How serious will the new flu outbreak be?

One commentary specifically addresses this question. We analyse the commentary.

Source: The Straits Times, 1/5/9, p.A25
Headline: Keeping the big picture in sight
Writer: Michael Richardson

Quote1:
The World Health Organisation has warned that a global influenza outbreak is imminent. How serious will it be?

Comment1:
The question is posed. Now for the arguments.

Quote2:
There were three flu pandemics in the last century. By far the worst was the so-called Spanish flu of 1918-1919. ... An estimated 25 percent to 30 percent of the world population fell ill and at least 40 million people died. The toll was many times higher than the 8.3 million who perished in the fighting. In the US, the flu mortality rate was around 3 percent of those infected. In Singapore, more than 2,870 people died, a death rate of under 2 percent. ...

Comment2:
From these numbers and percentages, what can we infer to be the case this time around? We are not told. There is no argument to that effect.

Quote3:
The US Centres for Disease Control has identified the pathogen as a unique version of the H1N1 strain of the influenza A virus, the only type of flu virus that can cause a pandemic. H1N1 is also the same strain that causes seasonal outbreaks of flu in humans. But this latest subtype is different from both the Spanish flu and seasonal flu. It is believed to be a hybrid containing genetic material from flu viruses in pigs in North America, Europe and Asia. It also contains genetic segments from North American human flu and bird flu. ... Although the bug may have evolved from or in pigs, it has not been shown to cause disease in them. The World Organisation for Animal Health ... called for urgent scientific research to determine the susceptibility of animals to the pathogen. ... We do not yet know how quickly or how far the new virus will spread among humans or whether it will trigger severe respiratory illness in large numbers of people, causing many to die. ...

Comment3:
To summarise, we do not know the danger this virus posses to animals or humans.

Quote4:
The 1918-1919 outbreak occurred in two waves. ... [The] first wave was highly contagious but not especially deadly. So when the second wave hit in August 1918, no country was prepared for the explosive outbreaks and a tenfold rise in the death rate. ...

Comment4:
Should we expect wave attacks again? Should we expect the second wave to be stronger? We are not told. There is no argument for or against these effects.

Quote5:
The 1918-1919 outbreaks had characteristics that were not seen before or since. Deaths from flu, whether during seasonal epidemics or pandemics, usually occur in the very young or very old. In the case of the Spanish flu, most deaths were among those aged 15 to 35, a prime-of-life group normally resistant to illness.

Comment5:
Based on that one-time age demographic, should we expect the same vulnerability this time around? We are not told. There is no argument either way.

Quote6:
Latest research on the 1918-1919 pandemic indicates that most of the deaths were not from primary viral pneumonia. They were the result of bacterial infections in weakened respiratory systems. ... Science and health care have certainly made major advances since 1918. But the world's population is also much bigger and vast numbers of people ... lack the resources that could help protect them from pandemic flu. Concerns ... have strengthened international defences, putting surveillance and reaction mechanisms in place. ... Many countries and the WHO have also stockpiled antiviral drugs. ... Governments must ensure that such drugs are used, ... not ... hoarded. ...

Comment6:
Will medical advance and supply overcome increased population and poor distribution? We are not told. There is no argument.

Quote7:
With luck, the virulence of this one will be relatively low.

Comment7:
Luck, by definition, is unpredictable.

Comment8:
The question has not been answered.