#hps

Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome (HPS) Nedir? Belirtileri, Bulaşma Yolları ve Korunma Rehberi

Son yıllarda dünya genelinde dikkat çeken zoonotik hastalıklar arasında yer alan Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome, özellikle kemirgenlerle temas sonucu ortaya çıkan ciddi bir viral enfeksiyondur. Her ne kadar nadir görülse de, erken teşhis edilmediğinde hayati risk oluşturabilir.

Peki hantavirüs tam olarak nedir? Nasıl bulaşır? Belirtileri nelerdir? İşte detaylı rehber.

Hantavirüs Nedir?

Hantavirüs, çoğunlukla fare ve diğer kemirgen türlerinde bulunan bir virüs grubudur. İnsanlara genellikle enfekte kemirgenlerin:

İdrarı

Dışkısı

Tükürüğü

ile temas sonucu bulaşır.

Virüs, havaya karışan mikroskobik parçacıkların solunmasıyla insan vücuduna girebilir. Özellikle uzun süre kapalı kalmış depo, bodrum, ahır veya kırsal alanlarda risk artar.

Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome (HPS) Nedir?

HPS, hantavirüsün akciğerleri etkileyen en ciddi formudur. Enfeksiyon ilerledikçe akciğerlerde sıvı birikimi oluşabilir ve bu durum ciddi solunum yetmezliğine yol açabilir.

Hastalığın ilk belirtileri çoğu zaman grip ile karıştırılır. İşte tehlikeli kısmı tam burada başlıyor. Çünkü birçok kişi ilk günlerde durumu sıradan bir enfeksiyon sanabiliyor.

Hantavirüs Belirtileri Nelerdir?

İlk belirtiler genellikle şunlardır:

Yüksek ateş

Kas ağrıları

Halsizlik

Baş ağrısı

Mide bulantısı

Kusma

Karın ağrısı

İleri aşamada ise:

Şiddetli nefes darlığı

Öksürük

Göğüs sıkışması

Akciğerde sıvı birikmesi

görülebilir.

Özellikle nefes alma güçlüğü başladıysa durum acil hale gelebilir.

Hantavirüs Nasıl Bulaşır?

En yaygın bulaşma yolları:

1. Fare Dışkısı ve Tozu

Kurumuş dışkı veya idrarın temizlenmesi sırasında virüs havaya karışabilir.

2. Kapalı Alanlar

Uzun süre kullanılmamış:

Depolar

Yazlık evler

Garajlar

Ahırlar

riskli alanlardır.

3. Kemirgen Teması

Canlı veya ölü kemirgenlerle doğrudan temas riski artırır.

Hantavirüsten Korunma Yolları

Korunma, bu hastalıkta en kritik konudur.

Dikkat edilmesi gerekenler:

Fare bulunan alanları önce havalandırın.

Süpürge kullanmadan önce dezenfektan sıkın.

Eldiven ve maske kullanın.

Açıkta yiyecek bırakmayın.

Kemirgen giriş noktalarını kapatın.

Klasik “bir şey olmaz” yaklaşımı burada ciddi risk oluşturabilir. Özellikle kırsal bölgelerde çalışanlar ekstra dikkatli olmalı.

Hantavirüs Tedavisi Var mı?

Şu an hantavirüse karşı kesin bir antiviral tedavi bulunmamaktadır. Ancak erken teşhis ve yoğun destek tedavisi yaşam kurtarıcı olabilir.

Bu nedenle:

Şüpheli temas sonrası belirtiler başladıysa,

Özellikle nefes darlığı gelişiyorsa,

vakit kaybetmeden sağlık kuruluşuna başvurulmalıdır.

Türkiye’de Görülüyor mu?

Türkiye’de hantavirüs vakaları oldukça nadirdir. Ancak zaman zaman Karadeniz bölgesi başta olmak üzere bazı vakalar rapor edilmiştir. Dünya genelinde ise özellikle Amerika kıtasında daha ciddi türleri görülmektedir.

Sonuç

Hantavirüs nadir görülen ancak hafife alınmaması gereken bir enfeksiyondur. Temizlik sırasında alınacak basit önlemler bile ciddi riskleri azaltabilir.

Baru-baru ini, komunitas kesehatan global dikejutkan oleh rilis resmi dari Organisasi Kesehatan Dunia (WHO) melalui laporan Disease Outbreak News (DON) nomor 2026-DON599 yang diterbitkan pada tanggal 4 Mei 2026. Laporan tersebut menyoroti sebuah insiden medis yang sangat tidak biasa: klaster penyakit pernapasan akut parah di atas sebuah kapal pesiar bernama MV Hondius yang sedang berlayar di…

there are a few different angles ive approached this from, and apologies this is basically all a 19th century france list, it's just hashtag my knowledge base:

first of all the relationship between the state and the medical establishment was/is more than just an alignment of interests, in the french case this is quite overt and explicit but it's true elsewhere as well that a certain strain of thinking essentially posits that doctors and legislators should be the same people, decisions about social welfare should be the same as decisions about (public) health, doctoring society = doctoring the individual, etc. jack ellis's 'the physician-legislators of france' covers some of these specific individuals and dynamics; george weisz's 'the medical mandarins' is complementary

in contagious disease management specifically, you can see much of this dynamic playing out as concern about urban poverty, overcrowding, and economic productivity. i haven't really loved most of the lit i've read on this as standalones, but you can kind of take what you will from a handful of different things: catherine kudlick (cholera in post-revolutionary paris), andrew aisenberg (contagion), françois delaporte (histoire de la fièvre jaune), richard evans (epidemics and revolutions), david barnes (im thinking of an essay called like, cargo, infection, and quarantine or something like that)

concern about fertility, family size, etc took on specific forms as social sciences consolidated disciplinarily & statistics were increasingly viewed as important & objective measures. on this id recommend people like joshua cole (the power of large numbers) and jack donzelot (the policing of families)

colonial intervention and military medicine are specific areas where you can often see most readily the deployment of medicine as a social disciplining technology, because by their nature there really is no existence for these branches of medicine outside the state's economic goals. off the top of my head id recommend ellen amster's work, richard keller on psychiatry in french colonial north africa, aro velmet's 'pasteur's empire', michael osborne on acclimatisation/climatic medicine. david arnold and roy macleod have also worked in this area. there are a few interesting essays that touch on the medical aspects of this in 'l'invention scientifique de la méditérranée', which is just a collection i picked up at some point

gender is another stress point where it's easy to see the ideological commitments of medicine because there was/is so much anxiety specifically about women as vectors of immorality, unwellness, constitutional weakness, etc. david barnes covers some of this in his tuberculosis book 'the making of a social disease' and id recommend alain corbin's study of the legal regulatory apparatus around prostitution, 'les filles de noce'. sun-young park also discusses urban architecture and design as medical gendering efforts in 'ideals of the body'

jumping backward a little chronologically, dora weiner also talks about early 19th century clinical medical reform in paris as explicitly configured around the promotion of work and ideal productivity in 'the citizen-patient in revolutionary and imperial paris' (tho she is wrong about foucault lol), and so does emma spary peripherally in 'feeding france'. sean quinlan (also wrong about foucault) and william max nelson lay some of this groundwork even earlier in their discussions of medicine, early biopolitical gestures, the consolidation of early racial categorisations, and the medical policing of poverty in the 18th century

in general anything on 'medical police' will be a fruitful place to start lol. there are some solid overview texts in this area, like ann la berge's 'mission and method' or gérard jorland's 'une société à soigner'

as far as the overarching theoretical claims here go, i obviously borrow a lot from foucault in certain respects (birth of the clinic, order of things, essays on biopolitics) as well as from latour (pasteurisation of france). i wouldn't necessarily say you have to start with these types of texts or read them in great loving depth or be loyally attached to them but they're useful frameworks to at least acquaint yourself with at some point if these types of topics are interesting to you

I've been digging into studies which show treatments like TMS and SSRIs falling to outperform the placebo, but I feel like I lack a sufficient understanding of what is actually going on when treatments supposedly have a "strong placebo effect." Like I'm sure that things like reporting bias factor in, but I also think it's possible that some people could experience genuine relief from idk like, seeing that resources are being dedicated to the diagnosis and treatment of their situation, even if the treatment is bunk.

I'm also curious to hear your thoughts!

wow sorry this died in my inbox for 1 million years. so this is a big topic haha, and i'm just going to bullet point a few things because otherwise we will be here all day, but

SSRIs are a classic placebo effect topic nowadays partly because placebo effect is easier to test with drugs, specifically drugs that take a while to build up in your system and that don't typically have immediate obvious effects. eg, like, if you're testing whether amphetamines 'treat' 'adhd' then you run into the obvious problem that it's not usually very hard for someone to tell whether you just gave them a dose of adderall or a sugar pill, so that confounds results. interventions that involve some kind of invasive procedure are even harder to placebo-test because patients will obviously know if you, like, didn't perform a surgery. you could for example put conventional acupuncture and electro-acupuncture head-to-head relatively easily, or lymphatic massage vs sham massage or something, but it's not so easy to compare these things to a no-intervention group, and even with something like SSRIs some people do notice certain effects more strongly or quickly, so trial design is hard and really affects outcomes a lot

placebo trials are also hard for long-term outcomes or chronic conditions, most of which tend to wax and wane over time anyway. like, weight loss trials have the same problem lol, who cares if i lost afew kilo or decreased my depression scores by 3 points if you're only looking at 6 months of data? classically the asnwer is, well the intervention works but you just have to keep doing it :) but like, rarely are the data there to support that, and even if it's theoretically true it's very irrelevant if the intervention in practice is not sustainable for almost anyone for a long period of time lol, or has other negative effects that put people off it, or whatever

i agree with you there are some cases in which 'placebo effect' is partially an artefact of ppl feeling a little better just knowing that someone is trying to solve their problem. most often you see that show up as a temporary decrease in symptoms like pain, dyspepsia, anxiety, etc... like, it's not surprising that a person would feel a little better during the course of what seems to be a compassionate and effortful medical encounter than one where they're confused, mistreated, ignored, etc. however it's not generally the case that you see a genuinely strong placebo effect in replicable trials for all symptoms/conditions, and certainly not over a long period of time

in general trial populations are not very representative of general patient populations. they often exclude comorbid conditions (this can include, like, having Chronic Tension Headaches coded into your electronic medical record because of that time your generalist wrote you for tramadol, or psych dxes that are years old that you wish weren't there, or whatever), they often exclude pregnant patients or even anyone they define as theoretically capable of getting pregnant, they may select from extremely sick hospital populations OR from whoever is willing to show up for a day in exchange for a 20 (meaning, largely, poorer people with little background medical documentation), they may define a condition in either vvery restrictive terms (eg, genetic testing not available to the avg patient) or very broad ones (eg, long covid studies that just ask if you have any of a broad number of symtpoms x number of months after having covid, with no attempt to filter out WHY you have those symptoms), etc etc etc. it depends very heavily on the condition, intervention, and the company/university funding the trial lol. so, trial participants' response or non-response to an intervention is not always an easy data point to interpret meaningfully

where psychiatric diagnoses are concerned i just don't take any of this seriously period, in any direction, because [gestures at my everything about what psychiatry is and how it epistemically flops]

in general i'm not like, particularly inspired by most talk about 'placebo effect' because it tends to devolve rather rapidly into inane spiritualisms about the mind-body blahblahblah, and overlapping implications (or explications) about how your symptoms are because you're not thinking positive enough. like, you know who fucking loves the placebo effect? interventional pain clinics that exist to sell you graded exercise therapy and win grant funding for taking as many patients off opioids as possible, and the 'alternative' providers they refer to who sell themselves as Well Sure It Might Be Bullshit, But You're Desperate! lol. also ive spent enough time in history of medicine archives that i just would not presume to rule out other reasons why someone might have responded or not responded to an intervention, like: they had a different problem that acgtually happened to be treated by the intervention. they had a different problem that happened to spontaneously or temporarily resolve. they were still reporting symptoms, but by the physician's asinine and hyperspecific definition of cure, they improved. etc, living tissue is weird and complex and human biology is partially understood at best and disease is a socially mediated concept, always. theres just a lot going on and a lot of different cases.

as far as reading, i'm not sure how much you even need to look at these that are more specifically about placebo -- any decent phil of medicine reading will strengthen analysis on this topic. but these might be of more particular interest anyway.

The Question of Efficacy (2015). Sivin, Nathan. Asian Medicine: Tradition and Modernity 10.1-2, 9-35

The Testing of Sanocrysin: Science, Profit, and Innovation in Clinical Trial Design, 1926-31 (2014). Gabriel, Joseph M. Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 69.4, 604-632. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhmas/jrt040

A Note on the Invention, Invisibility and Dissolution of the Placebo Effect (2005). Andersen, Lars Ole. Gesnerus 62, 102-110

Placebo trials without mechanisms: How far can they go? (2019). Teira, David. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 77, 101-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2019.101177