Notices
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Testing for viruses (swine flu f.e.)

  1. #1 Testing for viruses (swine flu f.e.) 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14
    I was wondering..Is it possible for some other epidemic to go unnoticed, because of all the noise there is about swine flu?

    In Serbia, you're diagnosed by visual inspection (lol). So there could be thousands of patients with some other condition diagnosed as swine flu, and nobody would notice.

    But what would happen if there was a patient which has virus infection, with symptoms similar to swine flu, and he was tested for swine flu? Which tests would simply show negative result for swine flu, but without discovering real infection, and which ones would discover the real infection?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman Samuel P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    78
    I'm pretty sure that if they want to confirm you have swine flu, they will give you a blood test that will not only pick up on swine flu, but other infections/viruses also. It's obvious that visual inspection is ridiculous, but sometimes it's the only way that everybody can be seen quickly enough to diagnose something such as swine flu, as it has many physical symptoms.

    Also, if the people that were supposed to have swine flu and died even though they had been treated to combat swine flu (using antibiotics that would most likely kill anything close to swine flu) the first question would be "Are you sure that they had swine flu?". Which wouldn't happen because they would have been tested and diagnosed.

    In short, no, because epidemics are a little hard to ignore and in the modern world we live in can be quickly identified and separated from other similar diseases.

    ^_^ Hope that helps.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel P

    Also, if the people that were supposed to have swine flu and died even though they had been treated to combat swine flu (using antibiotics that would most likely kill anything close to swine flu) the first question would be "Are you sure that they had swine flu?". Which wouldn't happen because they would have been tested and diagnosed.
    Sorry to sound pedantic, but technically antibiotics do nothing for viral infections.... As viruses aren't technically living.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman Samuel P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Saflanag
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel P

    Also, if the people that were supposed to have swine flu and died even though they had been treated to combat swine flu (using antibiotics that would most likely kill anything close to swine flu) the first question would be "Are you sure that they had swine flu?". Which wouldn't happen because they would have been tested and diagnosed.
    Sorry to sound pedantic, but technically antibiotics do nothing for viral infections.... As viruses aren't technically living.
    Oh yer, it's been a while since I've done anything to do with viruses. My mistake, sorry.

    I still think an epidemic couldn't go unnoticed though ^_^.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •