Not so in Britain, as I discovered during a recent trip. The flu, which is now spreading directly and rapidly from human to human, occupies the front pages of newspapers. Talk of the disease is everywhere amid fears that hundreds of thousands could be affected by the epidemic. The Health Protection Agency estimates that in the week prior to July 16, 55,000 people contracted the disease. While the death toll, currently at 29 in the United Kingdom, is still relatively low -- the ordinary flu kills many, mainly elderly people, every year -- the government's worst-case scenario puts the possible, but unlikely, death toll at 65,000, while some predictions foresee one-third to half of the population eventually catching the virus. A vaccine is being prepared, but it may not be ready for several months.The flu is now seen as a major risk, not just because of the potential fatalities. While most patients recover within a week or two, the H1N1 virus produces symptoms -- high fever, achy joints and headaches -- that are seriously debilitating. The speed and pattern of progression suggests that in the coming weeks or months, enough people will be in bed at the same time to create a logistical nightmare. Transport could be disrupted, law enforcement agencies might be short of personnel and, of course, the National Health Service is expected to be severely challenged. Experts warn that even a mild epidemic could slow down economic recovery and cost the country several percentage points in lost growth.
Such eventualities would be testing for any government. The authorities have to plan for the worst while hoping for the best: issue warnings to curb the rate of new infections without creating panic in the population. This sometimes results in conflicting and confusing advice: when couples planning to have children were advised to hold off conceiving, strong reactions forced the British Department of Health to retract its warning and explain instead that pregnant women should be particularly careful since they are more prone to infection. While the flu is targeting the usual vulnerable groups, it also appears to target children and healthy young people in large numbers.
So far, opinion appears fairly evenly divided between those who shrug their shoulders and believe the threat is hyped and those who take it seriously. Judging from a few conversations I have had with friends and acquaintances, concerns about the practical aspects of dealing with swine flu, rather than fear of fatal consequences, are beginning to affect people's planning, especially when it comes to traveling abroad.
People considering holidays abroad in the coming months worry that if the epidemic reaches the proportions feared in Britain, they might be turned back at the border when they reach their destination or, on the contrary, end up stranded abroad, unable to fly back at the end of their stay. The British government has already advised people experiencing flu-like symptoms while on a foreign trip to wait until they are better to return home. Fifty-two British schoolchildren on an educational trip to China have just been quarantined in Beijing after four of them were found to be infected. Airlines such as British Airways and Virgin have issued guidelines to staff to screen outgoing passengers.
As a major tourism destination, Turkey needs to keep an eye on developments abroad.
If the epidemic spreads sufficiently to limit international travel, tourism revenues, already down on previous years, could be further affected. So far, few domestic cases have been reported but the likelihood of the disease spreading more widely within Turkey is likely to increase if among the millions of visitors streaming into the country in search of sea, sun and sand, a few unwittingly bring the virus as excess baggage.
