I share your frustration but you're misreading that page. WHO reports 7 deaths in Mexico confirmed from this flu virus. Read on for excerpt:In 1957 it was the "Asian Flu", in 1968 it was the "Hong Kong Flu" and today it's the "Swine Flu".
Wouldn't "Mexico Flu" be more appropriate to identify the origin or do we need to be PC?
Here is the latest from a report on the WHO website.
Mexico 26 confirmed -- no deaths
US 40 confirmed --no deaths.
Canada 6 confirmed -- no deaths.
Why is the NY times reporting 152 case in Mexico?
Who do we believe?( no pun intended)
Is this a crisis where there is none?
"As of 27 April 2009, the United States Government has reported 40 laboratory confirmed human cases of swine influenza A(H1N1), with no deaths. Mexico has reported 26 confirmed human cases of infection with the same virus, including seven deaths. Canada has reported six cases, with no deaths, while Spain has reported one case, with no deaths."
I am not at all pleased with how the news agencies are handling reporting of the outbreak and spread of the virus outside the Mexico outbreak areas.
What I'd like to see for news:
- A story which addresses why it is taking so long to confirm cases (death and not) in Mexico as opposed to in the U.S. even though the CDC sent personnel there days ago would be nice.
- An article on what top epidemiologists and virologists think are the reasons for the apparently high mortality in Mexico versus the apparently lower severity outside (seven deaths out of 26 cases, using only the confirmed Mexico numbers, is a high rate).
What we've got instead:
Recycled AP bits going into frankenstories updated every couple of hours whether new information is available or not. This sort of reporting has severely diminishing returns for informational content, and so after a certain number of iterations, all we can get out of the frankenstories is the EEEEeeeeeekkkkk! factor.
Nice job US Media.