Swine Flue

[redrum]

Redrum - you are late to the party. Orwellian already accused me of simply swallowing everything the mainstream media spoon-feeds me. I'm simply pointing out that he (and many others) do the same with off-the-center publications. Pot, kettle and all that.

i'm only going off the fact that you seem to swallow everything the mainstream press feeds you without ever giving any thought that perhaps there is another side you're not seeing or haven't really truthfully explored. you don't even entertain the idea. you just giggle at anybody with an opposing view and then play the victim that you are the one being attacked.

by the way, the article owellian posted was not from some off center publication, it was fox news.

And no one thinks its worse than the regular flu? Well, it wasn't for me but I'm sure there are others (including Igor who was hospitalized for it, per my understanding) who may not feel the same way. I would be hard-pressed to say you can speak for everyone that had the flu.

There you go again trying to change the argument. Stop attacking the speaker and attempting to assume for whom/what I speak for. Address the issue and the facts. The FACTS are that the swine flu is just another flu. The FACTS are that fewer people have died from the swine flu than the regular flu.

have ppl died from h1n1? Of course they have. Have they gotten deathly ill? Of course they have. And the same can be said for the regular flu. I repeat, the swine flu is just another flu and the WHO level 6 was completely not justified. Giggle at that.

Re: vaccines. Fine, you have every right not to get vaccinated. I strongly encourage you to go live in an area where you can live au natural - without vaccines for TB, smallpox, measles, mumps, rubella, et al. You seem to think your quality of life will improve. Have at it. No one is telling you otherwise. Yes, I am a huge proponent of vaccines. Yes, I believe that immunizations have improved quality of life, eradicated or lessened the impact of life-threatening disease, extended life spans, etc.

Again, stop talking about me. stop talking about where you suggest for me to live or what i seem to think. stick to the issues.

you continue to insist on only seeing one side. You refuse to even entertain the idea that vaccines can be/have been harmful. I'm not saying that all vaccines are/have been bad. All I'm trying to communicate is not to blindly roll up your sleeve and trust whatever some organization tells you to do. Makes sense right?

The thing I find most interesting is that because I find many theories posted on her to be completely lacking in credibilty, you and others immediately accuse me of being blind, not asking questions, being a sheep or whatever other insult you can come up with. Does it ever occur to you that maybe I have looked into it & I think it's utter bullshit? Someone disagreeing with your vehemently stated position doesn't make them uninformed, just means they don't agree with you.

First off, please refrain from using profanity. Let's try and keep it clean.

Second, stop trying to lump me in with the "others" on this board. If ppl are accusing you to "wake up" or "ask questions", well, then maybe you should. there is nothing wrong with asking questions and going against the grain. in fact, we need more it, more today than ever.


third, i don't mind somebody disagreeing with me, not in the least. but you need to come with more than just a VAGUE opinion that has been in large part formed by the special interests that control the mass media. give me the reasons why you disagree, support your argument....not why you THINK or SUPPOSE something to be a certain way.

I think my biggest issue with you is that you most definitely have opinions and you're completely entitled to them. But in my estimation, they are not INFORMED opinions, because you insist on only seeing the issues as one way while at the same time providing no real reasons as to why.

I have seen you weigh in on the economy, the falling dollar, swine flu, 9/11...etc. most the time your comments are simply an "opinion". When pressed to elaborate with more detail however you become deathly silent. You resort to attacking the speaker, exaggerating, putting words into people's mouths, giggling...etc.

And again, you are entitled to think whatever you want about my contributions and value or lack there of. Have at it. You can inform me I'm living in denial or contribute nothing - really, it's all fine. I can continue to point out that I think things are funny or batshit crazy or conspiracy theories.

So there you go. Are you giggling now? Have at it then.

 

[Ailujjj]

Sorry, but H1N1 /swine flu is not just another flu. WHO and HOW it affects certain population segments is completely atypical and abnormal.

Fox News should never, ever be considered a news source, unless you include gossip rags such as the National Enquirer in that category....

 

[redrum]

Sorry, but H1N1 /swine flu is not just another flu. WHO and HOW it affects certain population segments is completely atypical and abnormal.

Fox News should never, ever be considered a news source, unless you include gossip rags such as the National Enquirer in that category....

sorry but in terms of h1n1's REAL, not hyped, affect on the world, it IS just another flu. you can talk about particulars and inherent differences all you want. that's not my point here.

the POINT is that what we've been told/sold about h1n1 is a lie.

i believe this particular article was originally reported by the associated press then picked up by fox news.

whatever the case, the person being quoted is Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe. are people going to say he's not a legitimate source either?

 

[orwellian]

Sorry, but H1N1 /swine flu is not just another flu. WHO and HOW it affects certain population segments is completely atypical and abnormal.

It doesn't affect the population differently than normal flu. Could you please elaborate because I really don't know what you're talking about.

Fox News should never, ever be considered a news source, unless you include gossip rags such as the National Enquirer in that category....

Al Jazeera first broke the story, the reason I posted the Fox News story was because it contained more quotes than the original. Fox News isn't always bad.

 

[Ailujjj]

Sorry but the logic that once it's a flu it's just like any other flu is pretty weak.

It is affecting atypical age groups - ie has been extreme (requiring hospitalization) deadly for many who are younger and healthier than who would normally succumb to the usual flu.

Not saying your source isn't legitimate - although I stand by Fox News being rubbish, overall - but certainly I'll give precedence to others I trust more or experts I know personally.

 

[orwellian]

Sorry but the logic that once it's a flu it's just like any other flu is pretty weak.

It is affecting atypical age groups - ie has been extreme (requiring hospitalization) deadly for many who are younger and healthier than who would normally succumb to the usual flu.

It's a fact that it's actually less lethal than normal flu. Normal flu also requires hospitalization and several people die from it annually.
Check out these articles:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...ctually-LESS-dangerous-annual-flu-season.html
http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/l...-swine-flu-in-U-S/SYwVqQF_3Umy0qY3qhp9zQ.cspx

Not saying your source isn't legitimate - although I stand by Fox News being rubbish, overall - but certainly I'll give precedence to others I trust more or experts I know personally.

You should never trust any media. Always be skeptical. I dislike Fox News too but that doesn't mean they can publish good articles every now and then.

 

[Ailujjj]

The issue with h1n1 is not that it requires hospitalization or how deadly it is - it is WHO requires hospitalization and WHO is dying from it which differs from who requires hospitalization or dies from standard influenza that we see annually.

Yes, it is 'less deadly' than your average flu - but teenagers, young adults, etc are NOT those that the flu would be expected to affect so severely. The many that die of the flu annually are not young or otherwise healthy; they have already compromised systems and could fall victim to any number of more minor health problems.

If you place no trust in any media EVER than safe to say that makes it pretty difficult to form a reasonable, measured opinion in any form. Anyhow. If you can't agree that it is an atypical flu than any debate on stakeholders or public policy henceforth is pointless.

 

[orwellian]

The issue with h1n1 is not that it requires hospitalization or how deadly it is - it is WHO requires hospitalization and WHO is dying from it which differs from who requires hospitalization or dies from standard influenza that we see annually.

Yes, it is 'less deadly' than your average flu - but teenagers, young adults, etc are NOT those that the flu would be expected to affect so severely. The many that die of the flu annually are not young or otherwise healthy; they have already compromised systems and could fall victim to any number of more minor health problems.

So what you are saying is that it affects young healthy people not pertaining to any risk groups?
Take the kingdom of Sweden as an example, who seems to be one of the best countries reporting on deaths related to the flu and to the (mass) vaccination against it.

"Most of Sweden’s swine flu victims have been above 50-years-old and the majority also belonged to a known risk group."

and:

"Three of twelve males who have died didn’t belong to a group known to have a higher risk for contracting the disease."

http://www.thelocal.se/23430/20091123/

So I believe you are wrong. Although I agree that the virus is slightly different than normal flu, as it was probably created in a lab. But the effects are the same.

If you place no trust in any media EVER than safe to say that makes it pretty difficult to form a reasonable, measured opinion in any form. Anyhow. If you can't agree that it is an atypical flu than any debate on stakeholders or public policy henceforth is pointless.

Just because I don't trust the media doesn't mean I can't believe in what is being reported. The important thing is to be skeptical.

 

[ElQueso]

You know, I am worried that I find myself agreeing at times with Orwellian At least in some things!

Are all vaccinations bad or even needed? That is a pretty big controversy that is not real easy to come down on one side or the other, in my opinion. But for sure it should be questioned.

My uncle had a mild case of polio when he was a kid. One leg is slightly shorter and with less muscle mass than the other. He has some health problems as a result now, in his old-age. I'm sure he would have absolutely LOVED to have had a vaccination against polio when he was a kid.

Do we still need polio vaccinations nowadays? At least in the States and other first and second world countries where it's pretty much been eradicated? Is it worth the possibility (no matter how small, but some numbers I saw were 1 in 750K not big, but it DOES happen) that your kid is going to end up with a mutated polio virus as a result? I personally don't know the answer to that question.

Should people get a vaccination for something like the regular flu? I know people who swear by it - every year they go get the injection before "flu season" so they can be assured of not getting the flu. What gets me about that is they would rather take a chance on dying or getting more sick from some complication (admittedly rare, but it can happen) than being sick for a few days. Personally, I have never once gotten a flu shot and have never had the flu itself (or if I did, it was so mild that I laugh at it! )

There, I'm talking about relatively healthy people. But should an older person who is not in the best of health get a vaccination against the flu? Well, I can see the argument for that.

The H1N1 flu scare that went around last year, in my opinion, was a prime example of hysteria without reason.

I never saw a single person that was sick with it. At the time, I caught a cold and went to a clinic here in Pilar to get antibiotics (something I ONLY do when a cold is turning into bronchitis and threatens to go on for weeks - overuse of antibiotics is a BIG problem). I was in the clinic with a bunch of sick people. I asked the doctor when she saw me how much of a problem the H1N1 was at the time and she told me they had yet to see a case, but they were "vigilant".

The flu supposedly caused death in a slightly higher percentage of people who were "not at risk." What does that really mean? When will people learn that statistics can be manipulated in so many ways that they are often just plain useless?

I am pretty sure, personally, that the pharmaceutical companies are behind this in some fashion. I'm not a big believer in "conspiracies" per se because I just don't believe that conspiracies that affect the whole world (or even a large group of people) can be kept quiet. Not in the sense of a group of people getting together at very high levels and "deciding the fate of the universe."

HOWEVER.

I do believe that those who are already in power (politically or commercially), and including those who want to be in power, and also including those who want to be seen by those in power as being "with them," use disinformation to get large groups of people fleeing like herds of cows in the direction they want them to flee.

The easiest way to get the herd to move is to scare them.

To me, there are a number of items whereby a relatively few people have used scare tactics to get large groups of people moving in the direction they want them to move.

- Man-Made Global Warming

- Invasion of Iraq by the US

- AIDS (yeah I know, I'll probably be castigated for that one)

- The current version of Healthcare reform in the US

Ah, there's sure to be many others. I'm just writing off the top of my head, not preparing a thesis.

I'm not even saying that there is not some basis of truth behind may of these things. I'm sure everyone knows that the best lie contains important kernels of truth.

I believe that GOVERNMENT is the biggest problem, always has been. People should be extremely skeptical of anything a government organization or official says or does. People should be EXTREMELY skeptical of ANYTHING a government does to make things "BETTER" for its citizens.

Governments, by their very nature of size, impersonal-ness and corruption-of-power (related to mere mortals), can't really make things better. It's the PEOPLE who make things better.

 

[citygirl]

El Queso - interesting post. When you posit that the following were examples of disinformation or scare tactics - can you expand?

- Man-Made Global Warming (are you saying global warming doesn't exist?)

- Invasion of Iraq by the US (FWIW - completely agree with you on this one, the fact that something like 1 in 3 Americans wound up believing Iraq had something to do with 9/11 is mind-blowing )

- AIDS (again - are you saying HIV wasn't a real problem? mis-information by whom and to what aim?)

- The current version of Healthcare reform in the US (scare tactics by whom? those who want reform or those who are fighting against proposed bill?)

I'm curious to hear more.