EPTEurope to Investigate the UN Over H1N1 ‘Pandemic’ - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Jathin
United States3505 Posts
| ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
| ||
|
Glaucus
479 Posts
The chief of the UN said that up to 150 million people can die from the bird flu. How is that not throwing a half-assed prediction that people are gonna catch up on, out there? Yeah, in an absolute worst case scenario... On January 11 2010 23:43 Mortality wrote: There's ALWAYS someone seeking profit of some kind from ANY political agenda. You're naive to think otherwise. That's different. Less CO2 emissions means less use of energy which means less economic growth. Taxes and trading of emission rights are all secondary things and can't be blamed on global warming. | ||
|
Draconizard
628 Posts
Certainly, the disease did not turn out to be as bad as initially portrayed, but how could any layman (which I am assuming that everyone here is) know that at the time? Saying that it was "common sense" or that one could simply "know" is simply ridiculous. On January 11 2010 20:50 NonFactor wrote: Raise your hand if you had the possibility to get a vaccine easily but decided not to because you knew it was bullshit and nothing really to be affraid of! o/ Posts like this one are especially egregious. | ||
|
Emon_
3925 Posts
When the minister responsible was asked why we needed such an amount of vaccine when the swine flu isn't that dangerous she replied: "If we can save the life of one kid, then its worth it". When further pressed about it, this was her only argument. . . Such a waste of money. Also, this was around the time when the flu was sufficiently spread and still the mortality was 1%! | ||
|
Glaucus
479 Posts
And it will be the same people bashing them as there are now. Only it will be much much harsher and they will actually kind of have a point. What are they going to say? This has happened through the ages and there's nothing we can really do about it? (which might be true) Also 1% of 6 billion is still 60 million. | ||
|
Badjas
Netherlands2038 Posts
On January 12 2010 00:03 Jathin wrote: I don't really understand the purpose of this investigation. Is it to say that lobbyists were pushing to label this a 'pandemic'? Well, duh! duh what? If the pharmaceutical companies lobbied for declaring a pandemic, without properly backing up their claims, then they are at fault. Edit: On January 12 2010 00:03 Jathin wrote: 2) Refusing to get a vaccine is up to you, but to say it's "bullshit because it won't help me" is missing the point of vaccination from a global health perspective. The concept of "herd immunity" is intended not to protect you, but to halt spread of the disease. I forget the exact numbers, but somewhere between 60 and 80% of people need to be vaccinated in order to decelerate the spread of influenza. Sure, it may not help you, but it'll help those who would die from it from acquiring the disease. You forget the exact numbers, but you also forget to cite resources. It is very hard to tell after the vaccination programs have run, what would have happened otherwise and we can't really find out the truth, but it's convenient as an argument for vaccination. 3) It saddens me that some people here refused to take H1N1 vaccines because they didn't feel "at risk." In fact, the reason H1N1 caused such a stir this time around is because it has been killing healthy people in the younger age range (it is a recurrence of a prior strain, so the elderly population already has immunity against it since they were once exposed) You are at risk of a lot of things. If you want insurance for all of them you're gonna pay millions, to insurance companies to get it covered. Yet, you can choose to accept the risk. How big is it really? That previous generation didn't suffer much from their influenza strain, or did they? (kinda a genuine question since I don't have any figures.) | ||
|
Lovin
Denmark812 Posts
| ||
|
iFU.pauline
France1727 Posts
| ||
|
BanZu
United States3329 Posts
On January 11 2010 20:50 NonFactor wrote: Raise your hand if you had the possibility to get a vaccine easily but decided not to because you knew it was bullshit and nothing really to be affraid of! o/ \o/ I got sick during the whole scare period and so did my roommates lol Wasn't too bad if it was H1N1 | ||
|
bdams19
United States1316 Posts
| ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On January 12 2010 00:03 Jathin wrote: 3) It saddens me that some people here refused to take H1N1 vaccines because they didn't feel "at risk." In fact, the reason H1N1 caused such a stir this time around is because it has been killing healthy people in the younger age range (it is a recurrence of a prior strain, so the elderly population already has immunity against it since they were once exposed) The H1N1 does NOT kill healthy people. Not a single person diagnosed as healthy has died from H1N1 or any other flue for that matter. All deaths has either been reported by people with complications or by people with no diagnose. Just because you don't have a diagnose doesn't mean you are at good health. | ||
hifriend
China7935 Posts
On January 12 2010 01:54 Integra wrote: Not a single person diagnosed as healthy has died from H1N1 or any other flue for that matter. cool story brah plenty of research behind this statement I'm sure | ||
|
ocoini
648 Posts
| ||
|
obesechicken13
United States10467 Posts
On January 12 2010 02:05 ocoini wrote: Wheeee,i took the vaccine! does this mean I might get some money when/if they get sued? :D In dreamland maybe. If people found out that the flu was not dangerous and continued to make it sound like it was to make a profit then they should be held accountable. There are far more deaths from side effects to vaccines than there were historically for flus such as the 1976 swine flu. I think the WHO can just argue that they were concerned about the public safety and will be left alone if they are brought to court. | ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
Glad to see some in-fighting and the tiniest bit accountability amongst the power brokers of the world. In the end all the tax payers of the world ended up paying a lot of money for a largely useless product. I predicted exact that when the vaccines finally arrived on the market in mass. This outcome was eminently predictable primarily because the vaccine arrived so late that the flu "pandemic" had already run its course. The primary effect of taking the flu vaccine was to exposure to the risks associated with a hastily-made vaccine. | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On January 12 2010 01:02 Lovin wrote: It is the mutation that would be the problem from what I understand. Seriously though, sooner or later we've gotta be ready for an epidemic like this. It's stuff like this, even if it rips off, that prepares us for the real thing. Death by epidemic is problably the most plausible path of extinction for humanity right now [citation needed], and we need to prepare. Besides, should we have spread H1N1 uncontrollably, we might actually have seen a mutation.. Correct me if I'm wrong This is correct. Flu virus does mutate over time. It is also the reason why flu vaccines get ineffective and you need a different flu vaccine every season. The possibility for mutation significantly weakens the notion that a flu vaccine will be an effective counter in the middle or latter stages of an epidemic. The flu vaccine needs to be available at the early stages of an epidemic to blunt its spread. | ||
|
Jathin
United States3505 Posts
| ||
|
Badjas
Netherlands2038 Posts
Since there is a large difference in the fatality rate between the Spanish flu pandemic and the recent swine flu one, is that a difference because of the swine flu vaccination program, better hygiene and awareness, better treatment of other fatality-rate-increasing diseases or the effectiveness of the regular vaccination program? It is difficult to make a clear case for the swine flu vaccination program by comparing with the Spanish flu, when it comes with so many factors. | ||
|
hifriend
China7935 Posts
On January 12 2010 02:56 Badjas wrote: Thanks for the references Jathin. Since there is a large difference in the fatality rate between the Spanish flu pandemic and the recent swine flu one, is that a difference because of the swine flu vaccination program, better hygiene and awareness, better treatment of other fatality-rate-increasing diseases or the effectiveness of the regular vaccination program? It is difficult to make a clear case for the swine flu vaccination program by comparing with the Spanish flu, when it comes with so many factors. I think it's pretty certain the new strain wasn't nearly as fatal as the spanish flu, nor as fatal as we first suspected it to be. However all these amateur virologists who think that they somehow predicted this beforehand are idiots. | ||
| ||
