The 2009-2010 flu season is coming to a close.  Except for localized cases in the Southeast, Maine and Hawaii, current H1N1 flu information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates sporadic activity in most of the U.S. and no activity in Iowa and most of the Upper Midwest. 

Evaluation is underway and official reports will be published in the coming months, but one conclusion is obvious: the flu season was expected to be much worse than it actually turned out to be. 

Why? 

While the official and scientific response to that question is in the works, an interesting bit of data was provided by a recent post on the Gallup Web site.  Since September 2009, Gallup has randomly called 1,000 Americans a day and asked them, “Were you sick with the flu yesterday?”. 

For seven of the eight months between September and April, the percentage of people who self-reported flu symptoms was lower in 2009-2010 than during the 2008-2009 flu season.  The same was true for people who were asked if they had a cold the previous days.

So, surprisingly, on any given day fewer people were sick this flu season compared to that last one.  The reasons are complicated and, as noted, being figured out.

But at least partial credit for this decline goes to efforts to inform and educate the public about the flu, how to prevent its spread and, of course, constantly pushing people to get vaccinated, Gallup concluded.  People washed their hands, sneezed into their elbows, stayed home when they were sick and went out of their way to get their shots.  And they reminded their families and friends to do the same.

Hospitals played an important role in all of this.  Hospitals were not only a source of vaccine, but also a source of expert information that was disseminated to the community through a large corps of knowledgeable, trusted health care professionals. 

In most communities, no other entity – public or private – could have fulfilled the mission that hospitals did during the 2009-2010 flu season. 

Hospitals also increased their credibility in this potential crisis by setting the example – by diligently enforcing hygiene policies and pressing employees to get vaccinated.  This is why, nationwide, hospital employees had higher vaccination rates than all other health care workers – nearly 75 percent, versus about 50 percent for all other workers.  Hospitals that required vaccination had a 97 percent rate. 

Final results are still being tabulated, but expect Iowa hospitals to fall somewhere between 80 and 90 percent for their employee vaccination rates.  Not a bad result, but you can count on hospital leaders to be pushing their staffs to do better.

The Des Moines Register is arguing this morning that the “public deserves information about H1N1.”  If only that were what the Register was really after. 

Through hospitals, physicians and public health agencies, the public has access to plenty of information about H1N1.  That information has focused on the most important factors:  what the virus is and how to protect yourself from it. 

What Register editors and reporters want – really want – are the names and addresses of Iowans who have died from H1N1.  That’s part of the essential job of newspapers, to get the “who” and “where” of hot stories.  But it’s not the job of the Iowa Department of Public Health to provide that information, directly or indirectly. 

In its editorial, the Register tries to mask its intentions.  Recognizing that IDPH can’t legally release names and addresses of H1N1 victims, the editorial claims reporters want only “as much information as legally possible – not in the interest of gossip but in the interest of Iowans protecting themselves…”  Just how more information will make that happen, the Register never explains.  

But the editorial does go on to show the newspaper’s true colors, saying it’s no big deal if the public learns the names and addresses of the victim (“Some people will figure it out anyway…” the editorial shrugs), as long as IDPH doesn’t break the law (which, of course, would immediately make headlines).  Based on the Register’s standards, why not release information about each Iowan who contracts H1N1? 

Thankfully, IDPH doesn’t appear to be ready to play so fast and loose with this sensitive information.  IDPH has an obligation to protect that information, because there is nothing more personal and private than a person’s health records. 

But it’s more than just protecting people’s privacy.  IDPH’s primary mission is to protect the public.  That mission is not served by giving out more information about H1N1 fatalities.  In fact, it runs counter to that mission, because it feeds amateur speculation about how the virus is spread, where it exists and who might get it.  It might lead people to be even more lackadaisical about taking precautions, or it might lead people to overreact, to demand schools or workplaces be closed and individuals quarantined. 

To be sure, these could be real issues, but they are issues we trust the health care professionals at IDPH to address. 

Let IDPH do its important work, which does not include supplying newspapers with fodder for the next news cycle.

In response to questions about swine flu and the constant media attention, IHA has prepared a number of credible resources.

Information for clinicians and the public on swine flu:

• Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) Updates and Alerts
• U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) information and updates
• World Health Organization info on global response
• Google Swine Flu map tracker
• Guidance for Clinicians & Public Health Professionals

For additional information about swine flu:

A toll-free swine flu hotline has been established and can be reached at 1-800-447-1985.

Questions can also be directed to the Center for Acute Disease Epidemiology at 1 (800) 362-2736, or the Iowa Department of Public Health.

IHA will post additional information as it becomes available.

This information is also available on the IHA website: swine flu