Is MRSA more dangerous than the swine flu?



  1. 0 Votes

    MRSA is far more dangerous than swine flu.  However, it is less contagious and sporadic, garnering it less media attention.  UK figures from 2008 show 200 deaths associated with the swine flu H1N1 virus, compared to 1,230 from MRSA.  In 2005 MRSA was associated with 18,00 deaths, even compared to 16,000 deaths from AIDS that same year.  The rise and prominence of MRSA has been attributed to the overuse of antibiotics.

  2. 0 Votes

    While both diseases are potentially fatal, MRSA’s numbers show it is far more likely to have deadly consequences than swine flu. Annually, MRSA kills 100,000 people, compared to the 140 that died as a result of swine flu. Furthermore, 10% of the patients that contracted the MRSA infection eventually died; less than .01% of swine flu patients died from the illness. MRSA is also more likely to be contracted at a health care facility. So, by these measures, MRSA is far more dangerous to the general public. 

Please signup or login to answer this question.

Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!