Divisions in France of over dangers of H1N1 virus

There are two quite different perspectives that have appeared in France over the past couple of days on the same story: perhaps reflecting the attitude held by many people here and elsewhere over the real dangers associated with "swine flu" - or "grippe A" (influenza A) as it's called in France.

In Sunday's edition of le Journal du Dimanche there was an interview with one of this country's most well-known doctors and a member of parliament for the centre-right Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (Union for a Popular Movement, UMP) professor Bernard Debré.

He played down the dangers of the (H1N1) virus and accused the government of over-reacting and responding to media pressure.

The following day there was a reply from fellow UMP member and minister of health, Roselyne Bachelot, who insisted in an interview with the national daily, le Figaro, that the government's response was measured and appropriate.

The crux of the matter as far as Debré is concerned is that the current strain is no more dangerous than seasonal flu and in fact could be less threatening.

Part of the problem, he insists, is the reaction there has been to the latest outbreak in light of the so-called bird flu which he describes as "Being very dangerous to human beings with a mortality rate of 60 to 65 per cent but at the same time less contagious because it's difficult to cross from species to species."

"This (H1N1) flu isn't dangerous. We've even realised that it could be less threatening than seasonal flu," he said.

"At the moment there have been around 800 deaths worldwide and the southern hemisphere has undoubtedly reached its peak of contamination," he added.

"Of course the virus could become more virulent, but that's not the opinion that has been expressed by a majority of virologists."

Debré says that the reaction from the French government has to an extent only served to increase fear among the general public. But at the same time he admits that governments around the world have had their hands forced somewhat.

"From the moment the World Health Organisation started issuing daily reports and holding press conferences, governments really didn't have an option but to follow that lead," he told le Journal du Dimanche.

"It's my contention that the French government has come under pressure because of the political over-dramatisation within the media of the risks the virus presents."

The flip side of the argument of course comes from Bachelot, who told le Figaro that as far as she was concerned the government's reaction to the threat had been the right one.

"I treat this pandemic very seriously and I don't base my approach on the opinion of politicians or try to make a media splash," she said.

"From the beginning I've consulted the most renowned and respected experts - French and European - and if we look at what they have had to say in the media about the government's response to this health crisis, they point to it having been in proportion and correct."

In answering Debré's assertion that the virus isn't dangerous and is no more harmful than the possible effects of seasonal flu, Bachelot perhaps not surprisingly, is more cautious.

She admits that the virus might not be particularly harmful at the moment, but its ability to spread quickly requires that governments have a system in place that can cope with a wider outbreak.

And for Bachelot, the threat lies in the potential rate of infection based on statistics for those who catch seasonal flu.

"On average seasonal flu kills around 2,500 people in France - among 2,5 million people who catch it," she says.

"Some experts say that this virus could lead to around 20 million people becoming ill and that presents a potentially serious problem to public health even if the virus remains relatively harmless in many cases."

The number of cases of "grippe A" reported here in France so far has been 483, of which none has been deadly.