Flu Season 2023-2024: Experts Dispute Claims of a “superflu”
Table of Contents
Despite widespread media reports and concerns from health officials, leading scientists are asserting that the current flu season is, actually, broadly typical – a sentiment at odds with narratives of an “unprecedented” or “superflu” outbreak. This year’s season began earlier than usual in the UK, prompting initial fears of a especially severe wave, but current data suggests the reality is far less dramatic than initially portrayed.
Concerns initially arose in early November when scientists detected seven new mutations in a strain of influenza known as H3N2, specifically a subclade designated K. This newly mutated virus quickly became dominant, and 10% of cases are now attributed to this strain – but it remains unclear if this applies universally or is concentrated among younger populations with less prior exposure. While H3N2 viruses generally pose a greater risk to the elderly, there is currently no evidence to suggest this year’s strain is more risky than expected. Initial assessments of the seasonal flu vaccine also indicate it is performing in line with previous years.
An Early Start, But Not an Outbreak
Dr. Jamie Lopez bernal, a consultant epidemiologist at the UKHSA, acknowledged the unusual early start to the season and the increased viral evolution.”but in terms of the impact on the NHS and the impact on people’s health, we’re seeing a broadly typical flu season.”
While the flu season may already be peaking, significant uncertainty remains, particularly regarding the potential impact of increased social mixing during the Christmas holidays and the risk to older individuals. Additionally, a different flu strain – H1N1 – is gaining traction in Europe, potentially leading to a rise in cases.
The Problem with “Superflu”
The perception of a severe outbreak has been fueled, in part, by the language used to describe it.Statistical comparisons highlighting an apparent “10 times higher” case rate compared to 2023 were based on an earlier start to the season, akin to taking an earlier train to arrive at the same destination simultaneously occurring. NHS England’s national medical director, Prof Meghana pandit, labeled the situation an “unprecedented wave of super flu,” a characterization that has drawn criticism. Some have even suggested the term was used to instill fear during ongoing resident doctor strike action.
Experts overwhelmingly agree that “superflu” lacks a scientific basis. “I don’t think it’s a helpful term,” stated Prof Fraser. “There isn’t a particularly unusual set of symptoms, there’s no indication of it being associated with exceptional severity, exceptionally rapid spread or exceptional health impact.”
Prof Nicola Lewis, director of the World Influenza Center at the Francis Crick Institute, echoed this sentiment, stating the virus was “not particularly unusual” and she saw “no evidence” it was “particularly different.” Even Prof Jonathan Van-Tam, former deputy chief medical officer for England, expressed confusion, posting that he was “very unclear what is meant by the rather silly term of ‘superflu’.”
The Risk of “Crying Wolf”
The escalating language surrounding seasonal illnesses – from “tripledemic” to “quademic” and now “superflu” – is raising concerns about eroding public trust in official health advice. While promoting flu vaccination remains crucial – last winter’s jabs are estimated to have prevented around 100,000 hospitalizations – experts worry that constant alarmism could lead to a “cry wolf” effect, rendering the public “numb” to critically important health messages.
dr. Simon Williams, a researcher in psychology and public health at Swansea University, emphasized the need for a “fine balance” between raising awareness and avoiding “fear-messaging or being overly alarmist, which can backfire.” Prof Jonathan Ball,a virologist at Nottingham University,agreed,warning,”I think it is a concern to use words like super flu,when we may one day experience a real super flu.” He stressed the importance of careful communication to avoid diminishing the impact of future, genuinely severe threats.
