The report does appear to take a rational look at the numbers, and my little half hour projections are way off. In my defense, I was using the current mortality rate we are seeing in this flu, and not the much lower rate seen in 1918. These are still some frightening numbers.
One is a "moderate" pandemic comparable to those in 1957 and 1968. It would cause illness in one-third of the population, hospitalize 865,000 and kill 209,000.
The other is a "severe" pandemic comparable to that in 1918. It, too, would sicken about one-third of the population. But about 9.9 million people would need to be hospitalized, and 1.9 million would die unless optimal preventive or treatment measures are in place.
This more terrifying point is also made.
"It is clear that pandemic influenza has the potential to pose disease control challenges unmatched by any other natural or intentional disease event," the authors of the plan wrote.
As I noted earlier, this will be where the planning has it's greatest weakness, those who actually have to implement the plan.
Just remember, these people will be selected by Bush and his staff, the man who gave this performance review "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job", is responsible for selecting those who would save the nation.
So this piece of advice becomes very important.
It also suggests that citizens consider having enough food to stay at home for 10 days. That is because local authorities might invoke a "snow days" option to keep people apart for the full incubation period of flu should an epidemic begin.
make sure you are in a position to sustain yourself,without the assistance of others, for a week or two. It may be the best part of the plan.
1 comment:
"It also suggests that citizens consider having enough food to stay at home for 10 days."
I have a feeling that will be as useful as telling people prior to Katrina to have 3 days supplies on hand.
Post a Comment