorry to hear that. What a horrible thing to go through for both of you.
My research on the Spanish flu was a modified SEIRD model, my job was to estimate the parameters in the equations. The S represents anyone who can get sick. The math did not work. When I changed my model to include smoking as a factor, I was able to get a model that agreed with the empirical data that I got from the CDC. Of course I could be wrong.
First of all you are confusing two different infections. The STD form of chlamydia does not cause pneumonia in adults although it can cause babies born to infected mothers can get eye infections and pneumonia from chlamydia.
Chlamydophila pneumoniae
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlamydophila_pneumoniae
https://medlineplus.gov/chlamydiainfections.html
Next it has been well known for years and long before 2009 that the flu presented a higher risk of developing a secondary pneumonia infection. I dont know where you are getting 2009 from but it is simply not supported.
2009, if that year is correct, marks the pharma industry's push to inoculate and inoculation does provide a pathway of many laboratory life forms capable of squeezing through the opening at the end of that needle.
No. No. And No. You are not going to get pneumonia from getting a flu or any other type of shot, and not from laboratory life forms whatever that is supposed to mean.
The subject of all the pity generated by the designing press should have stayed in mexico. As eastexsteve mentions, The only way to not get the flu is to not ingest the virus into your system. Her lifestyle as the article indicates opened her to many opportunities of life destroying pneumonia, not just the flu. To me, she's just another example of culture clash. Except in her case, she's the one that paid dearly.
Neither you nor I know if she was a natural born American citizen or was an illegal alien or legal resident alien. For what it is worth however, just because she had a Mexican name doesnt mean she was a wetback. There are many Americans citizens of Mexican descent living in the SW who have been American citizens for many, many generations and many longer than a lot of my family who came to the US in the late 1800s and early 1900s from Wales and Germany. And FWIW my father was born in Norway in 1921 and came to the US as a young child and later served in the US Army during WWII even as he wasnt yet a naturalized citizen.
Hell in the neighborhood where I grew up in in Baltimore had a large Polish population. Lots of people with Polish surnames, some whose families immigrated in the late 1900s but some who have been here since before the American Revolution.
And I dont see anything in the article that would indicate that her lifestyle was in any way to blame for her illness, unless you have information about this woman that the rest of us dont. Yes, she was a single mom of two young kids but she also worked a full time job, sometimes working 6 days a week.
But would you not agree that sanitary hygiene and western civilizations general understanding of how diseases can be controlled and even manipulated has come a long way since then?
Better sanitation and understanding how diseases are transmitted certainly has progressed greatly since then as have the success of vaccination programs. However better sanitation as in modern sanitation systems doesnt prevent the spread of influenza. Although frequent hand washing helps.
I hope they do a full investigation....I wonder if working in a warehouse if she might have been exposed to hanta virus...
personally, when I read that a young vibrant person dies of the flu/pneumonia, its much much worse than an 80 yro dying of the same....
Bless you.
I guess it all depends on what age group you are in.
Hope you both shake it soon - sucks to be congested like that.
Thanks - I’ll bookmark it.
No. Not according to the mortality rates not only here in the US but worldwide during the Spanish Flu pandemic. The age group most likely to die from the Spanish Flu was in the 20 to 40 age range which is the exact opposite of most influenza outbreaks where the mortality is typically in the very young and the very old or in people with already compromised immune systems. One theory was that this novel strain caused a cytokine storm immune response. In other words, if you were relatively young and healthy adult and having a robust immune system that would normally protect you against something like influenza, this particular strain caused those people with healthy immune systems to go into a type of immune over hyper drive their own immune systems in trying to fight off the virus, actually ended up killing the host.
Why Did the 1918 Virus Kill So Many Healthy Young Adults?
The curve of influenza deaths by age at death has historically, for at least 150 years, been U-shaped (Figure 2), exhibiting mortality peaks in the very young and the very old, with a comparatively low frequency of deaths at all ages in between. In contrast, age-specific death rates in the 1918 pandemic exhibited a distinct pattern that has not been documented before or since: a "W-shaped" curve, similar to the familiar U-shaped curve but with the addition of a third (middle) distinct peak of deaths in young adults ≈2040 years of age. Influenza and pneumonia death rates for those 1534 years of age in 19181919, for example, were >20 times higher than in previous years (35). Overall, nearly half of the influenza-related deaths in the 1918 pandemic were in young adults 2040 years of age, a phenomenon unique to that pandemic year. The 1918 pandemic is also unique among influenza pandemics in that absolute risk of influenza death was higher in those <65 years of age than in those >65; persons <65 years of age accounted for >99% of all excess influenza-related deaths in 19181919. In comparison, the <65-year age group accounted for 36% of all excess influenza-related deaths in the 1957 H2N2 pandemic and 48% in the 1968 H3N2 pandemic (33).
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/12/1/05-0979_article
Again, I would point out that it seems you were limiting your mathematical modeling on a subset of the population men serving in the army at the time. So among those men, what were their aveveage ages compared to the rest of the population who also died from that influenza pandemic? Did this subset have a higher rate of smoking vs. the general population? What about women, while I understand the infection and death rate of women was lower, women did die from it, what was there rate of smoking? Any of those data points could skew your results.
I recall reading a news article some years ago about a supposed statistical correlation of the use of underarm deodorant and breast cancer because of the number of women who had trace (very minute) amounts of alum in their breast tissues as found in biopsies.
But what that article left out was how many women who use underarm deodorant never get breast cancer (and of course they are not likely to get biopsies) or how many women who have never used underarm deodorant do. Then again in that same sampling how many of these same women diagnosed with breast cancer also, drove a car, owned a cell phone, has ever eaten at Chick Fil A, watched American Idol. Does ever having watched American Idol, driving a car, eating Chick Fil A or using a cell phone correlate to an increased risk of breast cancer? No of course it doesnt
Mathematical modeling and statistic is something I am very interested in and that Ive done in my job, creating graphs and charts and dash boards on statistical HR and Financial data. But Ive also seen how statistics can be all to easily manipulated to result in a desired outcome.
Again, correlation does not necessarily equate to causation.
How Ice Cream Kills! Correlation vs. Causation
The danger of mixing up causality and correlation: Ionica Smeets at TEDxDelft
The life expectancy in 1918 was estimated too be about 53, so when I said middle age men I meant men in the about 20-40 range. Which is approximately the age range for the army men who died.
I have a new SE1E2,...,EnIRD model that works great for measles, but it sucks for Scarlet fever. So I'm missing something , there is a hidden factor or factors that I need in my model. If someone has some data that hints at a factor, then I will add it to my model. If it helps fix my model great. This new variable or equation does not imply correlation or causation sense I'm not making any statistical inference. Again I could be wrong, that adding this factor helps in only a cosmetic way. When I get better data I improve my model. I have an idea how to fix the model, but the data available is not consistent. So I'll wag it until I get better data.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.