In response to Rick Bright:
>From the Influenza Branch/CDC:
Influenza is not a reportable disease. Unlike surveillance for some
other diseases, the purpose of the influenza surveillance is not to count the
number of cases of influenza that occur. The data from the influenza
surveillance systems
should not be interpreted as a count of the number of cases of influenza.
Influenza
surveillance in the United States is designed to give an overall estimate of
the
impact of influenza on morbidity and mortality each year, and to allow
characterization of circulating vital isolates. --decisions about -- strains
to be included in each year's influenza vaccine. There are currently four
surveillance systems that track influenza -- in the US.
1) reporting from ~120 laboratores --in WHO Influenza Network of the NREVSS.
2) the 122 cities mortality reporting system -- from death certificates.
3) weekly reporting by state and territorial epidemiologists.
4) sentinel physician surveillance system (currently 880 physicians enrolled)
which
tracks percentage of patient visits that are due to influenza-like illness.
I think it is obvious from the above that an extremely high number of
cases do not
get into the data. I think what the CDC should do is pick a few sample
locations, a
gated adult community for example, and get as near as possible to 100%
accuracy
in reporting. Maybe then they would have some idea as to how well the
vaccine is
working. The vast majority of people who come down with the flu don't go to
a doctor.
Mostly they just rest and wait for it to be over with. They know antibiotics
won't help.
Ralph L. Samson
---
