A question for those in the know. How easy is this to treat/what is the treatment?
Generally the news is just saying stuff like "there is enough Tamiflu for xmillion people, don't panic" which isn't exactly informative.
The treatment for the overwhelming majority of people who contract this particular flu will be no different from any other flu. Rest and plenty of fluids.
The problem is with your question. There is no real "in the know" for this because most of the variables that need to be filled are not yet known or have a high degree of uncertainty. The public is operating with a dearth of information. On the flip side of the coin, I don't envy the guys who are working on investigation and control on this one because the moment that people and governments started hitting the panic button, those guys went into total information overload. It's hard enough trying to develop a proper epi model when the information case is ideal, much less when the people you're interviewing can't tell the difference between reality and their own speculation.
Already, you have people taking advantage of the panic to push their own agendas. The Egyptian government has ordered the slaughtering of all pigs in the country. This hurts only the religious minority that are already discriminated against. The Egyptian government's reaction makes almost no sense scientifically, because it's not pigs that are spreading the disease, it's people. In fact, at this time, there's no definite indication that pigs are the reservoir.
If we sat here and made a list of the major relevant factors that would influence decision making in terms of containment and control, the unknowns heavily outweigh the knowns. Of course, this is usually the way it is anyway because it's very difficult to tell where on the epidemiological curve you are before you are already past the peak. There are methods to help you predict this, but if anyone tries to tell you that they know how any novel virus will behave, they're blowing smoke up your ass.
Just to give you an idea, how many people were exposed? How many of those exposed were infected? What's the contact time for infection? How many of those developed symptoms? How many of those who were symptomatic became seriously ill? How many of those died? These are just a small fraction of the bare minimum needed to establish any kind of scientific grasp of the situation and the fact of the matter is, most of it's either unknown or estimates vary widely.
There's actually quite a bit more known virologically and that helps in a number of ways. Unfortunately, flu viruses are notoriously unpredictable and have been known to change very, very quickly. There's a lot that makes this both a very heavy factor or a non factor, depending on which perspective you take. Health personnel who directly treat patients will often have a very different take than a person trying to prevent the spread of a disease.
Even this idea that there seems to be a very different pattern in Mexico vs the rest of the world might be flawed. It could be that the pattern IS very different. Or it could be that so many people were infected and had such mild symptoms that they never sought medical care or told anyone. These are things that will not be established with any degree of certainty for quite some time to come.
So yeah, there's a reason you're reading the same five stories over and over. Because there's not that much in the way of facts to report. Speculation, on the other hand, is easy to sell.