Log in

View Full Version : The truth about 'swine flu'



Rosa Lichtenstein
1st May 2009, 13:08
Can mod please change the title to "The truth about 'swine flu'"?...thanks!

From Socialist Worker:


What’s behind killer swine flu?

The headlines have been apocalyptic – a new outbreak of swine flu is in danger of engulfing the world.

There are indeed reasons for concern. Normal seasonal type-A influenzas kill as many one million people a year globally. Even a modest increase in virulence, especially if combined with high incidence, could cause huge problems across the world.

The most lethal flu outbreak to date was in 1918-19. It killed more than 2 percent of humanity (40 to 50 million people) in a single winter.

The development of a swine flu that can be passed between humans was predictable. Influenza constantly changes and mutates to create new strains. There have already been several incidents of flu strains jumping species and unleashing a virulent pandemic.

Both the 1957 and 1968 flu pandemics are believed to have originated from the mixing of bird and human viruses inside pigs.

Concentrated poverty is one of the most important issues in what happens to a flu outbreak – how it is spread and who it hits.

Twenty million or more of the deaths in the 1918-19 flu outbreak were in poorest parts of India.

The toll of HIV/AIDS in the Global South and the two million children annually killed by malaria should be a warning that capitalism is willing to let poor people die, even of curable diseases.

The World Health Organisation, backed by Western leaders, has argued that pandemics can be contained by the rapid responses of medical bureaucracies. The idea is that the strain is identified and then dealt with by local populations getting enough anti-viral drugs.

Vaccination

Rather than working together to produce a vaccination for each new flu strain, which is unprofitable for the pharmaceutical companies because many new flu strains don’t reach pandemic level, governments tend to rely on generic anti-virals such as Tamiflu.

But frequently a moderate flu epidemic outstrips the vaccine prepared for it even in the richest countries. The British government says it only has enough anti-virals for half the population.

Repeated assaults on public sector health care as part of the neoliberal agenda have made it harder to deal with the problem.

A key factor behind new diseases such as the swine flu threat is the growing concentration of animal production without appropriate regulation or biological safeguards.

Food production is driven by a handful of giant global corporations. This means large numbers of livestock crammed together to maximise profits.

Two thirds of poultry production in Britain already takes place in flocks of over 100,000 birds.

In the US today 65 million pigs are concentrated in just 65,000 facilities, compared to 53 million pigs on more than one million farms in 1965.

In such huge units animals are more prone to disease, which can rapidly spread and evolve into more deadly forms.

In order to boost growth and guard against illnesses, the corporations pump animals full of antibiotics, including ones used to treat human diseases.

Cuts in the regulation and monitoring of the meat industry also create huge dangers.

Only last week Alistair Darling announced plans in the budget to save £44 million by cutting “animal disease surveillance through a more risk-based approach to monitoring and enforcement and by sharing costs with industry”.

Corporate domination of food, healthcare and pharmaceuticals all contribute to the threat of a flu pandemic – and so do the acts of governments that allow these corporations to dominate world politics.

As the US author Mike Davies puts it, “Perhaps it is not surprising that Mexico lacks both capacity and political will to monitor livestock diseases, but the situation is hardly better north of the border, where surveillance is a failed patchwork of state jurisdictions, and corporate livestock producers treat health regulations with the same contempt with which they deal with workers and animals.”

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=17777

From the Guardian:


Swine flu? A panic stoked in order to posture and spend

Despite the hysteria the risk to Britons' health is tiny - but that news won't sell papers or drugs, or justify the WHO's budget

We have gone demented. Two Britons are or were (not very) ill from flu. "This could really explode," intones a reporter for BBC News. "London warned: it's here," cries the Evening Standard. Fear is said to be spreading "like a Mexican wave". It "could affect" three-quarters of a million Britons. It "could cost" three trillion dollars. The "danger", according to the radio, is that workers who are not ill will be "worried" (perhaps by the reporter) and fail to turn up at power stations and hospitals.

Appropriately panicked, on Monday ministers plunged into their Cobra bunker beneath Whitehall to prepare for the worst. Had Tony Blair been about they would have worn germ warfare suits. British government is barking mad.

What is swine flu? It is flu, a mutation of the H1N1 virus of the sort that often occurs. It is not a pandemic, despite the media prefix, not yet. The BBC calls it a "potentially terrible virus", but any viral infection is potentially terrible. Flu makes you feel ill. You should take medicine and rest. You will then get well again, unless you are very unlucky or have some complicating condition. It is best to avoid close contact with other people, as applies to a common cold.

In Mexico, 2,000 people have been diagnosed as suffering swine flu. Some 150 of them have died, though there is said to be no pathological indication of all these deaths being linked to the new flu strain. People die all the time after catching flu, especially if not medicated.

Nobody anywhere else in the world has died from this infection and only a handful have the new strain confirmed, most in America and almost all after returning from Mexico. A couple from Airdrie who caught the flu on holiday in Cancun are getting better. That tends to happen to people who get flu, however much it may disappoint editors.

We appear to have lost all ability to judge risk. The cause may lie in the national curriculum, the decline of "news" or the rise of blogs and concomitant, unmediated hysteria, but people seem helpless in navigating the gulf that separates public information from their daily round. They cannot set a statistic in context. They cannot relate bad news from Mexico to the risk that inevitably surrounds their lives. The risk of catching swine flu must be millions to one.

Health scares are like terrorist ones. Someone somewhere has an interest in it. We depend on others with specialist knowledge to advise and warn us and assume they offer advice on a dispassionate basis, using their expertise to assess danger and communicating it in measured English. Words such as possibly, potentially, could or might should be avoided. They are unspecific qualifiers and open to exaggeration.

The World Health Organisation, always eager to push itself into the spotlight, loves to talk of the world being "ready" for a flu pandemic, apparently on the grounds that none has occurred for some time. There is no obvious justification for this scaremongering. I suppose the world is "ready" for another atomic explosion or another 9/11.

Professional expertise is now overwhelmed by professional log-rolling. Risk aversion has trounced risk judgment. An obligation on public officials not to scare people or lead them to needless expense is overridden by the yearning for a higher budget or more profit. Health scares enable media-hungry doctors, public health officials and drugs companies to benefit by manipulating fright.

On Monday the EU health commissioner, Androulla Vassiliou, advised travellers not to go to north or central America "unless it's very urgent". The British Foreign Office warned against "all but essential" travel to Mexico because of the danger of catching flu. This was outrageous. It would make more sense to proffer such a warning against the American crime rate. Yet such health-and-safety hysteria wiped millions from travel company shares.

During the BSE scare of 1995-7, grown men with medical degrees predicted doom, terrifying ministers into mad politician disease. The scientists' hysteria, that BSE "has the potential to infect up to 10 million Britons", led to tens of thousands of cattle being fed into power stations and £5bn spent on farmers' compensation. A year later, the scientists tried to maintain that BSE "might" spread to sheep because, according to one government scientist, "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". The meat industry was wrecked and an absurd ongoing cost was imposed on stock farmers with the closure and concentration of abattoirs.

This science-based insanity was repeated during the Sars outbreak of 2003, asserted by Dr Patrick Dixon, formerly of the London Business School, to have "a 25% chance of killing tens of millions". The press duly headlined a plague "worse than Aids". Not one Briton died.

The same lunacy occurred in 2006 with avian flu, erupting after a scientist named John Oxford declared that "it will be the first pandemic of the 21st century". The WHO issued a statement that "one in four Britons could die".

Epidemiologists love the word "could" because it can always assure them of a headline. During the avian flu mania, Canada geese were treated like Goering's bombers. RSPB workers were issued with protective headgear.The media went berserk, with interviewers asking why the government did not close all schools "to prevent up to 50,000 deaths". The Today programme's John Humphrys became frantic when a dead goose flopped down on an isolated Scottish beach and a hapless local official refused to confirm the BBC's hysteria. The bird might pose no threat to Scotland, but how dare he deny London journalists a good panic?

Meanwhile a real pestilence, MRSA and C difficile, was taking hold in hospitals. It was suppressed by the medical profession because it appeared that they themselves might be to blame. These diseases have played a role in thousands of deaths in British hospitals - the former a reported 1,652 and the latter 8,324 in 2007 alone. Like deaths from alcoholism, we have come to regard hospital-induced infection as an accident of life, a hazard to which we have subconsciously adjusted.

MRSA and C difficile are not like swine flu, an opportunity for public figures to scare and posture and spend money. They are diseases for which the government is to blame. They claim no headlines and no Cobra priority. Their sufferers must crawl away and die in silence.

[email protected]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/29/swine-flu-mexico-uk-media1


From a medical site:


INFLUENZA A (H1N1) "SWINE FLU": WORLDWIDE (03)
**********************************************
A ProMED-mail post
<http://www.promedmail.org>
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
<http://www.isid.org>

In this update:
[1] Some questions
[2] New Zealand
[3] Israel
[4] Comment on seasonality

******
[1] Some questions
Date: Tue 28 Apr 2009
From: Roger Morris <[email protected]>


Some questions
--------------
For those of us who are involved in international work on influenza
epidemiology and control and responding to the many media enquiries,
there is a very large information gap in relation to diagnosis and
epidemiology of the Mexican influenza. What is known of the genetic
structure of this virus? It has been called a swine flu, but no
evidence has been put forward to allow this statement to be
evaluated. I have received information that it is a reassortant,
which has genetic components from 4 different sources, but nothing
official has been released on this. Where does it fit
phylogenetically? Is there any genetic variation of significance
among the isolates investigated? Would this help to explain the
difference in severity of disease between Mexico and other countries?

It is also stated that it should be diagnosed by RT-PCR, without
clarifying which PCR. I have received information that the standard
PCR for H1 does not reliably detect this virus. Is this true? What is
an appropriate series of diagnostic steps for samples from suspect
cases? Could we have an authoritative statement on these issues from
one of the laboratories, which has been working with the virus?

--
Professor Roger Morris
Emeritus Professor of Animal Health
Massey University EpiCentre, PN623
Institute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences
Massey University, Palmerston North
New Zealand
<[email protected]>

[The genome sequences of several US isolates are now available at GenBank: see
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/FLU/SwineFlu.html>. - Mod.CP]

******
[2] New Zealand
Date: Tue 28 Apr 2009
Source: Ministry of Health, New Zealand, Media Release [edited]
<http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexmh/results-of-h1n1-swine-flu-testing-280409>


Results of H1N1 (swine flu) testing
-----------------------------------
Director of Public Health, Dr Mark Jacobs announced tonight [28 Apr
2009] that results from some of the Rangitoto College party who
tested positive to influenza A on Sunday [25 Apr 2009], have also
tested positive for swine flu H1N1.

Results from 3 of the samples were received earlier this evening [28
Apr 2009] from the World Health Organization regional laboratory in
Melbourne and all tested positive for the same strain of swine flu.
Testing continues on a 4th sample.

On the basis of these results, we are assuming that all of the people
in the group who had tested positive for influenza A have swine flu.
As a result we are continuing with the current treatment, which has
been based on this assumption.

We were advised that the lab in Melbourne selected 4 of the best
samples of the very delicate genetic material to analyse. They found
3 positive results and one is still to be confirmed.

Staff from Auckland Regional Public Health are getting in touch with
those affected and informing them of the results. This is expected to
be completed by 10:00 pm tonight [28 Apr 2009]. All 10 are understood
to be recovering at home.

There is no need to change the treatment and follow-up of the
Rangitoto College group. The Tamiflu treatment will continue and they
will remain in home isolation and should complete 72 hours of Tamiflu
before they can return to normal activities.

--
Communicated by
Dr Patricia Priest
Senior Lecturer, Epidemiology
Department of Preventive and Social Medicine
University of Otago
Dunedin
New Zealand
<[email protected]>

[The HealthMap/ProMED-mail interactive map of New Zealand is available at
<http://healthmap.org/r/00aG>. - CopyEd.MJ]

******
[3] Israel
Date: Tue 28 Apr 2009
Source: Haaretz News Service [edited]
<http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1081774.html>


Israel confirms 1st case of swine flu, raises alert level to 4
--------------------------------------------------------------
Israel confirmed its 1st case of swine flu on Tuesday [28 Apr 2009],
Israel Radio reported, as the Health Ministry raised its level of
alert to 4 out of 6. A 26-year-old man who recently returned from
Mexico was diagnosed with the virus, after 2 days of quarantine in a
Netanya hospital pending results of his health tests. After the
diagnosis, he was listed in good condition at the hospital.

World health officials, racing to extinguish a new flu strain that is
jumping borders, raised a global alert to an unprecedented level as
the outbreak claimed more lives in Mexico. The US prepared for the
worst even as president Barack Obama tried to reassure Americans.
With the swine flu having already spread to at least 4 other
countries, authorities around the globe are like firefighters
battling a blaze without knowing how far it extends. At this time,
containment is not a feasible option, said Keiji Fukuda, assistant
director-general of the World Health Organization, which raised its
alert level on Monday [27 Apr 2009].

Another Israeli man has also been quarantined until further notice in
hospitals in a Kfar Sava, after he too returned from Mexico with
fu-like symptoms. The Health Ministry said Monday [27 Apr 2009] that
it had embraced the recommendation of the European Commission to
postpone nonessential travel to Mexico and recommends that travelers
be alert to reports regarding other countries. Health Ministry
officials said Monday they were not issuing any special instructions
to the public for now, including individuals returning from Mexico.
The ministry did recommend that such travelers seek medical
assistance if they develop flu-like symptoms within 7 days after
their return. These individuals would be quarantined at local
hospitals until their condition is determined.

[Byline: Ran Reznick, Yair Ettinger, Zohar Blumenkrantz]

--
Communicated by:
ProMED-mail
<[email protected]>

The HealthMap/ProMED-mail interactive map of Israel is available at
<http://healthmap.org/r/00aH>. - CopyEd.MJ]

******
[4] Comment on seasonality
Date: Mon 27 Apr 2009
From: EA Gould <[email protected]>


Swine influenza and the UK
--------------------------
I haven't been able to read every single ProMED-mail report covering
the new "swine" influenza outbreak but it is possible that the
reports have missed an important point concerning the UK and the rest
of Northern Europe.

I apologise if you or someone have already pointed it out, but for
the time being at least, we should have a breathing space in the
sense that influenza virus epidemics don't normally occur in Northern
Europe during the late spring and summer period.

So it would have to be totally outside precedent if this virus caused
significant infections at this time of the year in the UK.

Professor EA Gould
CEH Oxford
Mansfield Road
Oxford OX1 3SR
United Kingdom
<[email protected]>


http://www.promedmail.org/pls/otn/f?p=2400:1001:2333977618794706::NO::F2400_P1001_BA CK_PAGE,F2400_P1001_PUB_MAIL_ID:1000,77243

Still, it distracts attention from the global crisis by scaring us all witless...

RedAnarchist
1st May 2009, 13:31
Can mod please change the title to "The truth about 'swine flu'"?...thanks!

Done.

Rosa Lichtenstein
1st May 2009, 14:17
Thanks!

Killfacer
1st May 2009, 14:34
good post, thanks for the info. I have to admit even though i know it's silly i do sometimes work myself up over these things.

Coggeh
2nd May 2009, 09:40
When i saw the name of the thread I was like oh noes Rosa has turned into a conspiracy nutzzz :O , but thankfully not . Good post :)


In order to boost growth and guard against illnesses, the corporations pump animals full of antibiotics, including ones used to treat human diseasesThis bit is spot on , humans can become immune to some antibiotics by simply eating meat nowadays , it shows the carelessness of capitalist society and how the profit motive directly intertwines with attacking our health and our ability to fight off infections .

Coggeh
2nd May 2009, 09:43
good post, thanks for the info. I have to admit even though i know it's silly i do sometimes work myself up over these things.
Its not silly , nor really irrational . Most people nowadays take their day to day info from the news and why shouldn't they ? the news agencies are now run like tabloid newspapers pulling any story out of their ass to bring in viewers attention. Instead of informing people their merely scaring them .

pastradamus
3rd May 2009, 17:59
Did anyone stop to think that every time we have a big animal/human disease pandemic that the underlying causes are always down to greed and capitalism in true form. Take for example BSE/CJD which was basically caused by farmers feeding crushed up bone meal to their cattle as it was cheaper to use. This is effectively cannibalism. The same is true for swine flu and newcastle disease.

Invincible Summer
4th May 2009, 19:47
I've said it before, I'll say it again: factory farming is fucked up.... yet many of you on this forum support it. This causes and context surrounding the current swine flu thing is just more proof as to why factory farming must be heavily reformed/abolished.

Rosa Lichtenstein
4th May 2009, 22:58
D500; I'm with you...

Vanguard1917
4th May 2009, 23:09
I've said it before, I'll say it again: factory farming is fucked up.... yet many of you on this forum support it. This causes and context surrounding the current swine flu thing is just more proof as to why factory farming must be heavily reformed/abolished.

In what way does swine flu mean that factory farming -- a method of agricultural production which has, btw, transformed food production by allowing us to radically raise productive output and thus increase food distribution for millions -- should itself be abolished?

Sean
4th May 2009, 23:19
I've said it before, I'll say it again: factory farming is fucked up.... yet many of you on this forum support it. This causes and context surrounding the current swine flu thing is just more proof as to why factory farming must be heavily reformed/abolished.
While close proximity with animals for generations has caused many plagues etc, the reality is that we would be affected just as much by milder illnesses today. Its evolution and coulda woulda shouldas aren't going to eliminate disease in an overpopulated world of international travel and commerce.

Vanguard1917
4th May 2009, 23:41
While close proximity with animals for generations has caused many plagues etc, the reality is that we would be affected just as much by milder illnesses today. Its evolution and coulda woulda shouldas aren't going to eliminate disease in an overpopulated world of international travel and commerce.

Is the suggestion, then, that we would need to halt international movement of people and reduce population numbers in order to 'elimitate disease'?

Invincible Summer
5th May 2009, 03:10
In what way does swine flu mean that factory farming -- a method of agricultural production which has, btw, transformed food production by allowing us to radically raise productive output and thus increase food distribution for millions -- should itself be abolished?

Oh Vanguard, you and your factory-farm lovin'. I knew I'd end up having to defend against you :lol:

From another thread on this (emphasis mine):



But the corporate industrialization of livestock production has broken China's natural monopoly on influenza evolution. As many writers have pointed out, animal husbandry in recent decades has been transformed into something that more closely resembles the petrochemical industry than the happy family farm depicted in schoolbooks.

In 1965, for instance, there were 53 million American hogs on more than 1 million farms; today, 65 million hogs are concentrated in 65,000 facilities, with half of the hogs kept in giant facilities with 5,000 animals or more.

This has been a transition, in essence, from old-fashioned pig pens to vast excremental hells, unprecedented in nature, containing tens, even hundreds of thousands of animals with weakened immune systems, suffocating in heat and manure, while exchanging pathogens at blinding velocity with their fellow inmates and pathetic progenies.

***

ANYONE WHO has ever driven through Tar Heel, N.C., or Milford, Utah--where Smithfield Foods subsidiaries each annually produce more than 1 million pigs as well as hundreds of lagoons full of toxic shit--will intuitively understand how profoundly agribusiness has meddled with the laws of nature.

Last year, a distinguished commission convened by the Pew Research Center issued a landmark report on "industrial farm animal production" underscoring the acute danger that "the continual cycling of viruses...in large herds or flocks [will] increase opportunities for the generation of novel virus through mutation or recombinant events that could result in more efficient human-to-human transmission."

The commission also warned that promiscuous antibiotic use in hog factories (a cheaper alternative to sewer systems or humane environments) was causing the rise of resistant Staph infections, while sewage spills were producing nightmare E. coli outbreaks and Pfisteria blooms (the doomsday protozoan that has killed more than 1 billion fish in the Carolina estuaries and sickened dozens of fishermen).

Vanguard1917
5th May 2009, 22:37
I'm not saying that factory farming should not be improved (made cleaner, more efficient, etc). I'm disagreeing with the idea that factory farming needs to be abolished because it has some problems. The point is to solve those problems, not simply return to previous, backward methods of agriculture, something which will have highly negative consequences for humanity.



Oh Vanguard, you and your factory-farm lovin'.


Yes, quilty, i'm a big fan of factory farms -- since, prior to them, the millions of working class families who now benefit from them could only afford to eat meat once or twice a month, if that.

ÑóẊîöʼn
6th May 2009, 00:34
I'm not convinced that A) the advantages provided by factory farming are outweighed by their disadvantages and B) that it is impossible to improve factory farming in order to decrease the disadvantages and increase the advantages.

Let's look at the issue of waste. Just as improved sanitation in cities greatly reduces the incidence of infectious disease, so would better waste management in intensive farming serve to greatly reduce the filthy conditions that bacteria and viruses thrive in. Animal excrement is filthy stuff that needs to be properly disposed of, but it is also a potentially enormous source of fertiliser and methane - two very important items that are becoming increasingly difficult to find, as they are currently based mainly on fossil fuels.

So, by better managing waste, not only do we get to eat plenty of highly nutritious meat, but we also get less incidences of infectious disease within the livestock population as well as getting plentiful fertiliser and gas into the bargain. Whereas if we abolished factory farming we would be embeggaring ourselves, as "traditional" farming methods do not produce as much meat, fertiliser or gas.

Comrade Che
7th May 2009, 02:51
Swine flu is over-hyped.

piet11111
7th May 2009, 17:14
Swine flu is over-hyped.

it is but its a perfect opportunity to test our ability to handle a virus outbreak.
and as we can see we are doing rather poorly at isolating it but since its not a very dangerous virus we wont be paying a price in deaths.

we are now learning some very valuable lessons that will help us in the future.

Comrade Che
7th May 2009, 20:33
it is but its a perfect opportunity to test our ability to handle a virus outbreak.
and as we can see we are doing rather poorly at isolating it but since its not a very dangerous virus we wont be paying a price in deaths.

we are now learning some very valuable lessons that will help us in the future.
That is true, hopefully we will utilize what we learn for next time a outbreak occurs, although I doubt it.

Eva
8th May 2009, 02:06
Every day, almost 16,000 children die from hunger related causes (one child every five seconds); 6,000 people die of AIDS, and up to 8,000 die of Malaria. We've had 17 reported cases of swine flu and it's all over the media.

Rosa Lichtenstein
8th May 2009, 13:45
Piet:


it is but its a perfect opportunity to test our ability to handle a virus outbreak.
and as we can see we are doing rather poorly at isolating it but since its not a very dangerous virus we wont be paying a price in deaths.

we are now learning some very valuable lessons that will help us in the future.

But we had a similar media-induced panic six months ago over 'Australian flu', and then a couple of years back over 'Bird flu', so I think we should be sceptical of the idea that this sort of hype helps them 'prepare' in any way -- other than, of course, to sell loads of Tamiflu, scare us witless, and divert attention from the world-wide slump.

ZeroNowhere
8th May 2009, 14:10
I've said it before, I'll say it again: factory farming is fucked up.... yet many of you on this forum support it. This causes and context surrounding the current swine flu thing is just more proof as to why factory farming must be heavily reformed/abolished.
Um, do we even know how the current swine flu thing started?

Klepto
8th May 2009, 16:43
Did anyone stop to think that every time we have a big animal/human disease pandemic that the underlying causes are always down to greed and capitalism in true form. Take for example BSE/CJD which was basically caused by farmers feeding crushed up bone meal to their cattle as it was cheaper to use. This is effectively cannibalism. The same is true for swine flu and newcastle disease.

This isn't exactly true. Using the new high protein feeds (powdered sheep) was more expensive, but it lead to bigger cows with better quality meat. The underlying cause was the quest for profit, but that profit came from higher value yields rather than cheaper raw materials.

Re: swine flu... It sells news, it sells unnecessary anti-virals, it makes our glorious leaders appear to be saving us from a problem they didn't cause in the first place and it diverts attention from all the real s**t that's going on ATM. It's almost a complete non-story, pure propaganda (IMO).

piet11111
8th May 2009, 20:31
Piet:



But we had a similar media-induced panic six months ago over 'Australian flu', and then a couple of years back over 'Bird flu', so I think we should be sceptical of the idea that this sort of hype helps them 'prepare' in any way -- other than, of course, to sell loads of Tamiflu, scare us witless, and divert attention from the world-wide slump.

if it takes a scare to make officials deal with existing (potential) threats then i consider it necessary.

be skeptical all you want but just like the army the health officials are also always preparing to fight the previous war.
so having relatively harmless viruses scaring people and make them demand government measures to protect them is only for the better even if its currently not necessary.
its better to have a system in place capable of dealing with this and not need it then not having it when we do.

also the spanish flu started out as nothing until it mutated and became a killer and every flu including the current one has the potential to be the next killer.

Rosa Lichtenstein
8th May 2009, 20:39
Piet:


if it takes a scare to make officials deal with existing (potential) threats then i consider it necessary.

But, they won't; all they'll do is push the interests of Big Pharma, as noted earlier


Rather than working together to produce a vaccination for each new flu strain, which is unprofitable for the pharmaceutical companies because many new flu strains don’t reach pandemic level, governments tend to rely on generic anti-virals such as Tamiflu.

But frequently a moderate flu epidemic outstrips the vaccine prepared for it even in the richest countries. The British government says it only has enough anti-virals for half the population.

Repeated assaults on public sector health care as part of the neoliberal agenda have made it harder to deal with the problem.

The Spanish flu was exceptional, since it followed on a world war, and most of those who died lived in India (killed by poverty as much as anything else).

If you think that these 'officials' care too hoots about the average worker, you are posting at the wrong board.

Il Medico
9th May 2009, 01:15
Swine Flu is, in my opinion, more paranoia than pandemic in the USA. A few people at my school have taken to wearing masks, ha! The sad thing is it is the greed of the rich that made this disease. They are safe, living in comfort while the poor are effected. The greed of the rich killing the poor.
Oh, by the way for the Lou Dobbs among us, Swine Flu actually started in the US. It was exported to Mexico!
:crying: Only in America can the people who created a disease use the fear of getting it to attack the victims of it.

Captain Jack

Zurdito
9th May 2009, 01:26
a response to Simon Jenkins from an actual doctor (funny how some others, just by virtue of being a columnist, thinks they are equipped to comment on the possibility of a flu pandemic):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/29/swine-flu-hype

First it was the emails, and the tweets. This is all nonsense about the aporkalypse, surely? Just like with Sars (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/28/swine-flu-cases-around-world), and bird flu (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/besttreatments/flu-bird-flu), and MMR (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/besttreatments/autism-mmr-vaccine-and-autism), is this all hype? The answer is no, but more interesting is this: for so many people, their very first assumption on the story is that the media are lying. It is the story of the boy who cried wolf.

We are poorly equipped to think around issues involving risk, and infectious diseases epidemiology is a tricky business: the error margins on the models are wide, and it's extremely hard to make clear predictions.

Here's an example. In Glasgow in the 1980s, less than 5% of injecting drug users were HIV positive. In Edinburgh at the same time, it was almost 50%, even though these two places are only an hour apart by train. Lots of people have got theories about why there should have been such a huge difference in the numbers of people infected, and there's no doubt that it's fun to try and come up with a plausible post hoc rationale. But you certainly wouldn't have predicted it.


Ben Goldacre on whether the media coverage of swine flu has been bad science Link to this audio (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/audio/2009/apr/30/swine-flu-statistics-science)

Maybe some bloke with HIV got off the train at Edinburgh station instead of Glasgow on a whim, some fateful day in the early 1980s.

Maybe there was a different culture among heroin users, or services.

Nobody really knows.

We face the same problem with swine flu. All people have done is raise the possibility of things really kicking off, and they are right to do so, but we don't have brilliantly accurate information. Someone has said that up to 40% of the world could be infected. Is that scaremongering? Well it's high, and I'm sure it's a bit of a guess, but maybe up to 40% could be. Annoying, isn't it, not to know.

Someone has said 120 million could die. Well I suppose they could: I'm sure it was done on the back of an envelope, by guessing how many would be infected, and what proportion would die, but I don't think anyone's pretending otherwise.
You could no more predict what will happen here than you could have predicted the enormous disparity in HIV prevalence between Glasgow and Edinburgh. Everyone is just saying: we don't know, it could be bad, and the newspapers are reporting that. Sure there's a bit of vaudeville in the headlines, but they're not saying things that are wrong, and do you really know actual, real people, normally pretty solid, who are suddenly now panicking?

By Tuesday, pundit-seekers from the media were suddenly contacting me, a massive nobody, to say that swine flu is all nonsense and hype, like some kind of blind, automated naysaying device. "Will you come and talk about the media overhyping swine flu?" asked Case Notes on Radio 4. No. "We need someone to say it's all been overhyped," said BBC Wales.

I assumed they were adhering, robotically, to the "balance" template, but no: he kept at it, even when I protested and explained. "Yeah, but you know, it could be like Sars and bird flu, they didn't materialise, they were hype." Simon Jenkins (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/29/swine-flu-mexico-uk-media1) suggested the same thing. It's not true, I said. They were risks, risks that didn't materialise, but they were still risks. That's what a risk is. I've never been hit by a car, but it's not idiotic to think about it. Simon Jenkins won't be right if nobody dies, he'll be lucky, like the rest of us. Do people think this flappily in casinos? The terrible truth is yes.

In the time that I have been writing this piece – no embellishment – I've had similar calls off This Week at the BBC ("Is the coverage misleading?"), Al-Jazeera English ("We wanted to talk to someone on the other side, you know, challenging the fear factor"), the Richard Bacon Show on Five Live ("Is it another media scare like Sars and bird flu?") and many more.

I'm not showing off. I know I'm a D-list public intellectual, but I just think it's interesting: because not only have the public lost all faith in the media; not only do so many people assume, now, that they are being misled; but more than that, the media themselves have lost all confidence in their own ability to give us the facts.

Rosa Lichtenstein
9th May 2009, 01:38
Zurdito:


funny how some others, just by virtue of being a columnist, thinks they are equipped to comment on the possibility of a flu pandemic

But he didn't, he merely said that the evidence so far indicated more hype than pandemic -- and hype aimed at boosting Big Pharma's profits.

The other docs I quoted tended to agree with him.


We face the same problem with swine flu. All people have done is raise the possibility of things really kicking off, and they are right to do so, but we don't have brilliantly accurate information. Someone has said that up to 40% of the world could be infected. Is that scaremongering? Well it's high, and I'm sure it's a bit of a guess, but maybe up to 40% could be. Annoying, isn't it, not to know.

We heard the same BS over 'bird flu' a few years back, and 'Australian flu' six months ago, and we'll hear more of the same BS in a year or so again.


Coming to Britain - the Australian flu virus that has already killed hundreds

By Daniel Martin

Last updated at 10:53 PM on 28th September 2008

A flu virus more deadly than any seen in two decades is threatening Britain.

The strain originates in Australia where it has claimed hundreds of lives, including those of children.

Called Brisbane H3N2, it is so virulent that health chiefs have had to change the make-up of flu vaccines to deal with it.

It affects three times the number of victims hit by other strains, with many deaths resulting from pneumonia.

Viruses from the southern hemisphere strike in their winter months - our summer - and tend to travel north for our winter.

And although that did not happen after Brisbane H3N2 ravaged Australia last year, experts fear Europe will not escape it this winter.

Hugh Pennington, professor of bacteriology at Aberdeen University, said: 'If this flu has been busy in Australia, it is reasonable to suppose that we may get a similar situation in the UK. Viruses travel round the world very quickly now.

We have had some very quiet flu years recently and every year we have to assume that it will be busier than last year.

'Sooner or later we will have a big outbreak, and the more cases there are, the more deaths there will be.

'There is no doubt that elderly people are more at risk. It can tear through an old folk's home and cause a lot of harm.'

The last major outbreak in England and Wales came in 1989-90, when 23,046 people died, compared with a seasonal average of around 4,000. The elderly are those most at risk because they have weaker immune systems.

The Australian flu outbreak affected even fit young adults, and New South Wales saw more than 800 deaths from pneumonia in just five weeks in June and July 2007. Many children died.

Experts speculated that several winters of mild flu had left the population with little immunity. Last year the Australian inventor of the flu vaccine, Dr Graeme Laver, said the outbreak in his country meant Britain was also in danger. 'If the seasonal flu is as bad as it was in Australia, you are in for a pretty bad time,' he said.

'You could have a really severe epidemic. Thousands will be ill and many will die.'

The World Health Organisation and Sanofi Pasteur, a vaccine manufacturer, have combined the Brisbane strain with two others, one also named after the city, in their latest flu vaccine.


Bold added.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1063737/Coming-Britain--Australian-flu-virus-killed-hundreds.html

Fifteen years ago it was Ebola, then it was 'Mad Cow' disease. How many more cries of 'Wolf!' does it take?

Zurdito
9th May 2009, 01:52
We heard the same BS over 'bird flu' a few years back, and 'Australian flu' six months ago, and we'll hear more of the same BS in a year or so again.


as the article quoted said:

"Yeah, but you know, it could be like Sars and bird flu, they didn't materialise, they were hype." Simon Jenkins (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/29/swine-flu-mexico-uk-media1) suggested the same thing. It's not true, I said. They were risks, risks that didn't materialise, but they were still risks. That's what a risk is. I've never been hit by a car, but it's not idiotic to think about it. Simon Jenkins won't be right if nobody dies, he'll be lucky, like the rest of us.

There have been flu pandemics in the past that killed millions, why is it rididculous to suggest another one? of course the media hypes it and the level of fear is not justified, true.

Rosa Lichtenstein
9th May 2009, 02:05
Z:


There have been flu pandemics in the past that killed millions, why is it rididculous to suggest another one? of course the media hypes it and the level of fear is not justified, true.

And there was Black Death 700 years ago.

All of these pandemics had special causes, but the media regularly use the word 'pandemic' to scare weak-kneed punters, and for the reasons I and others have already pointed out.

I sincerely hope you do not continue emulating such weak-kneed punters.

Anyway, what's a Trotskyisyt like you doing believing everything you read in the capitalist press?

Zurdito
9th May 2009, 02:40
Z:



And there was Black Death 700 years ago.

All of these pandemics had special causes, but the media regularly use the word 'pandemic' to scare weak-kneed punters, and for the reasons I and others have already pointed out.

I sincerely hope you do not continue emulating such weak-kneed punters.

Anyway, what's a Trotskyisyt like you doing believing everything you read in the capitalist press?

:rolleyes: If I deblieved everything I read in the capitalist press, I would be wearing a face mask. However, the world's top scientists believe there is a reasonable possibility of a pandemic (which means sustained human to human transmission in more than one region), and neither you nor Simon Jenkins have proved them wrong...

In any case I am not scared for myself, but if there is a pandemic it will disproportionately hit the world's poor and add to an already dire situation for tens of millions. I think a "trotskyist like myself", or in fact anyone vaguely progressive, would be best off analysing worries like this from that perspective rather than forming amateur "opinions" on the possibility of a flu pandemic.

Rosa Lichtenstein
9th May 2009, 10:56
Zurdito:


If I deblieved everything I read in the capitalist press, I would be wearing a face mask. However, the world's top scientists believe there is a reasonable possibility of a pandemic (which means sustained human to human transmission in more than one region), and neither you nor Simon Jenkins have proved them wrong...

1) Not necessarily; many media sources tell us face masks are useless.

2) These 'top scientists' (who push the interests of Big Pharma) can be found every six months or so making the same claims. Apparently only you, and other scaredy cats, believe them.


In any case I am not scared for myself, but if there is a pandemic it will disproportionately hit the world's poor and add to an already dire situation for tens of millions. I think a "trotskyist like myself", or in fact anyone vaguely progressive, would be best off analysing worries like this from that perspective rather than forming amateur "opinions" on the possibility of a flu pandemic.

It is quite right and proper for us Trots to be concerned about the world's poor, but swallowing this guff is not going to help them.

pastradamus
9th May 2009, 13:24
This isn't exactly true. Using the new high protein feeds (powdered sheep) was more expensive, but it lead to bigger cows with better quality meat. The underlying cause was the quest for profit, but that profit came from higher value yields rather than cheaper raw materials.


I agree in one sense with what your saying, but look at say suckler Cattle. In Ireland a small farmer is under such severe market competition that he/she is always going to be looking at ways of reducing costs and increase profit which range from everything from Cattle feed, to veterinary bills to the high protein feeds you mentioned. Interestingly, Some of the feeds which contained this Bone meal were also mixed with other materials and marketed as "high protein feed".



Re: swine flu... It sells news, it sells unnecessary anti-virals, it makes our glorious leaders appear to be saving us from a problem they didn't cause in the first place and it diverts attention from all the real s**t that's going on ATM. It's almost a complete non-story, pure propaganda (IMO).

Absolutely comrade.

piet11111
9th May 2009, 18:10
Piet:



But, they won't; all they'll do is push the interests of Big Pharma, as noted earlier

if Big Pharma is the only one that can provide vaccines and anti viral medicine then its also in our interest to see them expand their capacity of producing those things.

i do not hold illusions that we can live outside of capitalism at this moment and as such i would rather see big pharma having the means to deal with a real plague when/if it hits instead of hoping they wont get a dime and then having nothing that can help us in the future.




The Spanish flu was exceptional, since it followed on a world war, and most of those who died lived in India (killed by poverty as much as anything else).

If you think that these 'officials' care too hoots about the average worker, you are posting at the wrong board.

i would count on those officials to care about capitalism and a plague can really paralyze it.
as such even the capitalists would have an interest in the public well being especially so when the public demands it from their government.

just because its Big Pharma that benefits from a health crisis does not mean that we should do without them because then we would have nothing.

Rosa Lichtenstein
9th May 2009, 18:42
piet:


if Big Pharma is the only one that can provide vaccines and anti viral medicine then its also in our interest to see them expand their capacity of producing those things.

i do not hold illusions that we can live outside of capitalism at this moment and as such i would rather see big pharma having the means to deal with a real plague when/if it hits instead of hoping they wont get a dime and then having nothing that can help us in the future.

Yes, they have done a brilliant job tackling Aids in Africa, haven't they?

But, your comment is about as naive as if someone were to say "Since the banks have now got the required credit, they can get us out of the global crisis..."

And you clearly ignored this point:


Rather than working together to produce a vaccination for each new flu strain, which is unprofitable for the pharmaceutical companies because many new flu strains don’t reach pandemic level, governments tend to rely on generic anti-virals such as Tamiflu.

But frequently a moderate flu epidemic outstrips the vaccine prepared for it even in the richest countries. The British government says it only has enough anti-virals for half the population.

Repeated assaults on public sector health care as part of the neoliberal agenda have made it harder to deal with the problem.


i would count on those officials to care about capitalism and a plague can really paralyze it.
as such even the capitalists would have an interest in the public well being especially so when the public demands it from their government.

You sound like a reformist who looks to 'his' government to run capitalism better than anyone else.

And as I noted in my repy to a similar cop out from Zurdito:


We heard the same BS over 'bird flu' a few years back, and 'Australian flu' six months ago, and we'll hear more of the same BS in a year or so again.


Coming to Britain - the Australian flu virus that has already killed hundreds

By Daniel Martin

Last updated at 10:53 PM on 28th September 2008

A flu virus more deadly than any seen in two decades is threatening Britain.

The strain originates in Australia where it has claimed hundreds of lives, including those of children.

Called Brisbane H3N2, it is so virulent that health chiefs have had to change the make-up of flu vaccines to deal with it.

It affects three times the number of victims hit by other strains, with many deaths resulting from pneumonia.

Viruses from the southern hemisphere strike in their winter months - our summer - and tend to travel north for our winter.

And although that did not happen after Brisbane H3N2 ravaged Australia last year, experts fear Europe will not escape it this winter.

Hugh Pennington, professor of bacteriology at Aberdeen University, said: 'If this flu has been busy in Australia, it is reasonable to suppose that we may get a similar situation in the UK. Viruses travel round the world very quickly now.

We have had some very quiet flu years recently and every year we have to assume that it will be busier than last year.

'Sooner or later we will have a big outbreak, and the more cases there are, the more deaths there will be.

'There is no doubt that elderly people are more at risk. It can tear through an old folk's home and cause a lot of harm.'

The last major outbreak in England and Wales came in 1989-90, when 23,046 people died, compared with a seasonal average of around 4,000. The elderly are those most at risk because they have weaker immune systems.

The Australian flu outbreak affected even fit young adults, and New South Wales saw more than 800 deaths from pneumonia in just five weeks in June and July 2007. Many children died.

Experts speculated that several winters of mild flu had left the population with little immunity. Last year the Australian inventor of the flu vaccine, Dr Graeme Laver, said the outbreak in his country meant Britain was also in danger. 'If the seasonal flu is as bad as it was in Australia, you are in for a pretty bad time,' he said.

'You could have a really severe epidemic. Thousands will be ill and many will die.'

The World Health Organisation and Sanofi Pasteur, a vaccine manufacturer, have combined the Brisbane strain with two others, one also named after the city, in their latest flu vaccine.


Bold added.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1063737/Coming-Britain--Australian-flu-virus-killed-hundreds.html

Fifteen years ago it was Ebola, then it was 'Mad Cow' disease. How many more cries of 'Wolf!' does it take?

These 'oficials' you mention (who push the interests of Big Pharma) can be found every six months or so making the same sort of claims. Apparently only you, and other scaredy cats, believe them.


just because its Big Pharma that benefits from a health crisis does not mean that we should do without them because then we would have nothing.

I must confess, I didn't know you were a reformist.

You'll be arguing next that we should all support our armed forces, since 'who else will save us from the foreign invader...'

Cumannach
9th May 2009, 19:32
Big Pharma may be the most psychopathically criminal sector of industrial capitalism today, and that's saying alot.

piet11111
9th May 2009, 20:10
i dont like big Pharma either but they are the only ones that have the means to develop a vaccine and as such i would want them to expand their capacity so that when the need is there they can produce enough to vaccinate everybody.


Yes, they have done a brilliant job tackling Aids in Africa, haven't they?

obviously not but at least there are some medicines now that allow people to live longer and healthier.


Repeated assaults on public sector health care as part of the neoliberal agenda have made it harder to deal with the problem.

i agree entirely that capitalism is seriously undermining our ability to provide health care to the population.
and that under a communist system we would be able to allocate resources where they are needed (aids before erectile dysfunction)
so no argument there.


You sound like a reformist who looks to 'his' government to run capitalism better than anyone else.

no its more that i am saying that capitalism is not consciously trying to burn down the house they are living in.


These 'oficials' you mention (who push the interests of Big Pharma) can be found every six months or so making the same sort of claims. Apparently only you, and other scaredy cats, believe them.

the potential for a killer virus is always there and with modern transportation a disease can spread in a matter of days around the world that is the reality we live in.
as such i would rather see that there is enough capacity to produce enough vaccins and meds like Tamiflu then to have nothing at all.


I must confess, I didn't know you were a reformist.

i am no reformist but i am a realist that knows we do not have the luxery of rejecting health care simply because its run by capitalists.


You'll be arguing next that we should all support our armed forces, since 'who else will save us from the foreign invader...'

sure why not..... :rolleyes:

Lynx
9th May 2009, 20:43
I'm just grateful this isn't a real pandemic, with lots of deaths.

Rosa Lichtenstein
10th May 2009, 00:34
Piet:


i dont like big Pharma either but they are the only ones that have the means to develop a vaccine and as such i would want them to expand their capacity so that when the need is there they can produce enough to vaccinate everybody.

Who said you liked them?

However, a socialist should be arguing that these companies should be seized in the name of the working class (by the working class) and used solely in the interests of promoting health, not profit.


obviously not but at least there are some medicines now that allow people to live longer and healthier.

And every so many years, when the patents run out, they change these products slightly (with no objective test whether they are superior to the originals, or not) so that they can re-patent them, and rip us off some more. Meanwhile, Aids and Malaria victims (etc) in Africa (and elsewhere) in their millions die every year.

And you put your faith in these b*stards?


no its more that i am saying that capitalism is not consciously trying to burn down the house they are living in.

Even so, that is what they end up doing.


the potential for a killer virus is always there and with modern transportation a disease can spread in a matter of days around the world that is the reality we live in.
as such i would rather see that there is enough capacity to produce enough vaccins and meds like Tamiflu then to have nothing at all.

There's one here already -- Aids. Big Pharm couldn't care less about its victims. What makes you think they care about the hypothetical future victims of flu'?

Instead of arguing that we should surrender our future health and welfare to these mass murderers, you should be arguing that these concerns be seized, and controlled by their workers.


i am no reformist but i am a realist that knows we do not have the luxery of rejecting health care simply because its run by capitalists.

But, you are a reformist since you think that capitalism can deliver a secure future for our health, at least here.

As we say in the UK, a rose by any other name...


sure why not.....

This suggests you are either insincere, or that you do not think this issue is serious.

piet11111
10th May 2009, 01:07
Piet:



Who said you liked them?

However, a socialist should be arguing that these companies should be seized in the name of the working class (by the working class) and used solely in the interests of promoting health, not profit.

of course i just do not think it necessary to say the obvious that they have to be seized in the name of the working class and run by the working class on a forum filled with revolutionary leftists that should be a given





And every so many years, when the patents run out, they change these products slightly (with no objective test whether they are superior to the originals, or not) so that they can re-patent them, and rip us off some more. Meanwhile, Aids and Malaria victims (etc) in Africa (and elsewhere) in their millions die every year.

And you put your faith in these b*stards?

no but what part of their operation i do have faith in is that they have the ability to expand their production when the money is there.
so that they can produce enough vaccines and stuff like Tamiflu when needed.




There's one here already -- Aids. Big Pharm couldn't care less about its victims. What makes you think they care about the hypothetical future victims of flu'?

if those flu victims are in the western country's then big Pharm has paying customers in the form of national governments and hospitals.
in africa there is very unfortunately a lack in the numbers of paying customers and that is something that only global communism can correct.



Instead of arguing that we should surrender our future health and welfare to these mass murderers, you should be arguing that these concerns be seized, and controlled by their workers.

obviously but again i just did not think it necessary to spell that out on this forum because that is what everybody here wants.




But, you are a reformist since you think that capitalism can deliver a secure future for our health, at least here.

only in a very limited way like a government having to put down a shitload of money to vaccinate its population in case of emergency.
but having something like a national free health care plan is simply impossible because capitalism has no more concessions to give.






This suggests you are either insincere, or that you do not think this issue is serious.

actually if you put your cursor on the smiley you read Roll eyes (sarcastic)
i used it because i could not take your comment of
You'll be arguing next that we should all support our armed forces, since 'who else will save us from the foreign invader...' seriously.

Rosa Lichtenstein
10th May 2009, 01:21
Piet:


of course i just do not think it necessary to say the obvious that they have to be seized in the name of the working class and run by the working class on a forum filled with revolutionary leftists that should be a given

But, you pointedly failed to say this, and worse, you foster illusions in the capacity of capitalist firms to satisfy human need.

Exhibit A for the prosecution:


no but what part of their operation i do have faith in is that they have the ability to expand their production when the money is there.
so that they can produce enough vaccines and stuff like Tamiflu when needed.

You are in a hole, comrade. My advice is that you stop digging.

Exhibit B:


if those flu victims are in the western country's then big Pharm has paying customers in the form of national governments and hospitals.
in africa there is very unfortunately a lack in the numbers of paying customers and that is something that only global communism can correct.

Don't forget to say 'hello' to the earth's core when you pass it...


obviously but again i just did not think it necessary to spell that out on this forum because that is what everybody here wants.

Except, it isn't top of your list (as it is with the rest of us), whereas your faith in Big Pharma is.


only in a very limited way like a government having to put down a shitload of money to vaccinate its population in case of emergency.
but having something like a national free health care plan is simply impossible because capitalism has no more concessions to give.

Oh dear, this just get's worse and worse. You sound like a trade union bureaucrat telling workers to accept management's 'last' offer, since they can't afford any more.

Which side are you on comrade?


seriously.

That conclusion follows from what you argue in the above posts.

piet11111
10th May 2009, 01:42
are you playing games again rosa ?

Jazzratt
10th May 2009, 03:28
"Swine flu" is about as dangerous as any seasonal flu the problem is that, at this time of year, most places have not developed the yearly vaccination. A five minute chat with your doctor will allieveate any panic you have about this particular "pandemic". The real danger with this kind of thing was aptly illustrated centuries ago by "Mr. Aesop" in a certain fable about a boy and his propensity to cry out about a wolf...

Lynx
10th May 2009, 18:20
I don't get the impression there has been an abusive number of false alarms from our health authorities, and even if there were, each alarm must be considered without bias.

redSHARP
10th May 2009, 21:01
In what way does swine flu mean that factory farming -- a method of agricultural production which has, btw, transformed food production by allowing us to radically raise productive output and thus increase food distribution for millions -- should itself be abolished?

factory farming is productive, but these farms employ exploited workers, design crops that do not produce plantable seeds so the farmer would by more and more seed, cause terrible pollution, and the US keeps most farm products off the market anyway to keep prices down. fuck em! and ultimately, these farms put many smaller family owned farms out of business. these corporate farmers would actually hinder us from radicallizing the country.

Rosa Lichtenstein
10th May 2009, 21:06
Piet:


are you playing games again rosa ?

No more nor no less than you are.

Rosa Lichtenstein
10th May 2009, 21:08
Lynx:


I don't get the impression there has been an abusive number of false alarms from our health authorities, and even if there were, each alarm must be considered without bias.

There isn't one every week, but over the last few years there has been one at least every six months, just long enough for the public (and a few of you) to forget about them.

Vanguard1917
10th May 2009, 21:17
factory farming is productive, but these farms employ exploited workers, design crops that do not produce plantable seeds so the farmer would by more and more seed, cause terrible pollution, and the US keeps most farm products off the market anyway to keep prices down. fuck em! and ultimately, these farms put many smaller family owned farms out of business. these corporate farmers would actually hinder us from radicallizing the country.

All large-scale industry under capitalism exploits workers (and puts smaller firms out of business). The solution, surely, isn't to abolish large-scale industry but to bring it under democratic workers' control and management. The problems you describe are largely social problems, as opposed to problems inherent in factory farming itself.

Jazzratt
10th May 2009, 22:29
There isn't one every week, but over the last few years there has been one at least every six months, just long enough for the public (and a few of you) to forget about them.

Off the top of my head I can only remember SARS and Bird Flu. But I see where you're coming from.

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 00:00
Jaz, six months ago, there was 'Australian Flu'; here is what I posted earlier:


Coming to Britain - the Australian flu virus that has already killed hundreds

By Daniel Martin

Last updated at 10:53 PM on 28th September 2008

A flu virus more deadly than any seen in two decades is threatening Britain.

The strain originates in Australia where it has claimed hundreds of lives, including those of children.

Called Brisbane H3N2, it is so virulent that health chiefs have had to change the make-up of flu vaccines to deal with it.

It affects three times the number of victims hit by other strains, with many deaths resulting from pneumonia.

Viruses from the southern hemisphere strike in their winter months - our summer - and tend to travel north for our winter.

And although that did not happen after Brisbane H3N2 ravaged Australia last year, experts fear Europe will not escape it this winter.

Hugh Pennington, professor of bacteriology at Aberdeen University, said: 'If this flu has been busy in Australia, it is reasonable to suppose that we may get a similar situation in the UK. Viruses travel round the world very quickly now.

We have had some very quiet flu years recently and every year we have to assume that it will be busier than last year.

'Sooner or later we will have a big outbreak, and the more cases there are, the more deaths there will be.

'There is no doubt that elderly people are more at risk. It can tear through an old folk's home and cause a lot of harm.'

The last major outbreak in England and Wales came in 1989-90, when 23,046 people died, compared with a seasonal average of around 4,000. The elderly are those most at risk because they have weaker immune systems.

The Australian flu outbreak affected even fit young adults, and New South Wales saw more than 800 deaths from pneumonia in just five weeks in June and July 2007. Many children died.

Experts speculated that several winters of mild flu had left the population with little immunity. Last year the Australian inventor of the flu vaccine, Dr Graeme Laver, said the outbreak in his country meant Britain was also in danger. 'If the seasonal flu is as bad as it was in Australia, you are in for a pretty bad time,' he said.

'You could have a really severe epidemic. Thousands will be ill and many will die.'

The World Health Organisation and Sanofi Pasteur, a vaccine manufacturer, have combined the Brisbane strain with two others, one also named after the city, in their latest flu vaccine.


Bold added.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1063737/Coming-Britain--Australian-flu-virus-killed-hundreds.html

Fifteen years ago it was Ebola, then it was 'Mad Cow' disease. Now we regularly have C Diff and MRSA panics.

There'll be another some such in a few months, too.

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 00:03
More truth about this 'pandemic':


Profiteers helped to cause swine flu threat

by Simon Basketter

The tabloid headlines over swine flu changed last week from “impending Armageddon” to stating “everything is fine after all”.

In reality neither extreme is accurate. But what has come to light is the extent to which corporate pursuit of profits is shaping reporting of the emerging flu pandemic.

Even the name “swine flu” came under corporate pressure last week.

US agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack said the outbreak should not be called “swine flu” because the name “suggests a problem with pork products”.

According to ABC news, this statement came after “representatives of certain agricultural industries made their displeasure known to the Obama administration”.

The corporate lobbying was so successful that the World Health Organisation has now stopped calling the virus swine flu, using “N1HI” instead.

Corporate interests have also shaped the global response to the threat. Shares in drug companies rose dramatically at the start of the outbreak.

The pharmaceutical giants concentrate on producing anti-virals such as Tamiflu that stem the symptoms of the disease but only work with early treatment.

There is less profit in producing the more effective vaccines because of the way the flu virus evolves and changes – meaning a new vaccine is needed for each different strain of flu.

Skewed

Even where there is vaccine research, it is skewed by the priorities of the system.

For instance, as part of George Bush’s “war on terror”, research money was diverted into vaccines for terrorist threats instead of flu vaccines.

As with all major diseases, the impact and spread of swine flu is shaped by poverty.

The first known victim of the swine flu was five year old Edgar Hernandez, who lives in the town of La Gloria in Mexico.

La Gloria is part of the municipality of Perote – where an outbreak of flu and chest infections has affected 1,600 people out of a population of 3,000 since February.

The high death rate from flu in Mexico is down to poverty – people living in cramped, overcrowded conditions with poor nutrition and little access to healthcare.

At the heart of Perote is Granjas Carroll – one of the country’s largest pig farms.

Some 50 percent of the operation is owned by the US-based corporation Smithfield Foods. It produces close to a million pigs a year.

Residents held a demonstration last month against the pollution from the factory, which meant the town was cordoned off by the authorities.

People who get severe flu which remains untreated can develop pneumonia.

There have been calls to exhume the bodies of the children from the area who died of pneumonia so that they could be tested for swine flu.

The genetic background of the current flu is a strain that emerged in 1998 in factory farms in North Carolina in the US.

In the 1990s pig production in North Carolina rose from two million to ten million, even as the number of farms dropped.

Waste

Pigs are packed so tightly that they cannot turn, and have to stand in their own waste.

They are pumped full of antibiotics, including ones used to treat human diseases.

In the name of maximising profit, this has created a health disaster waiting to happen.

The poor have been the hardest hit in all major flu outbreaks.

If the pandemic emerges fully in Britain then the effect of privatisation and bed shortages in the NHS would make the effects of the flu far worse than they need to be.

And for the poor of the Global South a global flu pandemic would be disastrous.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=17808

Lynx
11th May 2009, 05:41
SARS and bird flu are recent examples that come to mind. SARS was played up in part because it affected Canadians. Never heard anything about Australia - if it isn't a bush fire, it rarely makes the news here in Canada.
MRSA and C difficile are found in hospitals - the concern with these is resistance to all known antibiotics. Please don't lump these in with false alarms regarding pandemics.

Other news tidbits of concern to Eastern Canadians: West Nile virus in mosquitos and birds (mainly corvids); and Lime Disease in ticks.

I don't consider the sum total of this to be excessive or abusive.

In general, there always seems to be some crisis or other, reinforcing the need for leadership and authority. This is to be expected. Doing a personal risk assessment is one way to cut through the deluge of bad news.

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 10:47
Lynx:


MRSA and C difficile are found in hospitals - the concern with these is resistance to all known antibiotics. Please don't lump these in with false alarms regarding pandemics.

1) I wasn't.

2) MRSA is a threat because of factory farming and the indiscriminate use of anti-biotics.

3) I mentioned these only to underline the permanent state of panic the media tries to hold us in.

I also forgot to mention the regular outbreaks of Foot and Mouth disease, an infection that is no worse in cattle than a bad cold to cattle, but which is treated as if it were Bubonic Plague.

Then there was Blue Tongue disease...

Lynx
11th May 2009, 17:13
1) I wasn't.

2) MRSA is a threat because of factory farming and the indiscriminate use of anti-biotics.
Yes, and it highlights the threat posed by the hospital environment. We've created new habitats and new opportunities for these little beasties to do what they do best.

3) I mentioned these only to underline the permanent state of panic the media tries to hold us in.
I think this is an exaggeration. People are concerned, yet have learned to take these media announcements in stride.

I also forgot to mention the regular outbreaks of Foot and Mouth disease, an infection that is no worse in cattle than a bad cold to cattle, but which is treated as if it were Bubonic Plague.

Then there was Blue Tongue disease...
F&M is a contagious disease whose outcome is financially fatal. Blame the consumer, if you wish, who expect their meat to come from healthy animals.

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 17:43
Lynx:


I think this is an exaggeration.

Clearly you haven't been reading the tabloid press (and other media outlets) over the last ten years or so.


F&M is a contagious disease whose outcome is financially fatal

Only for a while until the animals recover.


Blame the consumer,

Excuse me, but I thought us socialists blamed the bosses (not workers/consumers).

Or, did I miss a meeting?

ÑóẊîöʼn
11th May 2009, 18:08
Clearly you haven't been reading the tabloid press (and other media outlets) over the last ten years or so.

Are there any hard figures as to how many people actually take those rags seriously?

Lynx
11th May 2009, 18:12
Clearly you haven't been reading the tabloid press (and other media outlets) over the last ten years or so.
Tabloids are not meant to be taken seriously. If people were in a state of panic, it would effect their behavior and the economy.

Only for a while until the animals recover.
The animals are usually slaughtered.

Excuse me, but I thought us socialists blamed the bosses (not workers/consumers).

Or, did I miss a meeting?
Only if the bosses are responsible for heightened consumer awareness and the slaughter/incineration policy. I can't imagine producers voluntarily making their own lives more difficult.

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 20:15
Noxion:


Are there any hard figures as to how many people actually take those rags seriously?

Not that I know of, but have you seen how many people are wearing those useless face masks? And how many schools have been closed? And have you seen the interviews on TV of panicky commuters afraid to travel by bus, train or get in a lift?

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 20:19
Lynx:


Tabloids are not meant to be taken seriously. If people were in a state of panic, it would effect their behavior and the economy.

I only mentioned them since they are more up-front. But even the 'serious' papers have been spreading panic.


The animals are usually slaughtered.

Yes, I know. The point is that there is no good reason to do this. They all recover if left alone.


Only if the bosses are responsible for heightened consumer awareness and the slaughter/incineration policy. I can't imagine producers voluntarily making their own lives more difficult.

They (consumers) are merely responding to the catastrophist propaganda churned out by the media and those with a financial interest in such food production. If these animals were left to recover, there'd be no problem.

ÑóẊîöʼn
11th May 2009, 21:18
Not that I know of, but have you seen how many people are wearing those useless face masks? And how many schools have been closed? And have you seen the interviews on TV of panicky commuters afraid to travel by bus, train or get in a lift?

Well, I don't watch TV. While swine flu seems to be in the news, as far as I can tell everything else is running smoothly, or at least as smoothly as such things can be said to run. Apart from a few posters and leaflets telling people to use a tissue and not to sneeze everywhere, nothing appears all that different.

Really, the situation is overblown, but then in my opinion so is the screeching over Big Pharma. Considering how few people have actually been infected with swine flu (including "unconfirmed" cases), I fail to see how Big Pharma could be making a killing out of selling Tamiflu. Sure, they could persuade governments to stockpile it, but if the corporate section of the ruling class is savvy enough to do that, then surely the corresponding government section of the ruling class is competent enough to do a level-headed assessment of the situation - and if the whole swine flu situation is overblown as many say it is, then the governments can effectively turn around to Big Pharma and say "fuck you, we have more important things to spend our money on in this economy".

Jia
11th May 2009, 21:21
If the entire world had swine flu, only 120 million would die. And that is if those countries have as bad as healthcare as Mexico, where I got the fatality figures.

120 million deaths? Not that bad in global terms. It would probably benefit in the long term due to cutting over-population. :)

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 23:45
Noxion:


While swine flu seems to be in the news, as far as I can tell everything else is running smoothly, or at least as smoothly as such things can be said to run. Apart from a few posters and leaflets telling people to use a tissue and not to sneeze everywhere, nothing appears all that different.

It was the leading story on every news channel and news bulletin most of last week; and from what I can tell from cable TV news channels, the same has been the case in other countries -- to such an extent that the Egyptian government, for example, wants to slaughter every pig in Egypt, provoking huge riots by the pig farmers (who belong to a a christian sect):


Egyptian state provokes riots by slaughtering pigs

by Matthew Cookson

The Egyptian government’s plan to slaughter the country’s pigs as a response to swine flu provoked riots in the capital city of Cairo last Sunday.

Residents of the Manishyet Nasr shanty town hurled stones and bottles at police and set fire to barricades in an attempt to stop authorities enforcing the cull.

Police fired tear gas and charged into the crowd, injuring many and arresting at least 24 people.

The country’s impoverished Coptic Christian minority own over 300,000 pigs. Most earn a living through a combination of rubbish collection and pig farming.

The residents of Manishyet Nasr are known as the capital’s garbagemen or “Zabaleen”.

The Zabaleen play a vital role in collecting and recycling waste. They take rubbish back to their neighbourhood to sort out what can be sold and what needs to be burned or thrown away. The pigs are fed much of the edible rubbish.

But the government wants to slaughter the pigs despite there being no reported cases of swine flu in Egypt.

Both the World Health Organisation and the Food and Agriculture Organisation say there is no scientific rationale for a cull as the disease is passed between humans.

Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian dictator, is a key US ally in the Middle East and is deeply unpopular. A powerful wave of workers’ strikes and a large opposition movement has shaken the government in recent years.

The state wants to appear to be acting decisively to stamp out any threat from swine flu, as it is still suffering from the effects of avian flu – which has killed 26 people in the country since 2006.

Mubarak also wants to divide the opposition by attacking and scapegoating the Christian minority.

The Copts make up around 10 percent of Egypt’s population. They face oppression and discrimination.

Progressive movements in Egypt have demanded recognition of the discrimination Christians face.

The Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s main opposition group, has traditionally been hostile to the Copts but has condemned the slaughter of the pigs.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=17809

Every house in the country has been sent a special booklet on this flu; mine arrived on Saturday.

At my daughter's place of work, one of their customers (a big multinational bank) rang her bosses to ask what their policy was on keeping the operation going during the outbreak. Hospitals, fire and other emegency services have had to draw up plans to say what their contingency plans are if too many of their staff are killed by this flu Schools have had to do the same; exam boards have had to do likewise. The list goes on.

I think 'media induced panic' well describes the situation.


so is the screeching over Big Pharma

Except, as I reported above:


Corporate interests have also shaped the global response to the threat. Shares in drug companies rose dramatically at the start of the outbreak.

The pharmaceutical giants concentrate on producing anti-virals such as Tamiflu that stem the symptoms of the disease but only work with early treatment.

There is less profit in producing the more effective vaccines because of the way the flu virus evolves and changes – meaning a new vaccine is needed for each different strain of flu.

But, I agree with you, this has been overblown -- but not without clear intent.


then surely the corresponding government section of the ruling class is competent enough to do a level-headed assessment of the situation - and if the whole swine flu situation is overblown as many say it is, then the governments can effectively turn around to Big Pharma and say "fuck you, we have more important things to spend our money on in this economy".

There are good reasons why governments are in hock to big capital (of which I am sure you are aware) -- but this has shaped government policy, as my comments above show.

And, it helps distract the public's mind from the worldwide slump, while boosting the profits of Big Pharma. In addition, it helps them test out their methods of opinion formation.

Finally, more than few politicians' palms will no doubt have been greased over this; as we can see from the latest 'expenses scandal' in the UK, few MPs aren't corrupt.

You can find more details about how governments have been bought by Big Capital in 'The Best Democracy Money Can Buy' by Greg Palast:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Best_Democracy_Money_Can_Buy

Rosa Lichtenstein
11th May 2009, 23:48
Unreadable name:


120 million deaths? Not that bad in global terms. It would probably benefit in the long term due to cutting over-population.

Well, let's hope you are among the first to go, since this sort of comment is unwelcome here.

brigadista
11th May 2009, 23:54
i got an alarmist big brother style government leaflet through the door today warning me what to do to be "safe"......talk about a government attempt at a fear lockdown...

Lynx
12th May 2009, 00:44
I only mentioned them since they are more up-front. But even the 'serious' papers have been spreading panic.
After reading your subsequent comments, it appears the situation in Nova Scotia and Canada is considerably calmer than in the UK and elsewhere.

Yes, I know. The point is that there is no good reason to do this. They all recover if left alone.
They recover and remain carriers? And the meat is safe to consume?

They (consumers) are merely responding to the catastrophist propaganda churned out by the media and those with a financial interest in such food production. If these animals were left to recover, there'd be no problem.
Well then, who enacted these quarantine policies? Was it a reaction to food poisoning, lobbying by pharmaceutical companies, or recommendations of scientists?

ÑóẊîöʼn
12th May 2009, 01:32
It was the leading story on every news channel and news bulletin most of last week; and from what I can tell from cable TV news channels, the same has been the case in other countries -- to such an extent that the Egyptian government, for example, wants to slaughter every pig in Egypt, provoking huge riots by the pig farmers (who belong to a a christian sect):

Like I said, I don't watch television, so perhaps I've been missing out on the hysterical merry-go-round that TV execs must whirl in order to maintain ratings and their viewers' percieved microscopic attention spans.

As for the proposed porcine massacre, that sounds like an overreaction. I've no idea how well-informed the Egyptian government is about swine flu - either they are not in full possession of the facts or there is something more to the story, as your link suggests.


Every house in the country has been sent a special booklet on this flu; mine arrived on Saturday.The government devotes many tons of dead tree flesh to disseminating a mixture of genuinely useful information and ham-handed propaganda (The stacks of drugs-related pamphlets in the New Deal centres come to mind). This isn't unusual.


At my daughter's place of work, one of their customers (a big multinational bank) rang her bosses to ask what their policy was on keeping the operation going during the outbreak. Hospitals, fire and other emegency services have had to draw up plans to say what their contingency plans are if too many of their staff are killed by this flu Schools have had to do the same; exam boards have had to do likewise. The list goes on.

I think 'media induced panic' well describes the situation.That hardly sounds like a panic to me. All governments and most large corporations make plans for possible emergencies - that isn't losing one's head, it's simple prudence.


Except, as I reported above:So their shares went up. That proves nothing; the stock market is an amoral casino - share values would have shot up even further if more people had caught the disease.


But, I agree with you, this has been overblown -- but not without clear intent.A conspiracy to increase share prices? I'm sure there are easier and less disruptive ways of making more money.

Also, not being a mind-reader myself, I can't profess to know the plans of the various individuals involved in the business.


There are good reasons why governments are in hock to big capital (of which I am sure you are aware) -- but this has shaped government policy, as my comments above show.

And, it helps distract the public's mind from the worldwide slump, while boosting the profits of Big Pharma. In addition, it helps them test out their methods of opinion formation.It may well do that, but that's not the same thing as planning the whole thing from the start - capitalists are banal opportunists, not moustache-twirling villain masterminds, which only exist in comic books.


Finally, more than few politicians' palms will no doubt have been greased over this; as we can see from the latest 'expenses scandal' in the UK, few MPs aren't corrupt.I don't doubt it myself, but I don't think it's important. Petty corruption is par for the course in bourgeouis politics.

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 02:29
Lynx:


They recover and remain carriers? And the meat is safe to consume?

Well, this is just a matter of animal management. The reason these animals are killed is that yields plummet, and it is cheaper to eradicate the infected animals.

This is what Wiki says:


The incubation period for foot-and-mouth disease virus has a range between 2 and 12 days. The disease is characterised by high fever that declines rapidly after two or three days; blisters inside the mouth that lead to excessive secretion of stringy or foamy saliva and to drooling; and blisters on the feet that may rupture and cause lameness. Adult animals may suffer weight loss from which they do not recover for several months as well as swelling in the testicles of mature males, and in cows, milk production can decline significantly. Though most animals eventually recover from FMD, the disease can lead to myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and death, especially in newborn animals. Some infected animals remain asymptomatic, but they nonetheless carry FMD and can transmit it to others.

Lynx:


Well then, who enacted these quarantine policies? Was it a reaction to food poisoning, lobbying by pharmaceutical companies, or recommendations of scientists?

No idea.

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 02:38
Noxion:


That hardly sounds like a panic to me. All governments and most large corporations make plans for possible emergencies - that isn't losing one's head, it's simple prudence.

In what way does this massive over-reaction, across the entire globe, fall short of being a panic?

Mexico virtually shut down for a week, for goodness sake.

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/96106/Mexicos_swine_flu_shutdown

All for a few dozen deaths (tragic though they were).


So their shares went up. That proves nothing; the stock market is an amoral casino - share values would have shot up even further if more people had caught the disease.

Are you suggesting that there is no connection between this share rise and the media hype?


A conspiracy to increase share prices?

Where did I suggest that? The word 'cospiracy' is yours not mine.


I'm sure there are easier and less disruptive ways of making more money.

In a global recession?


Also, not being a mind-reader myself, I can't profess to know the plans of the various individuals involved in the business.

Maybe not, but when it comes to other things the ruling-class get up to (such as their lies to justify the invasion of Iraq, say), I am sure you were just as ready as the rest of us to impute ulterior motives and secret planning to these b*stards.

Except in this case, you are prepared maybe to give them the benefit of the doubt...

Lynx
12th May 2009, 02:54
Well, this is just a matter of animal management. The reason these animals are killed is that yields plummet, and it is cheaper to eradicate the infected animals.
This suggests an economic motive in addition to a perceived need to control outbreaks of contagious diseases. Blame cannot be assigned entirely to the media and other vested interests.

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 03:13
Lynx:


This suggests an economic motive in addition to a perceived need to control outbreaks of contagious diseases. Blame cannot be assigned entirely to the media and other vested interests.

In this case I agree, and I do not think I posted anything that suggested otherwise.

Lynx
12th May 2009, 03:26
In this case I agree, and I do not think I posted anything that suggested otherwise.
Nor do you have to - I'm not going to argue that the response to F&M is completely rational.

ÑóẊîöʼn
12th May 2009, 05:36
In what way does this massive over-reaction, across the entire globe, fall short of being a panic?

Mexico virtually shut down for a week, for goodness sake.

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/96106/Mexicos_swine_flu_shutdown

All for a few dozen deaths (tragic though they were).

Mexico is not the world. A massive overreaction would be shutting down or significantly reducing global air traffic, something I have not heard a peep about.

Do you really think the quivering hypochondriacs that TV news crews love to shove microphones into the faces of, are remotely representative of the general public?

It's really easy nowadays to at least get the impression that everyone's getting their knickers in a twist over something insignificant. Why's that? because communications technology is ubiquitous in our crowded world - for every 1000 people who are too busy to care, you can find at least one person willing to squeal for the cameras, and one can transmit said squealing across the globe.

If anyone's to blame for this whole mess, it's the yellow journalists who value sensationalism over anything else.


Are you suggesting that there is no connection between this share rise and the media hype?No, I'm suggesting that it's insufficient evidence for any kind of premeditated action. Like I said, banal opportunists.


Where did I suggest that? The word 'cospiracy' is yours not mine.So what are you suggesting?


In a global recession?Something that a spurious flu scare is unlikely to improve. If I were a member of the ruling class and somebody (whether a representative of Big Pharma or one of their paid-off politicians) pulled that kind of shit with me, I'd be demanding my money back with menaces.


Maybe not, but when it comes to other things the ruling-class get up to (such as their lies to justify the invasion of Iraq, say), I am sure you were just as ready as the rest of us to impute ulterior motives and secret planning to these b*stards.Ulterior motives? Secret planning? This coming from someone who disavows words like "conspiracy". Interesting.

No, the lies concerning the invasion of Iraq were quite blatant by anyone's standards. Weapons of mass destruction? None were found. Saddam's links to Al Qaida? A laughable fiction - bin Laden hated the guy. Liberating the Iraqis? Bald-faced hypocrisy, both in the sense that the religious nuts actually have a shot at running things in Iraq now (if they aren't doing so by already) and in the sense that the US is not in the business of "liberating" countries.


Except in this case, you are prepared maybe to give them the benefit of the doubt...We'll see. I'm expecting this to pan out to nothing much at all, which is why I'm not worried. Let's just hope I'm not wrong.

Jia
12th May 2009, 08:52
Unreadable name:



Well, let's hope you are among the first to go, since this sort of comment is unwelcome here.

Okay, lets just keep spewing out humans and at this rate we will run out of food in no time, instead of a cycle of growth/death/decline/growth.

No, no, your way of growth/growth/growth/growth/ billions dead, sounds far better! :rolleyes:

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 13:16
^^^Look sunshine, if you keep repeating this vile material, you stand a good chance of being restricted.

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 14:15
Noxion:


Mexico is not the world. A massive overreaction would be shutting down or significantly reducing global air traffic, something I have not heard a peep about.

Who said it was? I gave Mexico as just another example (to add to the many I have already cited, and those listed below).

As far as the airlines are concerned, check these out:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/swine-flu/5249836/Swine-flu-IATA-warning-over-impact-on-air-travel.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/04/27/325664/airlines-and-airports-respond-to-swine-flu-outbreak.html

http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/view_news.asp?ID=360

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20090428/twl-uk-flu-airlines-risks-sb-factbox-a7cf3b4_1.html

http://www.farminguk.com/news/Argentina-Swine-flu-restrictions.15640.asp

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/news/detail.php?art_id=3130


Do you really think the quivering hypochondriacs that TV news crews love to shove microphones into the faces of, are remotely representative of the general public?

They mirror survey results.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/files/Swine_Flu.TOPLINE.pdf

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news-1/Polls-Show-Americans-Concerned-About-Swine-Flu--Taking-Actions-to-Protect-Themselves-44920-2/


If anyone's to blame for this whole mess, it's the yellow journalists who value sensationalism over anything else.

1) This was a world-wide phenomenon. Are you seriously asking us to believe that every news outlet across the planet was suddenly staffed with 'yellow journalists'?

2) You talk as if these journalists didn't themselves work for huge media empires, whose owners no doubt own Big Pharma shares.

3) This sort of health panic occurs every six months or so, and has been doing for the last five or ten years.


No, I'm suggesting that it's insufficient evidence for any kind of premeditated action. Like I said, banal opportunists.

Right across the planet, in nearly every sphere of human life, from schools closing (around the world), to special government disease control bodies arranging emergency meetings (like the UK 'Cobra' committee), to threats to slaughter pigs en masse, to large corporations issuing emergency plans about how they will cope if many of their employees die of this flu, to concerns about the damaging effect on armed services, hospitals and other emergency services...

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090427/tuk-cobra-meets-as-pair-tested-for-swine-45dbed5_1.html

http://allafrica.com/stories/200904271700.html

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/04/assessing_the_swine_flu.cfm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30483299/

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=93111&sectionid=3510212

http://www.cypnow.co.uk/news/ByDiscipline/Health/902170/Swine-flu-forces-school-closure/

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/pinoy-migration/balitang-america/04/30/09/swine-flu-prompts-school-closures-filipino-dense-neighborh

http://cbs13.com/local/More.Swine.Flu.2.999636.html

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/04/could-swine-flu-cause-a-n-side-school-to-close.html

http://www.click2houston.com/news/19340370/detail.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/swine-flu/5274064/Swine-flu-Alleyns-school-forced-to-close.html

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/04/30/bc-five-new-swine-flu-cases-confirmed.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090426/ap_on_re_au_an/swine_flu_world_28

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2505347.0.Sturgeon_convenes_emergency_ swine_flu_meeting.php

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/05/30205154

http://wales.gov.uk/topics/health/protection/communicabledisease/swine/news/090503daily/?version=1&lang=en

For goodness sake, the Chinese government even halted adoptions as a result of this flu!

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25436113-5018985,00.html


So what are you suggesting?

I purposely do not use the word 'conspiracy' since it automatically categorises the one using it as a 'crank'. But, it is undeniable that sections of the ruling-class plan things in their own interests.


Something that a spurious flu scare is unlikely to improve. If I were a member of the ruling class and somebody (whether a representative of Big Pharma or one of their paid-off politicians) pulled that kind of shit with me, I'd be demanding my money back with menaces.

That wasn't the point. You said:


I'm sure there are easier and less disruptive ways of making more money.

To which I replied:


In a global recession?

So, the point wasn't, will this cure the recession, but this is a good way to make money in a recession -- and to divert attention from it.


Ulterior motives? Secret planning? This coming from someone who disavows words like "conspiracy". Interesting.

1) See my point above.

2 Are you suggesting that Bush and Blair, and their respective government agencies, did not secretly plan to invade Iraq for its oil, etc? Or that bosses do not meet behind closed doors to plan strategy? What do you think they do all the time? Play golf?


No, the lies concerning the invasion of Iraq were quite blatant by anyone's standards. Weapons of mass destruction? None were found. Saddam's links to Al Qaida? A laughable fiction - bin Laden hated the guy. Liberating the Iraqis? Bald-faced hypocrisy, both in the sense that the religious nuts actually have a shot at running things in Iraq now (if they aren't doing so by already) and in the sense that the US is not in the business of "liberating" countries.

Well, that's the point. They say one thing in public, but we all know what has gone on in secret behind closed doors. And we knew this long before the invasion.

But, here, you apply a different standard.


We'll see. I'm expecting this to pan out to nothing much at all, which is why I'm not worried. Let's just hope I'm not wrong.

Again, that wasn't the point. The point was that you are quite happy to concede that the likes of Blair and Bush plan in secret (even before the evidence becomes overt), but here you are not (even though the evidence of co-ordination world-wide is pretty obvious).

Jia
12th May 2009, 15:51
^^^Look sunshine, if you keep repeating this vile material, you stand a good chance of being restricted.

What the fuck for? :confused:

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 16:37
Unreadable name:


What the fuck for?

For this:


In the daily happenings at the board, members sometimes make comments that are unacceptable at this site.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/faq.php?faq=restrictions#faq_thisperson

Jia
12th May 2009, 17:22
[QUOTE=Rosa Lichtenstein;1442116]

racist, sexist or homophobic :confused:

Dr Mindbender
12th May 2009, 18:54
Okay, lets just keep spewing out humans and at this rate we will run out of food in no time, instead of a cycle of growth/death/decline/growth.

No, no, your way of growth/growth/growth/growth/ billions dead, sounds far better! :rolleyes:

We're not running out of food though, that argument is a fallacy. Nor are we likely to anytime soon.

In one year the united states alone produces enough food to feed the world three times over, for the same timescale.

The reason people are starving is because of the price system and the awful way in which the capitalist system distributes resources.

Jia
12th May 2009, 19:00
We're not running out of food though, that argument is a fallacy. Nor are we likely to anytime soon.

In one year the united states alone produces enough food to feed the world three times over, for the same timescale.

The reason people are starving is because of the price system and the awful way in which the capitalist system distributes resources.

But the ways of getting the food from supplier to Mouth makes large impacts on the environment, as do more Humans using cars, planes and producing more waste that has to be dealt with. The less Humans the better.

Dr Mindbender
12th May 2009, 19:08
But the ways of getting the food from supplier to Mouth makes large impacts on the environment, as do more Humans using cars, planes and producing more waste that has to be dealt with. The less Humans the better.

The argument that we have to reduce population to reduce scarcity is a false dichotomy.

You are right that the distribution and waste of capitalism is wrong, but that doesnt mean a potential pandemic should be celebrated.

What we need is the removal and replacement of the current means of distribution, not a mass funeral.

Jia
12th May 2009, 19:12
The argument that we have to reduce population to reduce scarcity is a false dichotomy.

You are right that the distribution and waste of capitalism is wrong, but that doesnt mean a potential pandemic should be celebrated.

What we need is the removal and replacement of the current means of distribution, not a mass funeral.

Point taken.

Rosa Lichtenstein
12th May 2009, 22:31
Unreadable name:


racist, sexist or homophobic

Offensive.

Bandito
19th July 2009, 15:31
I'm H1N1 positive.
What a load of crap. It's no different than any other flu, besides it's not affected by any antivirus pill but Tamiflu.
It's comletely idiotic to make more fuss about it than any other similar infection. Human viruses type A and B keep mutating all the time and nobody knows when they are going to mutate into patogene forms. If we are going to be catastrofic about it, it's really a "matter of time" when HIV is going to get "airborne" and become spreading like every other respiratory infection.
So what can we do?
Lock ourselves into a mountain cabin and shoot everything that moves?

Fuck no.