Reports of their deaths were greatly varied

CURRENT EVENTS

Swine flu mortality seems to depend on which newspaper you read.

A skeptical Wall Street Journal reports that "Mexican health authorities" say 20 people have died and that "they are continuing to investigate whether" more than 1,000 others have been infected. The paper even finds a quote to match its mood: "We're Aztecs. It takes a lot more than a flu to slow us down," a "chubby 25-year-old business consultant" says.

By the Washington Post's count "at least" 68 people have died and "at least" 1,004 "have been sickened." In case that didn't seem serious enough, a mother of two gets quoted up high: "We are very worried. This is bad." Whether she was clutching her young children at the time is unknown, as it was a telephone interview. Apparently the writers were afraid of infection.

The Los Angeles Times' numbers were the most circumspect, quoting Mexican Health Secretary Jose Angel Cordova that 20 deaths have been confirmed and 40 others are still being investigated. It notes another 1,004 are "reported to be ill with flu symptoms," a nice way of communicating both the symptoms of the group and the uncertainty of diagnosis.

On the other hand, the papers all report eight swine flu cases at home. So, does this reflect a more coordinated U.S. public health system or the journalists' greater creedence in American officials?