Essay on the Public Policy of United State of America during Pandemic for Grade 12

For accurate data, you can check on Wikipedia.

2133 Words Essay:

Through the eyes of Dr. Robert Young Pelton:

What was the public policy of the United State of America during pandemic? A good description of that is through the eyes of Dr. Robert Young Pelton, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, St. Louis.

Short Introduction of Mr. Pelton:

This particular author holds an honorary position at his center. The center is known for its research on the public policy of health and safety, especially in light of emerging infectious diseases. And his research focuses mainly on public health measures the government has taken and implemented on the epidemic.

1918 pandemic:

His research led him to discuss a specific topic, the role of the United States government in controlling the spread of influenza during the 1918 pandemic. This particular era was highlighted in history for the reasons that they were and are not ready for the emergence of an influenza epidemic.

It was first declared, not really officially. In November of 1917, the first mention of the epidemic is heard from the lips of the New York Times, describing it as "an occasional mild disease." It would be three more months before the disease would be officially named influenza, with the New York Times referring to it as such in mid-December.

Why Government becomes reluctant sometimes:

Although influenza had been known about and diagnosed for a year, the advent of the epidemic coincided with the start of World War I, which is not exactly the best of circumstances for a disease that is still a matter of controversy among doctors over whether or not it is contagious. The United States was and is in the midst of a long and costly civil war. And the government was and is reluctant to spend resources on a contagious disease that might not be contagious.

The accountability of any Government is to accept the problem:

Dr. Pelton says that government inaction led to a situation in which "the outbreak of the pandemic might well have been contained if it had been considered." He does not mince words, telling us that "the severity of the 1918 flu pandemic was entirely preventable." His research took him to explore the work of the most eminent influenza experts of the time, to look for support for his argument from their own works. And the conclusion he reached is a clear one.

Influenza:

He writes that "during the 1920s and 1930s, influenza was considered as a strictly contagious disease. By that time, all influenza experts believed influenza could be prevented by routine vaccination against seasonal flu." This view was held by an overwhelming majority of the most eminent influenza experts of the time, those who, during the time of the pandemic, were the chief authors of the 1918 flu Code.

Code for Influenza:

The role of the influenza Code is interesting and was highlighted in my career as a reporter. The code was written to categorize the severity of influenza outbreaks. The most severe codes, H1, were reserved for outbreaks with deaths over 500, and those with a statewide or nationwide toll of over 1,000. The next four codes, N1, N2, N3, and N4, were for those with local tolls of 100 or less.

The only influenza expert who signed the Pelton Declaration was Charles J. Blahous. When scientists were reluctant to be taken seriously, Charles J. Blahous was taken as seriously as the influenza experts. The fact that he did not have a copy of the Declaration in hand when he signed it raises questions about whether he understood its implications. His belief was that "influenza was caused by influenza viruses". This belief was held by the experts to be nonsense. Influenza was caused by a virus. The 1918 influenza viruses were all novel. The 1918 flu epidemic that began in the US in October and ended in November was confined to America.

If Blahous could be taken seriously:

If Blahous could be taken seriously, and if he had even seen the Declaration, it is an indication of how wide the gulf was between the scientific experts and the scientific public. While the public had been fed a steady diet of military victories in the field, in hospitals, in laboratories, and on battlefields, and had been encouraged to see the war as part of the natural order of things, the scientific community was convinced that a disease like influenza could only be a disease of civilization, caused by our civilization, brought about by our civilization.

As the medical experts were making their case, the public was watching the nightly news with growing alarm. In December of 1918 newsmen were reporting that the Army Medical Department was "afraid of the flu." The flu had broken out among American soldiers and the epidemic had spread to British forces in Egypt. The next day's newsmen read a letter to the public from Dr. Charles E. Wilson, M.D., president of the American Medical Association, announcing that the influenza epidemic was a serious national security threat, adding that the outbreak could spread into January and February and cause millions of dollars in damage, perhaps a general strike. The epidemic could spread into January and February and cause millions of dollars in damage, perhaps a general strike.

On the home front, many were getting reports that people who had been vaccinated were bringing the disease home. The press had been abuzz with stories of the Army's vaccination program, the Army Medical Department's efforts to control the disease, but people were wondering if it was all just propaganda.

Propaganda film about the benefits of the vaccine:

Dr. John T. Wingate, M.D., in San Francisco, was urging that people who had been vaccinated not receive the vaccine again, as he believed it should be avoided for a couple of months. Wingate had seen the Army's propaganda film about the benefits of the vaccine and had been amazed at the ease with which the film had spread its message. As a result of this film, he advised, people should avoid people who had been vaccinated.

National Association of Public Health Institutes:

In New York, the National Association of Public Health Institutes, or NAPH, met in an attempt to reach a compromise on a vaccine. The NAPH leaders wanted a vaccine against pneumococcus, one of the bacteria involved in the epidemic, but they wanted the vaccine to contain the pneumococcus component, and they wanted it to be a parenteral vaccine. The meeting ended inconclusively, without a definite conclusion.

In San Francisco, one reporter, writing from an Army post in the Sierra Nevadas, noted that there were "thousands of health workers in yellow fever bands, and their yellow fever ward was crammed with people who had been vaccinated, some of them well and some ill, some with scarlet fever and pneumonia; and many of them were convalescing again after a long illness in the crowded wards of the Army hospitals."

Around the country, people had begun to notice a change in their general health. People started to experience coughing, runny noses, rashes, fever, muscle and joint pain, and a general feeling of ill health. One New York City newspaper reporter, writing from a city near the epicenter of the epidemic, had this to say: "You feel as though you've been run over by a truck." He also reported that people were beginning to complain of joint pain and had difficulty breathing.

In Washington, D.C., a meeting of the Public Health Action Committee heard from Richard Sherman, MD, who had been involved in the investigation of the initial cases. He reported that his team had found evidence of the pneumococcus vaccine in the throat swabs of some of the original cases. He also announced that his group had found evidence of the pneumococcus vaccine in swabs from four additional patients who had recovered. Sherman told of a previous outbreak in New York City in 1975 which had been caused by cases in children who had received the pneumococcus vaccine.

What Is the Pneumococcus

Pneumococcus is a type of bacteria that can cause disease in adults and children. It is a bacterial type, one of the most common types of bacteria that can be found in the respiratory tract, but is also found in the gastrointestinal tract and the eye. In the past, pneumococcus has been linked to pneumonia. However, there are cases of the disease caused by the bacteria without any indication of pneumonia. Because of this, some authorities believe that the bacteria may cause diseases such as cancer, anemia, and diabetes. According to the National Institute of Health, pneumococcus may be linked to meningitis, cellulitis, adenitis, and invasive pneumococcal infections. The pneumococcus is most frequently seen in the nose and throat, but it can also be found in the neck, armpits, groin, armpits, groin, and mouth.

What Causes Pneumococcus Disease

The pneumococcus bacteria are a type of bacteria that can cause disease in adults and children. It is a bacterial type, one of the most common types of bacteria that can be found in the respiratory tract, but is also found in the gastrointestinal tract and the eye. In the past, pneumococcus has been linked to pneumonia. However, there are cases of the disease caused by the bacteria without any indication of pneumonia. Because of this, some authorities believe that the bacteria may cause diseases such as cancer, anemia, and diabetes. According to the National Institute of Health, pneumococcus may be linked to meningitis, cellulitis, adenitis, and invasive pneumococcal infections. The pneumococcus is most frequently seen in the nose and throat, but it can also be found in the neck, armpits, groin, armpits, groin, and mouth.

What Are the Symptoms of Pneumococcus Disease?

The most commonly reported symptom of pneumococcus disease is sinusitis. Other symptoms of the disease include headache, fever, fatigue, vomiting, stiff neck, body aches, coughing, dyspnea, pneumonitis, cough, and conjunctivitis. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there are usually no other symptoms of pneumococcus disease in adults. For children, the pneumococcus can cause conjunctivitis, otitis media, otitis media, otitis media, otitis externa, and otitis media.

What Are the Tests For Pneumococcus Disease?

The symptoms of pneumococcus disease can be tested for by a physician. The doctor may order an invasive test to find out whether the disease has developed in the nose or throat. If the disease has developed in the nose, a sample of fluid taken from inside the nose may be tested for.

If the disease has developed in the throat, a sample of secretions may be taken from the throat may be tested for. In some cases, the culture of secretions from the nose can be done. In this test, the fluid is aspirated from inside the nose and a sample is taken for testing. The culture of nasal secretion is a test to see whether or not there is a pneumococcus in the nasal secretes.

What Is the Treatment For Pneumococcus Disease?

In most cases, antibiotics are given for the treatment of pneumococcus disease. The antibiotics are not given for the prevention of disease. The mouth and throat antibiotics are given for sore throat, fever, and fatigue.

The antibiotics are not given to prevent the infection from spreading to the muscles, joints, and organs. The antibiotics are given to reduce the pain of the disease and to prevent the damage of tissue. The pus is drained from the infected area with percutaneous drainage tubes. This is to reduce the inflammation and sores. The patient will be seen for observation to make sure that the wound is healed. In some cases, the antibiotics may be given in combination with one or more of the other treatments. This is to shorten the duration of the pain and discomfort and to reduce the chance of infection.

In severe cases of pneumococcus infection, even with the antibiotic treatment, there is a chance that the patient will develop a serious complication called disseminated bacteremia. This complication occurs in a patient who has a pneumococcus infection and has had antibiotics in the wound.

Diploid bacteria can be isolated from the wound. These bacteria are different from the diploid bacteria that cause disease. The organisms, in this case, can be cultured to give a longer-lasting antibacterial compound than the bacteria in the blood that cause disease.

Diploid bacteria can be cultured from the wound and treated with antibiotics and peroxide to kill the bacteria that cause disease. The wound is flushed with water to flush out the antibiotics and the bacteria. The wound is then wrapped in a thin layer of disinfectant to kill the bacteria. This confers higher protection against bacteremia than would be possible if the bacteria were not isolated.

The wound is irrigated as usual, and a wound swab is taken. The swab is tested for the bacteria, and if the isolate is positive, then antibiotics are given. The antibiotic administered is either an aminoglycoside or amphotericin. The wound is wrapped in a sterile dressing to protect it from bacteria. The wound is covered with a bandage to protect it from bacteria. The patient is encouraged to rest and keep the wound clean to prevent the bacteria from multiplying.

Friends, You may also like this Video.