Shawnee (from shawŭn, ‘south’; shawŭnogⁱ, ‘southerners.’ W. J.).
Formerly a leading tribe of South Carolina, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. By reason of the indefinite character of their name, their wandering habits, their connection with other tribes, and because of their interior position away from the traveled routes of early days, the Shawnee were long a stumbling block in the way of investigators. Attempts have been made to identify them with the Massawomec of Smith, the Erie of the early Jesuits, and the Andaste of a somewhat later period, while it has also been claimed that they originally formed one tribe with the Sauk and Foxes. None of these theories, however, rests upon sound evidence, and all have been abandoned. Linguistically the Shawnee belongs to the group of Central Algonquian dialects, and is very closely related to Sank-Fox. The name “Savanoos,” applied by the early Dutch writers to the Indians living upon the north bank of Delaware river, in New Jersey, did not refer to the Shawnee, and was evidently not a proper tribal designation, but merely the collective term, “southerners,” for those tribes southward from Manhattan island, just as Wappanoos, “easterners,” was the collective term for those living toward the east. Evelin, who wrote about 1646, gives the names of the different small bands in the south part of New Jersey, while Ruttenber names those in the north, but neither mentions the Shawnee.
The tradition of the Delawares, as embodied in the Walum Olum, makes themselves, the Shawnee, and the Nanticoke, originally one people, the separation having taken place after the traditional expulsion of the Talligewi (Cherokee) from the north, it being stated that the Shawnee went south Beyond this it is useless to theorize on the origin of the Shawnee or to strive to assign them any earlier location than that in which they were first known and where their oldest traditions place them the Cumberland basin in Tennessee, with an outlying colony on the middle Savannah in South Carolina. In this position, as their name may imply, they were the southern advance guard of the Algonquian stock.
Their real history begins in 1669-70. They were then living in two bodies at a considerable distance apart, and these two divisions were not fully united until nearly a century later, when the tribe settled in Ohio. The attempt to reconcile conflicting statements without a knowledge of this fact has occasioned much of the confusion in regard to the Shawnee. The apparent anomaly of a tribe living in two divisions at such a distance from each other is explained when we remember that the intervening territory was occupied by the Cherokee, who were at that time the friends of the Shawnee. The evidence afforded by the mounds shows that the two tribes lived together for a considerable period, both in South Carolina and in Tennessee, and it is a matter of history that the Cherokee claimed the country vacated by the Shawnee in both states after the removal of the latter to the north. It is quite possible that the Cherokee invited the Shawnee to settle upon their eastern frontier in order to serve as a barrier against the attacks of the Catawba and other enemies in that direction. No such necessity existed for protection on their northwestern frontier. The earliest notices of the Carolina Shawnee represent them as a warlike tribe, the enemies of the Catawba and others, who were also the enemies of the Cherokee. In Ramsey’s Annals of Tennessee is the statement, made by a Cherokee chief in 1772, that 100 years previously the Shawnee, by permission of the Cherokee, removed from Savannah river to the Cumberland, but were afterward driven out by the Cherokee, aided by the Chickasaw, in consequence of a quarrel with the former tribe. While this tradition does not agree with the chronologic order of Shawnee occupancy in the two regions, as borne out by historical evidence, it furnishes additional proof that the Shawnee occupied territory upon both rivers, and that this occupancy was by permission of the Cherokee.
De l’Isle’s map of 1700 places the “Ontouagannha.” which here means the Shawnee, on the headwaters of the Santee and Pedee rivers in South Carolina, while the “Chiouonons” are located on the lower Tennessee river. Senex’s map of 1710 locates a part of the “Chaouenons” on the headwaters of a stream in South Carolina, but seems to place the main body on the Tennessee. Moll’s map of 1720 has “Savannah Old Settlement” at the mouth of the Cumberland (Royce in Abstr. Trans. Anthr. Soc. Wash., 1881), showing that the term Savannah was sometimes applied to the Western as well as to the eastern band.
The Shawnee of South Carolina, who included the Piqua and Hathawekela divisions of the tribe, were known to the early settlers of that state as Savannahs, that being nearly the form of the name in use among the neighboring Muskhogean tribes. A good deal of confusion has arisen from the fact that the Yuchi and Yamasee, in the same neighborhood, were sometimes also spoken of as Savannah Indians. Bartram and Gallatin particularly are confused upon this point, although, as is hardly necessary to state, the tribes are entirely distinct. Their principal village, known as Savannah Town, was on Savannah river, nearly opposite the present Augusta, Ga. According to a writer of 1740 (Ga. Hist. Soc. Coll., i1, 72, 1842) it was at New Windsor, on the north bank of Savannah river, 7 miles below Augusta. It was an important trading point, and Ft Moore was afterward built upon the site. The Savannah river takes its name from this tribe, as appears from the statement of Adair, who mentions the “Savannah river, so termed on account of the Shawano Indians having formerly lived there,” plainly showing that the two names are synonyms for the same tribe. Gallatin says that the name of the river is of Spanish origin, by which he probably means that it refers to “savanas,” or prairies, but as almost all the large rivers of the Atlantic slope bore the Indian names of the tribes upon their banks, it is not likely that this river is an exception, or that a Spanish name would have been retained in an English colony. In 1670, when South Carolina was first settled, the Savannah were one of the principal tribes southward from Ashley river. About 10 years later they drove hack the Westo, identified by Swanton as the Yuchi, who had just previously nearly destroyed the infant settlements in a short but bloody war. The Savannah seem to have remained at peace with the whites, and in 1695, according to Gov. Archdale, were “good friends and useful neighbors of the English.” By a comparison of Gallatin’s paragraph (Trans. Am. Antiq. Soc., ii, 66, 1836) with Lawson’s statements (Hist. Car., 75, 279-280, ed. 1860) from which he quotes, it will be seen that he has misinterpreted the earlier author, as well as misquoted the tribal forms.
Lawson traveled through Carolina in 1701, and in 1709 published his account, which has passed through several reprints, the last being in 1860. He mentions the “Savannas” twice, and it is to be noted that in each place he calls them by the same name, which, however, is not the same as any one of the three forms used by Gallatin in referring to the same passages. Lawson first mentions them in connection with the Congaree as the “Savannas, a famous, warlike, friendly nation of Indians, living to the south end of Ashley river.” In another place he speaks of “the Savanna Indians, who formerly lived on the banks of the Messiasippi, and removed thence to the head of one of the rivers of South Carolina, since which, for some dislike, most of them are removed to live in the quarters of the Iroquois or Sinnagars [Seneca], which are on the heads of the rivers that disgorge themselves into the bay of Chesapeak.” This is a definite statement, plainly referring to one and the same tribe, and agrees with what is known of the Shawnee.
On De l’Isle’s map, also, we find the Savannah river called “R. des Chouanons,” with the “Chaouanons” located upon both banks in its middle course. As to Gallatin’s statement that the name of the Savannahs is dropped after Lawson’s mention in 1701, we learn from numerous references, from old records, in Logan’s Upper South Carolina, published after Gallatin’s time, that all through the period of the French and Indian war, 50 years after Lawson wrote, the “Savannahs” were constantly making inroads on the Carolina frontier, even to the vicinity of Charleston. They are described as “northern savages” and friends of the Cherokee, and are undoubtedly the Shawnee. In 1749 Adair, while crossing the middle of Georgia, fell in with a strong party of “the French Shawano,” who were on their way, under Cherokee guidance, to attack the English traders near Augusta. After committing some depredations they escaped to the Cherokee. In another place he speaks of a party of “Shawano Indians,” who, at the instigation of the French, had attacked a frontier settlement of Carolina, but had been taken and imprisoned. Through a reference by Logan it is found that these prisoners are called Savannahs in the records of that period. In 1791 Swan mentions the “Savannas” town among the Creeks, occupied by “Shawanese refugees.”
Having shown that the Savannah and the Shawnee are the same tribe, it remains to be seen why and when they removed from South Carolina to the north. The removal was probably owing to dissatisfaction with the English setters, who seem to have favored the Catawba at the expense of the Shawnee. Adair, speaking of the latter tribe, says they had formerly lived on the Savannah river, “till by our foolish measures they were forced to withdraw northward in defense of their, freedom.” In another place he says, “by our own misconduct we twice lost the Shawano Indians, who have since proved very hurtful to our colonies in general.” The first loss referred to is probably the withdrawal of the Shawnee to the north, and the second is evidently their alliance with the French in consequence of the encroachments of the English in Pennsylvania.
Their removal from South Carolina was gradual, beginning about 1677 and continuing at intervals through a period of more than 30 years. The ancient Shawnee villages formerly on the sites of Winchester, Va., and Oldtown, near Cumberland, Md., were built and occupied probably during this migration. It was due mainly to their losses at the hands of the Catawba, the allies of the English, that they were forced to abandon their country on the Savannah; but after the reunion of the tribe in the north they pursued their old enemies with unrelenting vengeance until the Catawba were almost exterminated. The hatred cherished by the Shawnee toward the English is shown by their boast in the Revolution that they had killed more of that nation than had any other tribe.
The first Shawnee seem to have removed from South Carolina in 1677 or 1678, when, according to Drake, about 70 families established themselves on the Susquehanna adjoining the Conestoga in Lancaster county, Pa., at the mouth of Pequea creek. Their village was called Pequea, a form of Piqua. The Assiwikales (Hathawekela) were a part. of the later migration. This, together with the absence of the Shawnee names Chillicothe and Mequachake east of the Alleghanies, would seem to show that the Carolina portion of the tribe belonged to the first named divisions. The chief of Pequea was Wapatha, or Opessah, who made a treaty with Penn at Philadelphia in 1701, and more than 50 years afterward the Shawnee, then in Ohio, still preserved a copy of this treaty. There is no proof that they had a part in Penn’s first treaty in 1682.
In 1694, by invitation of the Delawares and their allies, another large party came from the south probably from Carolina and settled with the Munsee on the Delaware, the main body fixing themselves at the mouth of Lehigh river, near the present Easton, Pa., while some went as far down as the Schuylkill. This party is said to have numbered about 700, and they were several months on the journey. Permission to settle on the Delaware was granted by the Colonial government on condition of their making peace with the Iroquois, who then received them as “brothers,” while the Delawares acknowledged them as their “second sons,” i. e. grandsons. The Shawnee to-day refer to the Delawares as their grandfathers. From this it is evident that the Shawnee were never conquered by the Iroquois, and, in fact, we find the western band a few years previously assisting the Miami against the latter. As the Iroquois, however, had conquered the lands of the Conestoga and Delawares, on which the Shawnee settled, the former still claimed the prior right of domain. Another large part of the Shawnee probably left South Carolina about 1707, as appears from a statement made by Evans in that year (Day, Penn, 391,1843), which shows that they were then hard pressed in the south. He says: “During our abode at Pequehan [Pequea] several of the Shaonois Indians from ye southward came to settle here, and were admitted so to do by Opessah, with the governor’s consent, at the same time an Indian, from a Shaonois town near Carolina came in and gave an account that four hundred and fifty of the flat-headed Indians [Catawba] had besieged them, and that in all probability the same was taken. Bezallion informed the governor that the Shaonois of Carolina he was told had killed several Christians; whereupon the government of that province raised the said flat-headed Indians, and joined some Christians to them, besieged and have taken, as it is thought, the said Shaonois town.” Those who escaped probably fled to the north and joined their kindred in Pennsylvania. In 1708 Gov. Johnson, of South Carolina, reported the “Savannahs” on Savannah river as occupying 3 villages and numbering about 150 men (Johnson in Rivers, S. C., 236, 1856). In 1715 the “Savanos” still in Carolina were reported to live 150 miles northwest of Charleston, and still to occupy 3 villages, but with only 233 inhabitants in all.
The Yuchi and Yamasee were also then in the same neighborhood (Barnwell, 1715, in Rivers, Hist. South Carolina, 94, 1874).
Apart of those who had come from the south in1694 had joined the Mahican and become a part of that tribe. Those who had settled on the Delaware, after remaining there some years, removed to the Wyoming valley on the Susquehanna and established themselves in a village on the west bank near the present Wyoming, Pa. It is probable that they were joined here by that part of the tribe which had settled at Pequea, which was abandoner about 1730. When the Delawares and Munsee were forced to leave the Delaware river in 1742 they also moved over to the Wyoming valley, then in possession of the Shawnee, and built a village on the east bank of the river opposite that occupied by the latter tribe. In 1740 the Quakers began work among the Shawnee at Wyoming and were followed two years later by the Moravian Zinzendorf. As a result of this missionary labor the Shawnee on the Susquehanna remained neutral for some time during the French and Indian war, which began in 1754, while their brethren on the Ohio were active allies of the French. About the year 1755 or 1756, in consequence of a quarrel with the Delawares, said to have been caused by a childish dispute over a grasshopper, the Shawnee abandoned the Susquehanna and joined the rest of their tribe on the upper waters of the Ohio, where they soon became allies of the French. Some of the eastern Shawnee had already joined those on the Ohio, probably in small parties and at different times, for in the report of the Albany congress of 1754 it is found that some of that tribe had removed from Pennsylvania to the Ohio about 30 years previously, and in 1735 a Shawnee band known as Shaweygria (Hathawekela), consisting of about 40 families, described as living with the other Shawnee on Allegheny river, refused to return to the Susquehanna at the solicitation of the Delawares and Iroquois. The only clue in regard to the number of these eastern Shawnee is Drake’s statement that in 1732 there were 700 Indian warriors in Pennsylvania, of whom half were Shawnee from the south. This would give them a total population of about 1,200, which is probably too high, unless those on the Ohio are included in the estimate.
Having shown the identity of the Savannah with the Shawnee, and followed their wanderings from Savannah river to the Ohio during a period of about 80 years, it remains to trace the history of the other, and apparently more numerous, division upon the Cumberland, who preceded the Carolina band in the region of the upper Ohio river, and seem never to have crossed the Alleghanies to the eastward. These western Shawnee may possibly be the people mentioned in the Jesuit Relation of 1648, under the name of “Ouchaouanag,” in connection with the Mascoutens, who lived in northern Illinois. In the Relation of 1670 we find the “Chaouanon” mentioned as having visited the Illinois the preceding year, and they are described as living some distance to the south east of the latter. From this period until their removal to the north they are frequently mentioned by the French writers, sometimes under some form of the collective Iroquois name Toagenha, but generally under their Algonquian name Chaouanon. La Harpe, about 1715, called them Tongarois, another form of Toagenha. All these writers concur in the statement that they lived upon a large southern branch of the Ohio, at no great distance east of the Mississippi. This was the Cumberland river of Tennessee and Kentucky, which is called the River of the Shawnee on all the old maps down to about the year 1770.
When the French traders first came into the region the Shawnee had their principal village on that river near the present Nashville, Tenn. They seem also to have ranged northeastward to Kentucky river and southward to the Tennessee. It will thus be seen that they were not isolated from the great body of the Algonquian tribes, as has frequently been represented to have been the case, but simply occupied an interior position, adjoining the kindred Illinois and Miami, with whom they kept up constant communication. As previously mentioned, the early maps plainly distinguish these Shawnee on the Cumberland from the other division of the tribe on Savannah river.
These western Shawnee are mentioned about the year 1672 as being harassed by the Iroquois, and also as allies and neighbors of the Andaste, or Conestoga, who were themselves at war with the Iroquois. As the Andaste were then incorrectly supposed to live on the upper waters of the Ohio river, the Shawnee would naturally be considered their neighbors. The two tribes were probably in alliance against the Iroquois, as we find that when the first body of Shawnee removed from South Carolina to Pennsylvania, about 1678, they settled adjoining the Conestoga, and when another part of the same tribe desired to remove to the Delaware in 1694 permission was granted on condition that they make peace with the Iroquois. Again, in 1684, the Iroquois justified their attacks on the Miami by asserting that the latter had invited the Satanas (Shawnee) into their country to make war upon the Iroquois. This is the first historic mention of the Shawnee evidently the western division in the country north of the Ohio river. As the Cumberland region was out of the usual course of exploration and settlement, but few notices of the western Shawnee are found until 1714, when the French trader Charleville established himself among them near the present Nashville. They were then gradually leaving the country in small bodies in consequence of a war with the Cherokee, their former allies, who were assisted by the Chickasaw. From the statement of Iberville in 1702 (Margry, Déc., iv, 519, 1880) it seems that this was due to the latter’s efforts to bring them more closely under French influence. It is impossible now to learn the cause of the war between the Shawnee and the Cherokee. It probably did not begin until after 1707, the year of the final expulsion of the Shawnee from South Carolina by the Catawba, as there is no evidence to show that the Cherokee took part in that struggle. From Shawnee tradition the quarrel with the Chickasaw would seem to be of older date. After the reunion of the Shawnee in the north they secured the alliance of the Delawares, and the two tribes turned against the Cherokee until the latter were compelled to ask peace, when the old friendship was renewed. Soon after the coming of Charleville, in 1714, the Shawnee finally abandoned the Cumberland valley, being pursued to the last moment by the Chickasaw. In a council held at Philadelphia in 1715 with the Shawnee and Delawares, the former, “who live at a great distance,” asked the friendship of the Pennsylvania government. These are evidently the same who about this time were driven from their home on Cumberland river.
On Moll’s map of 1720 we find this region marked as occupied by the Cherokee, while “Savannah Old Settlement” is placed at the mouth of the Cumberland, indicating that the removal of the Shawnee had then been completed. They stopped for some time at various points in Kentucky, and perhaps also at Shawneetown, Ill., but finally, about the year 1730, collected along the north bank of the Ohio river, in Ohio and Pennsylvania, extending from the Allegheny down to the Scioto. Sawcunk, Logstown, and Lowertown were probably built about this time. The land thus occupied was claimed by the Wyandot, who granted permission to the Shawnee to settle upon it, and many ears afterward threatened to dispossess’ them if they continued hostilities against the United States. They probably wandered for some time in Kentucky, which was practically a part of their own territory and not occupied by any other tribe. Blackhoof (Catahecassa), one of their most celebrated chiefs, was born during this sojourn in a village near the present Winchester, Ky. Down to the treaty of Greenville, in 1795, Kentucky was the favorite hunting ground of the tribe. In 1748 the Shawnee on the Ohio were estimated to number 162 warriors or about 600 souls. A few years later they were joined by their kindred from the Susquehanna, and the two bands were united for the first time in history. There is no evidence that the western hand, as a body, ever crossed to the east side of the mountains. The nature of the country and the fear of the Catawba would seem to have forbidden such a movement, aside from the fact that their eastern brethren were already beginning to feel the pressure of advancing civilization. The most natural line of migration was the direct route to the upper Ohio, where they had the protection of the Wyandot and Miami, and were within easy reach of the French.
For a long time an intimate connection existed between the Creeks and the Shawnee, and a body of the latter, under the name of Sawanogi, was permanently incorporated with the Creeks. These may have been the ones mentioned by Pénicaut as living in the vicinity of Mobile about 1720. Bartram (Travels, 464, 1792), in 1773, mentioned this band among the Creeks and spoke of the resemblance of their language to that of the Shawnee, without knowing that they were a part of the same tribe. The war in the northwest after the close of the Revolution drove still more of the Shawnee to take refuge with the Creeks. In 1791 they had 4 villages in the Creek country, near the site of Montgomery, Ala., the principal being Sawanogi. A great many also joined the hostile Cherokee about the same time. As these villages are not named in the list of Creek towns in 1832 it is possible that their inhabitants may have joined the rest of their tribe in the west before that period. There is no good evidence for the assertion by some writers that the Suwanee in Florida took its name from a band of Shawnee once settled upon its banks.
The history of the Shawnee after their reunion on the Ohio is well known as a part of the history of the Northwest territory, and may be dismissed with brief notice. For a period of 40 years from the beginning of the French and Indian war to the treaty of Greenville in 1795 they were almost constantly at war with the English or the Americans, and distinguished themselves as the most hostile tribe in that region. Most of the expeditions sent across the Ohio during the Revolutionary period were directed against the Shawnee, and most of the destruction on the Kentucky frontier was the work of the same tribe. When driven back from the Scioto they retreated to the head of the Miami river, from which the Miami had withdrawn some years before. After the Revolution, finding themselves left without the assistance of the British, large numbers joined the hostile Cherokee and Creeks in the south, while a considerable body accepted the invitation of the Spanish government in 1793 and settled, together with some Delawares, on a tract near Cape Girardeau, Mo., between the Mississippi and the Whitewater rivers, in what was then Spanish territory. Wayne’s victory, followed by the treaty of Greenville in 1795, put an end to the long war in the Ohio valley. The Shawnee were obliged to give up their territory on the Miami in Ohio, and retired to the headwaters of the Auglaize. The more hostile part of the tribe crossed the Mississippi and joined those living at Cape Girardeau. In 1798 a part of those in Ohio settled on White river in Indiana, by invitation of the Delawares. A few years later a Shawnee medicine-man, Tenskwatawa, known as The Prophet, the brother of the celebrated Tecumseh, began to preach a new doctrine among the various tribes of that region. His followers rapidly increased and established themselves in a village at the mouth of the Tippecanoe river in Indiana. It soon became evident that his intentions were hostile, and a force was sent against him under Gen. Harrison in 1811, resulting in the destruction of the village and the total defeat of the Indians in the decisive battle of Tippecanoe. Tecumseh was among the Creeks at the time, endeavoring to secure their aid against the United States, and returned in time to take command of the northwest tribes in the British interest in the War of 1812. The Shawnee in Missouri, who formed about half of the tribe, are said to have had no part in this struggle. By the death of Tecumseh in this war the spirit of the Indian tribes was broken, and most of them accepted terms of peace soon after. The Shawnee in Missouri sold their lands in 1825 and removed to a reservation in Kansas. A large part of them had previously gone to Texas, where they settled on the headwaters of the Sabine river, and remained there until driven out about 1839 (see Cherokee). The Shawnee of Ohio sold their remaining lands at Wapakoneta and Hog Creek in 1831, and joined those in Kansas. The mixed band of Seneca and Shawnee at Lewistown, Ohio, also removed to Kansas about the same time.
A large part of the tribe left Kansas about 1845 and settled on Canadian river, Indian Territory (Oklahoma), where they are now known as Absentee Shawnee. In 1867 the Shawnee living with the Seneca removed also from Kansas to the Territory and are now known as Eastern Shawnee. In 1869, by intertribal agreement, the main body became incorporated with the Cherokee Nation in the present Oklahoma, where they are now residing. Those known as Black Bob’s band refused to remove from Kansas with the others, but have since joined them.

• Additional Seneca Indian Resources
  • Shawnee Indian History
  • Shawnee Indian Divisions
  • Shawnee Indian Villages
  • Shawnee Indian Chiefs and Leaders
  • Hathawekela Indian History

Un mystérieux virus tue neuf patients

Mise à jour le mardi 27 avril 2010 à 21 h 12

Un mystérieux virus a tué neuf patients en trois semaines dans un hôpital de Victoria, en Colombie-Britannique.

Le virus est similaire à celui de la grippe, mais les tests ont démontré qu’il ne s’agit pas du H1N1.

D’autres vérifications sont effectuées pour déterminer la nature précise de ce virus.

La direction limite les contacts entre les patients et les repas sont servis dans les chambres pour éviter la propagation de la maladie.

L’hôpital Glengarry accueille principalement des personnes âgées qui ont déjà des problèmes de santé.

What the health secretary told MPs in full

Via The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jul/20/andy-burnham-swine-flu

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the A(H1N1) swine flu pandemic.

I wish to do three things today: to update the house on the spread of the virus, to provide additional details about the launch of the National Pandemic Flu Service, and to set out how honourable members will be kept informed during the summer recess.

In recent weeks, we have discovered a great deal more about the swine flu virus.

Whilst it has spread quickly, the virus has not become more dangerous. For the vast majority, swine flu remains a mild and self-limiting illness. And let me be clear Mr Speaker, our advice to the public about dealing with it has not changed.

However, as cases rise, it’s understandable that people are becoming more concerned – and we must continue to provide reassuring, consistent and clear advice.

Let me be clear, our advice has not changed.

For pregnant women, the CMO [chief medical officer] will be reissuing existing advice later today. I give a summary, but honourable members may wish to refer to the full advice. The CMO says that most pregnant women with swine flu will only get mild symptoms, but pregnancy brings a higher risk of complications. Bearing these risks in mind, at present mothers-to-be are advised to continue normal activities such as going to work, travelling on public transport, attending events and family gatherings. But they are advised to take the following steps to reduce their risk of infection and complications: first to observe good hand hygiene (frequent use of soap and water or sanitizer); second, wherever possible, avoid contact with someone who is known or suspected to have swine flu; third, if they have flu-like symptoms, to make early contact with your general practitioner, who may advise treatment with antiviral drugs.

If in doubt, pregnant women should seek advice, and if they think they have symptoms they need to contact their GP as soon as possible for antiviral treatment. The CMO will be reissuing this advice later today.

I also understand that families with small children have concerns.

The key characteristic of swine flu is fever. The first thing parents should do is check if their child has a temperature over 38C.

They should then contact the National Pandemic Flu Service once it has launched, or their GP, if their child has a high temperature and any one of the following symptoms: tiredness, headache, sore throat, shortness of breath, loss of appetite, vomiting and diarrhoea, aching muscles, or limb and joint pain.

Mr Speaker, since my last statement to the house, the daily reported figures from the Health Protection Agency have been replaced by weekly estimates, based on the numbers reporting flu-like illnesses to their GPs.

The latest figures published on Thursday showed how cases have grown, with 55,000 new cases of swine flu reported last week alone. There were 652 people in hospital, 53 of whom were in critical care. There had been 26 deaths in England.

The figures also confirm that the virus has now taken hold around the country, rather than in isolated pockets – and show how quickly this has happened.

On 8 July, just six primary care trusts reported exceptional levels of flu-like illness. By 15 July this increased to 110 PCTs. Hence our immediate decision last week to activate the National Pandemic Flu Service.

And the latest figures show nine out of 10 NHS regions are now showing exceptional levels of flu-like illness, based on GP consultations.

And Mr Speaker, GPs are on the front line in this pandemic. They’re coping admirably with the increased workload, and I’m sure the whole house would want to extend its thanks to them, their staff and to everybody working so hard throughout the health service, the Health Protection Agency and the Department of Health.

All professionals deserve our full support – and the best way to do this is to find new ways to relieve pressure on the front line.

The technology to launch the National Pandemic Flu Service has been available for some time, but with these latest HPA figures – and drawing on advice from the field – we have now reached a point where the service is required.

I can confirm therefore that the service will go live in England by the end of this week, subject to testing. It will be accompanied by a major public information campaign.

After the launch, people will no longer need to ring their GP. They can either answer questions online via the new website, or ring the call centre service, where trained staff will be able to assess them over the phone.

If swine flu is confirmed, they will then get an authorisation number, which their flu friend can use to pick up antivirals from the local antiviral collection point.

I will ensure that all members will receive information on the location and number of collection points in their area before the launch of the service later this week.

In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the situation is different. We haven’t seen the same rate of spread, and as a result, the service will not be in operation in those countries this week, but they may choose to opt in at a later date.

People in these regions should therefore continue checking their symptoms on the NHS website, or via the swine flu information line and then calling their GP for diagnosis over the phone.

Mr Speaker, the government must be as open as possible about the potential scale of the threat, so that organisations across both public and private sectors can plan effectively.

Last week’s planning assumptions set out reasonable “worst case scenarios” for them to plan against.

We published a range of figures covering the numbers who could get swine flu; who could experience complications; and who could be hospitalised or die.

The assumptions also cover the number who could be absent from work because they or their family gets swine flu.

Let me stress again that these are worst case scenarios, not predictions – and we need the media to play its part in reporting them as such.

For the NHS, the assumptions mean they can now step up their preparations to cope with a sudden surge in swine flu cases, and they already have detailed plans in place.

Similarly infrastructure providers and other essential operators, like food suppliers and electricity, gas and water companies, already have continuity plans to maintain services.

But organisations of all kinds should now be establishing plans to reduce the threat swine flu poses to the economy.

The government has published various guidance documents on continuity planning, and we’ve also set up a new business advisory network for flu to provide a single source of information and advice. Full details are available on the Business Link website.

Mr Speaker, let me now update the house on vaccines.

The Department of Health has already signed two contracts with manufacturers to supply enough vaccine for the whole population.

According to their delivery schedules, we should begin receiving supplies from August, with enough becoming available for at least 30 million people by the end of the year.

Clearly we want the vaccine available as soon as possible, but we cannot compromise on safety. We will take all necessary steps to ensure the vaccine is appropriately tested.

We are also now planning the vaccination programme so that we can start administering vaccines to priority groups, including NHS and social care staff, as soon as we get the green light to proceed.

And we will continue to take the best independent scientific advice on all questions around vaccination.

Finally, Mr Speaker, I recognise that honurable members must be updated during the parliamentary recess.

I have therefore asked strategic health authorities to provide weekly briefings for MPs coinciding with the HPA’s national updates.

This will cover local information on the number of diagnosed and confirmed cases, hospitalisations, as well as updates on antiviral collection points and local information on any clusters or other specific developments, and a hotline number for honourable members to use to contact their local strategic health authority.

In addition, the civil contingencies committee will meet weekly, and ministers and officials will be in close contact throughout the summer months to respond to emerging issues. And this evening, there will be a briefing session open to all members with the CMO.

I’m also grateful for the constructive conversations I’ve had with the honurable members for Cambridgeshire South [Andrew Lansley] and North Norfolk [Norman Lamb]. I will of course keep both frontbenches updated over the summer, and we’ll continue regular discussions with health ministers in the Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to ensure a consistent UK-wide response.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, concern has risen and there is increasing pressure on services. But there is no change to the advice or government plans.

It is because we have planned carefully for this eventuality that we have large quantities of antivirals, a National Pandemic Flu Service about to launch, and a vaccine on the way. This constitutes a solid base upon which to deal with future challenges.

I commend this statement to the house.

Over a month ago I brought this issue here in the following Diaries and today the Seniors Public Health Spokepersons are coming out on this very important issue.

And yes, even if you live in such a Region there are solutions.

First be aware that in many cases Swine flu is not a walk in the park as stated by the Reveres (Senior Public Health Officers) in their Public Health Site.

http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2009/05/swine_flu_not_a_walk_in_the_pa.php

Now is the comments of the Reveres at Effect Measure at http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2009/07/swine_flu_and_environmental_ar.php

Arsenic is a metal and a notorious poison known since classical times. It was a favorite murder weapon in Renaissance Italy. It is only in the last couple of decades, however, that arsenic toxicology has been transformed by the techniques of modern molecular toxicology. What Hamilton’s and other groups have found is that this ancient poison has widespread and fundamental biological effects on many different systems, often in very subtle ways we are only starting to unravel. Arsenic is not just a historical curiosity. Weathering and solution of natural mineral formations has put it in drinking water wells in many places and New Hampshire, where Dartmouth is located, is one of them. After a long tussle with a foot dragging Bush administration, public health advocates were finally able to get the standard for arsenic in community drinking water supplies reduced from 50 parts per billion (ppb) to 10 ppb, but private wells are not covered and many exceed it by wide margins. Almost half of New Hampshire residents get their water from private wells. Many other US states are also affected and arsenic contamination of water is a major problem in Bangladesh, Chile, Argentina and many other places. The levels in some places is high enough to cause frank poisoning, but in the US the levels are much lower. One significance of the work of Hamilton’s lab and those of several other scientists is to show that arsenic can cause important biological effects in animal models at environmentally relevant levels, meaning, 10 ppb to 100 ppb in drinking water.

[snip]

So what did these experiments show (paper here)? Standard lab mice (C57BL/6J if you’re interested) were inoculated intranasally with a sublethal dose of PR8. Some mice had partaken of 5 weeks of 100 ppb arsenic laced water before inoculation, others water without arsenic. Then the mice were studied for the way they responded to the virus. The arsenic treated mice were sicker (lost more weight) and had higher titers of influenza virus in their lungs as well fewer cells (dendritic cells) associated with preparing antigen for presentation to the immune system. The researchers interpreted this as showing that arsenic significantly compromised the lung’s immune response to influenza infection.

[snip]

That’s basically the evidence at this point. The processes implicated are part of the early innate immune response and could determine whether viral replication is sufficient to exceed some critical threshold and lead to a catastrophic response. At this point, however, this is an example of an animal model that suggests how modulating host responses through the environment might affect outcome. Virulence is not just a property of a virus. It is something that depends on the virus, its interaction with the host and the environment both are part of.

There are lots of reasons not to be exposed to arsenic in your food and water. It’s an endocrine disruptor, is implicated in cancer and may affect the immune system in subtle ways. And, yes, chronic exposure might make a difference in how you respond to a flu infection.

Of course this Reveres comment is a MUST READ.

Here is a World Wide data on regions with high level of arsenic in groundwater, as you will notice this is just astonishing.

http://www.igrac.net/…

Selenium is known to eliminate arsenic from your body and I refer you to the following diary.

In my June 21st 2009 Diary I mentionned the following 
Sunday alternative medicinal products researches ‘Selenium’in Sunday alternative medicinal products researches ‘Selenium’

This swine flu (H1N1) pandemic unfolding around us and in our midst still is a mild pandemic so far but lethal in some cases, I shared with you the efficient virtues of Curcumin athttp://www.dailykos.com/…

Curcumin is affordable and from around the world, scientific studies have demonstrated its efficiency against influenza.  Everyone should read the Diary and get Curcumin in their kitchen and yes in their medical cabinet.

And do not forget about Preparing for the Second Wave of this World pandemic expected in Fall. 
http://www.dailykos.com/…

I strongly recommend you to first buy the regular critical medicine that you need for few months ahead of Time and do it NOW the full Diary is at 
http://www.dailykos.com/…

Swine flu – some warning signs that someone is bound for a Medical Consultation refer to 
http://www.dailykos.com/…

Thank you and share to your near ones and your Communities, it can indeed reduce illness.

Snowy Owl

I have look in the last few weeks for some correlations between morbidity and mortality in infections of the H1N1 novel virus.

It turns out that I found a credible Trail and I here are some of my conclusions presented in some of my different worldwide and multilingual blogs.

This research was triggered via a request from Bangladesh.

Does arsenic set us up for H1N1?
http://www.dynamicbangladesh.com/blogs/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Does-arsenic-set-us-up-for-H1N1-.html&Itemid=3

Arsenic in Contaminated Water Increases Susceptibility to H1N1 Influenza
http://h1n1swinefluinformations.ning.com/forum/topics/arsenic-in-contaminated-water

Concentration of Arsenic in the Groundwater of a Region in Southwest Buenos Aires Province, Argentina
http://h1n1swinefluinformations.ning.com/forum/topics/concentration-of-arsenic-in

Arsenic in Groundwater Worldwide localization is very surprising
http://h1n1evolution.blogspot.com/

Concentration of Arsenic in the Groundwater of a Region in Southwest Buenos Aires Province, Argentina
http://h1n1swinefluinformations.ning.com/forum/topics/concentration-of-arsenic-in

Host nutritional selenium status as a driving force for influenza virus mutations
http://flunewsnetwork.ning.com/profiles/blogs/host-nutritional-selenium

The importance of selenium to human health
http://snowyowl.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/the-importance-of-selenium-to-human-health/

The New Recommendations for Dietary Antioxidants Selenium
http://achak.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/the-new-recommendations-for-dietary-antioxidants/

Alternative medicinal products researches ‘Selenium’
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/6/21/745118/-Sunday-alternative-medicinal-products-researches-Selenium

There is a lot more concerning Mexico, US and yes Manitoba Canada and UK.

I do not want to overwhelm you but it is there it is coherent.

High level of arsenic in groundwater, wheter from volcanic activity or mining activities do indeed aggravate the symptoms of an H1N1 infection.

And the lack of selenium on the ground does contribute to the rise of morbidity too.

Maybe we are now heading to a new authoritative science that is Medical Geology.

Again thank you

Achak Snowy Owl

“Our relations with the World Health Organisation have been developing for a long time and very successfully. We support all of the WHO initiatives and efforts in the fight against AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other socially dangerous diseases. We consider it extremely important to jointly combat alcoholism, smoking, and other habits that have a direct negative effect on people’s health.”

Transcript of the meeting’s beginning:

Vladimir Putin: Ms Chan, colleagues. We are happy to welcome you in Moscow.

Our relations with the World Health Organisation have been developing for a long time and very successfully. We support all of the WHO initiatives and efforts in the fight against AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other socially dangerous diseases. We consider it extremely important to jointly combat alcoholism, smoking, and other habits that have a direct negative effect on people’s health.
We welcome your efforts in the struggle against infectious diseases threatening the lives of millions, such as the effort against the A(H1N1) flu type. We take into consideration your warnings and analysis, and take requisite measures at the national level.

Despite the global financial and economic crisis, we have increased allocations to healthcare by 8% this year. We are carrying on the Healthcare nationwide programme formulated several years ago. I am pleased to say that it has been bringing the expected results: the death rate has been reduced by 9% over the past few years, the infant mortality rate is down 22.7% and the birth rate is up 18.7%. On the whole, the decrease of the population has slowed by more than two times, while the average life span has grown by 2.5 years.

We intend to continue to expand these efforts. The Russian Government is drafting a concept for long-term healthcare development until 2020, to be based on state guarantees of free medical assistance. We highly value our cooperation with the World Health Organisation, and I am confident that your visit will boost relations between Russia and the WHO.

Margaret Chan (as translated): Mr Putin, it is a great honour for me to be in Russia.

I would like to remind you about our first meeting, during the G8 summit in St Petersburg in 2006. Our next meeting took place in Davos in January 2009. I have been waiting for this meeting impatiently, seeking to promote cooperation between Russia and the World Health Organisation.

I would like to thank you personally for your efforts in healthcare. I have listened to your speeches and watched your progress in the implementation of the national healthcare programme. I can tell you that what we see in Russia is called return on investment, or investment profitability, in the financial world.

Over the past 10 years, conditions in Russia have improved considerably. First, life expectancy has increased – we were worried about it ten years ago, but it has now increased. It is clear that the Government is paying much attention to healthcare. Also, the health of and care for children and mothers have improved.

Russia has joined the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. We also see other major changes. I am confident that Russia will do well in attaining the healthcare goals formulated in the UN Millennium Declaration by 2015.

Of course, Russia as well as other countries are facing difficult tasks – to promote preventive measures and popularise healthy living, and also to redouble efforts in the struggle against AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other diseases.

I would like to highlight Russia’s role in global healthcare. I know that Russia is working to create an A(H1N1) vaccine. Despite the global downturn, I believe that Russia has the research capability and requisite potential to create vaccines and other antiviral substances.

Moreover, I would like to praise your efforts not just in Russia but also in the CIS. As far as I know, you are helping your neighbours with healthcare, which is highly commendable.

I would also like to speak about the importance of global efforts in helping some African and Asian countries. I believe that the World Health Organisation can support these efforts, and we can discuss Russia’s contribution to this work. I hope we will continue our fruitful cooperation.

And one more thing I would like to mention: I worked with the staff of the Ministry of Healthcare and Social Development, and I can tell you that you have a wonderful gender balance. You appoint women to the right posts.

Mr Putin, in concluding this opening address I would like to thank you personally for your assistance and support. I think the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding, which you have approved, will help us to determine potential venues of cooperation between the WHO and Russia.

I would like to point out two things in this respect. First, this memorandum would facilitate the implementation of Russia’s development concept until 2020. And second, it would promote cooperation at the regional and international levels.

After we sign the Memorandum of Understanding, we can hold technical discussions on relevant issues.

I would like to say again that it is a great honour for me to meet with you in Moscow and to discuss issues of mutual interest.

Vladimir Putin: You mentioned smoking, but I would like to add that we should also drink less. This would have a big beneficial effect on the nation’s health, I can assure you. In this context I believe that we should follow your recommendation of popularising healthy living standards – it should become the main thrust of our work in this area.

view original source

The New Recommendations for Dietary Antioxidants

A Response and Position Statement by the Linus Pauling Institute

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/s-s00/recommend.html
]]> http://achak.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/the-new-recommendations-for-dietary-antioxidants/feed/ 2 achak http://achak.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/june-23-2009-pandemic-reality-check-by-john-m-barry-author-of-the-great-influenza/ http://achak.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/june-23-2009-pandemic-reality-check-by-john-m-barry-author-of-the-great-influenza/#comments Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:32:18 +0000 achak http://achak.wordpress.com/?p=19 ]]> June 23, 2009, Pandemic Reality Check By John M. Barry, Author of the Great Influenza

Pandemic Reality Check

What Can Be Done — and What Can’t — To Protect Against H1N1

By John M. Barry  -  Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Here is John M. Barry observations on the unfolding pandemic with some comments of mine.

[snip]

[quote]

How many people this virus will sicken and kill depends, ultimately, on three things
the virus itself;
the impact of what are known as “non-pharmaceutical interventions,” or NPIs; and
the availability and effectiveness of a vaccine.

To my surprise he is underestimating the impact of alternative non BigPharma medicinal products and their effects in reducing morbidity and mortality.[end quote]

He does mention the uncertainty of availability of vaccines but does not say a word on the availability of regular medicine produce in other countries, (Insulin, nitro, medical equipments, personal protective equipments, etc..)
The virus will be the most important factor.

[quote]

Influenza is one of the fastest-mutating organisms in existence, which makes it unpredictable, and a virus newly infecting the human population is likely to be even more unpredictable as it adapts to a new environment.

There have been four pandemics that we know about in some detail: 1889-92, 1918-20, 1957-60 and 1968-70.

All four followed similar patterns:
initial sporadic activity with local instances of high attack rates — just as H1N1 has behaved so far — followed four to eight months later by waves of widespread illness with 20 to 40 percent of the population sickened.
(In a normal influenza season about 10 percent of the population gets sick.)
Subsequent waves followed as well.

In all four pandemics, lethality changed from wave to wave — sometimes increasing, sometimes decreasing. [end quote]

Not much to add on these relevant observations.

[quote]

What could help bring about such a best case?
Again, the virus is the most important factor, and we have no control over it. But we do have non-pharmaceutical interventions and the possibility of a vaccine. Such interventions would come into play primarily in a moderate or severe pandemic.

For a mild one, we may not need to take steps beyond washing hands, exercising “cough etiquette” and keeping the sick at home.

But if the virus increases its virulence, other measures, such as closing schools, urging people to telecommute and even banning public meetings, could mitigate the impact.

However, the usefulness of non-pharmaceutical interventions is limited, and even if they work, their chief impact will be to flatten the pandemic’s peak and stretch out the duration of a wave of illness to make it easier to handle. [end quote]

[snip]

[quote]

Supply is another problem.

The more virulent the virus, the more likely it is that foreign governments will refuse to allow export of the vaccine until their own populations are fully protected.

Meanwhile, the emergence of the H1N1 virus in no way lessens the threat from H5N1, more commonly known as bird flu. And the same day the World Health Organization declared H1N1 a pandemic, Egypt announced 25 new human cases of H5N1 — the largest number yet identified in a single day.
[end quote]

These Nationalistic measures are already implement when not in effect.

[quote]

The bottom line?

Little can be done in the short term beyond exerting diplomatic pressure to guarantee that foreign governments allow manufacturers to honor contracts to export vaccine.

[snip]

John M. Barry is a distinguished scholar at the Center for Bioenvironmental Research at Tulane and Xavier Universities and the author of “The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History.”

With his book “The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History.”, John M. Barry has contribute to unprecedented level to get people aware of what a virulent pandemic is and what have been some successfull response to such an event.

Snowy Owl

Credit to River at Effect Measure and of course Reuters

BERLIN (Reuters) – Germany’s federal agency for infectious diseases said on Tuesday there were signs the H1N1 swine flu virus had started to mutate and warned it could spread in the coming months in a more aggressive form.

Experts were concerned about how the flu was developing in Australia and South America, said Joerg Hacker, head of the Robert Koch Institute for infectious diseases.

“It’s possible the virus has mutated. In autumn the mutated form could spread to the northern hemisphere and back to Germany,” Hacker told a news conference in Berlin.

Latest WHO update 22 June 2009
Influenza A(H1N1) – update 52

Snowy Owl

Travellers warned of new India swine flu measures

Travellers to India from countries affected by swine flu (including the UK) are likely to be asked questions or be checked for symptoms by medical staff, according to the UK Foreign Office (FCO).

Travellers suspected of having H1N1 will be admitted to designated governemnt hospitals for compulsory quarantine, testing and treatment.

India has introduced these latest surveillance measures at International Airports in a bid to prevent the spread of the virus.

The FCO warns: “Tamiflu is only available through government hospitals and not openly on the private market i.e. pharmacies. Travellers should be aware that transfer from a government hospital to a more modern and better equipped private facility will not be permitted for those with suspected or confirmed H1N1.  Travellers should consult their healthcare provider before travelling to India.”