reply to post by budro
Patience! Good things come to those who wait.
Meanwhile, I have to wonder.
Why can we not simply get a factual, apolitical, analysis of the issue? There are really only a few elements that one would need to understand the
What constitutes a lethal disease? Can H1N1 be, under normal circumstance, something that we as a species should panic about?
What exactly is
a pandemic; especially now that the definition was 'tweaked' by "world" authorities, and rather abruptly embraced by
otherwise sovereign nation states.
Should we fear H1N1 more than the Rhino-virus that brings us the common cold? Should we wonder why?
What is H1N1 exactly? Influenza-A, we know; it is genetically related to the Spanish Flu, but also has elements of H5N1 (avian) flu, as well as it's
porcine and human characteristics. Should it matter what the source of the virus is? Perhaps it's logically irrelevant, the cat is out of the bag so
The illness to serious complication ratio is still eluding us.
The methodology used to disseminate information couldn't be less effectual, if the goal is public acceptance. Unless of course, there were no
information to disseminate that could effectively 'sell' the concept of mass global inoculations, lacking a true biological threat.
Maybe this is more about the geoeconomic impact than the healthcare impact.
It seems labor lost due to time necessary for recovery is the 'danger'. But that seems a stretch in terms of believability.
Perhaps there is another need this global inoculation operations addresses. Maybe it's all about access to the public. Maybe we'll never know.
There's a lot to look at.
Chronology is probably the only analytical approach we can use - as long as we accept that the timing related to when we were told certain fact, by
whom, and whether or not they were accurate.
[edit on 15-11-2009 by Maxmars]