Introduction
Descriptive and analytical epidemiology is a vital tool for evaluating pathogenic patterns in infected races. It makes use of personal descriptions in regards to the extent of pathogenic attack, and in regards to the infection time as well as places in terms of severity (Merrill, 2009). Generally, pathogens are seen to be gender sensitive such that male are more affected than female, while at the same time, its spread varies from place to place. The discussion in this paper seeks to describe and analyze patterns of epidemiology of an unidentified pathogen.
The description and analysis of epidemiology of an unknown pathogen
The unknown pathogen has been found to infect people of all ages and sexes. Its prevalence also indicates that it spreads to almost all the parts that diagnosis was conducted regardless of the conditions. However, the prevalence of the pathogen is highly different in accordance to the type of sex, places where they live, as well as the times of infection. Generally, the pathogenic paths are determined by various unidentified factors in this case, the reason for the observable prevalent distinctions.
First, the pathogen seems to love the male sex than the female in all realms of its occurrence. The distribution table indicates that in all individuals affected, a higher percentage of males are infected as compared to the available females. However, research indicates that the rate of deaths that occur in males is very high for any disease due to the rapid response of the male body to pathogenic attacks, while females, though slow to respond to the pathogenic attacks are severely affected and the infections normally have profound paralytic effects on their bodies (Schoenbach & Rosamond, 2000).
Secondly, the pathogenic patterns are not uniformly distributed in all places, since some areas seem to harbor it than the others. The pathogen finds fertile grounds for growth in some regions especially in the northeastern areas of the investigated regions, where more than 34 individuals per a selected sample population. The prevalence of the pathogen also differs from one country to the next, between cities and regions. It is also evident that the pathogen affects more and more people, as the interaction theory takes pre-eminence among them. For instance, the prevalence is higher in places with high population, thus, the amount of population is directly proportional to the amount of infection by the pathogen. Therefore, in the distinct places, the prevalence of disease follows a normal distribution curve. The best example to demonstrate this is the city of Newyork, with 29, 172 people who among 32.8% is infected with the unknown pathogen, while the city of Connecticut with 15, 523 has 17.4% of people infected with the pathogen. The areas of investigation indicate prevalence depending on the placement, population as well as the classes of persons available in a given sample area (Panda, 2002).
Moreover, the time of infection by the pathogen differs in regards to the place and the individual cases that are reported from the place. The reported cases are highly dependent on the month of the pathogenic infections onset. In this case, there are rampant cases of the disease reported in the mid-year periods. The month of July indicates the occurrence of more than 20,000 cases of the disease that are reported in the investigated regions. The first and the last months of the year of any infection indicate the availability of some disease resistance as compared to the mid-months of the same year of disease pathogenicity. The results of the pathogenicity and prevalence levels are indicative of the level of virulence of this unidentified pathogen. This is demonstrated in the fact that every month of the year demonstrates a reported case of infection, and rising beyond unexpected levels (Gorbach, Bartlett and Blacklow, 2004).
On the other hand, since the realization of the pathogenic existence in 1982 as per the investigations, the number of reported cases rises steadily over the years. The prevalence and the epidemiology of the pathogen at hand are deemed very high, as well as its survival potent. This seems to imply that any prevention of treatment efforts is not effective due to the high levels of pathogenicity. The last year of investigation, 1998 indicates the highest prevalence of the infection. The optimal results are that the epidemiology of the pathogen is directly proportional with time. The patterns of the infection by the pathogen also seem rapid on particular ages. For instance, many of the reported cases are those of people between 5-9 years and 55-59 years in the investigated regions. Thus, the pathogen is normal in its infection since it follows normal infection curves (Coggon, Rose & Barker, 2007).
Conclusion
The analysis of the epidemiological patterns of the pathogen under investigation is very high and its survival value is extremely high. The infection is to people of all ages and sexes, in distinct regions and at particular times of prevalence. Therefore, the prevalence is directly proportional to the number of individuals and the progress in time.
References
Coggon, D., Rose, G., & Barker, D. (2007). Case Control and Cross-Sectional studies in Epidemiology for the Uninitiated. British Medical Journal. Web.
Gorbach, S., Bartlett, J. and Blacklow, N. (2004). Infectious diseases. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Merrill, R. (2009). Introduction to Epidemiology. NJ: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Panda, U. N. (2002). Current Medical Diagnosis and Treatment. Jaypee Brothers Publishers.
Schoenbach, V. & Rosamond, V. (2000). Understanding the fundamentals of epidemiology. UNC School of Public Health. Web.