It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

£1.2bn spent to beat swine flu... and just 26 lives saved

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   

£1.2bn spent to beat swine flu... and just 26 lives saved


www.dailymail.co.uk

The £1.2billion spent on tackling the swine flu pandemic that never was may have saved as few as 26 lives at a cost of up to £46million each, an astonishing study has found.

The vast sum spent on vaccinations, anti-virals and facemasks prevented such a paltry number of deaths because the virus turned out to be far less deadly than normal flu.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   
And yet again people here already knew about this ... its amazing how some elitist can manipulate governments easily to buy their stuff

The whole world bought vaccines ... come on, thats just sick, I wonder if we are able to do something about it, like prosecute someone or some organization

@I didnt see posted here, so I believe its ok

www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   
what a load of bs

They have no clue how many lives this saved or maybe cost. If it did save 26 then its still worth it, who knows also if this saved jobs or caused swine flu to not be as bad.

Silly article, I wonder what the real reasons are behind publishing it.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Since when did we start putting a price on a life? It was still worth it if it saved 26 people.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:24 AM
link   
I believe that money was used as an investment in swine flu,like someone's planning to make some profit off it in the future,the swine flu "epidemic" and fear campaign is not over by a long shot.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Most of us know that the Swine flu epidemic was a big scam.

Where they got the number 26, I don't know, I think the focus should be on the fact that it was never more deadly than a seasonal flu, and we were never in any real danger from the Swine Flu, it was all hyped from day one.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:11 AM
link   
This smells like the boy who cried wolf to me. The next one could be real I guess, will the people buy it though?



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   
The whole swine flu thing was simply used as a way to deflect public attantion from the financial crisis at the time.

Simple as that.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Faiol
 


At the end of the day i am still glad this money was spent.

Flu pandemics can not be shrugged off. This was a relatively minor one but the logistical and co-operative experience tested and learnt will give countries and health organisations the knowledge on how to fight a much deadlier outbreak, which will inevitably arrive at some point.

[edit on 3-8-2010 by Peruvianmonk]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:51 AM
link   
I will never consent to their remedy, whatever it is, for an alleged pandemic or epidemic.

They tried to get most of the Western world to submit to vaccines on the pretext of the swine flu, because the vaccines contain all number of toxic substances with population cull being their goal.

There still seem to be a (surprising) number of people on ATS who still believe that the gubberment is trying to protect them. I urge anyone who still believes that to do some research.



[edit on 3-8-2010 by wcitizen]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


What if the swine flu virus was made by the pharmaceutical mafia in a laboratory for the specific purpose of infecting people, in collusion with the gubberment?

What if HIV was a virus created by the pharma mafia/gubberment with a view to reducing population?

Would you still feel the same?

Would you still be happy that billions of American's money went straight into the pockets of those same criminals?



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 04:56 AM
link   
it was not about saving people but drug companies making money.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


This isn't just about America or American tax dollars.`Mexico, UK, the Middle East, Asia and many other regions experienced this and fought it. There is actually some real indication that the virus started in the U.S. not Mexico as it was claimed.

dalje.com...
www.smh.com.au...
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Obviously i would not feel the same if this virus was created by some villinious entitiy, but i have seen no evidence for this.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 



This might explain how they got the number of 26.

www.naturalnews.com...





[edit on 3-8-2010 by wcitizen]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 



Have you looked for information that suggests it could have been man made? Because it is there, if you choose to look for it, as well as all the information which expresses concern that the H1N1 vaccine can and did cause much more serious diseases amongst those who were vaccinated.

I would agree with you that the money is well spent - IF it saves lives. But the figure of 26 lives saved is specious. Believe me, if they had larger numbers they would parade those statistics.

But what they don't tell you is that the vaccine was directly implicatedn in the deaths of more than 26 people. If these figures are to be believed, and there is no reason why they shouldn't, the vaccine actually killed more people than it saved.

The basis of their statistic - even to indicate that just 26 people were saved - is founded on a questionable basis. How do we kow that those same 26 people wouldn't have survivied anyway? What are the details, did those people not catch H1N1 virus? If they didn't catch it, how do we know they would have caught it anyway? If they did catch it but had only a mild dose, how do we know it would have been worse had they not been vaccinated. Perhaps they had an above average strong immune system. And statistics also show that significant numbers of people who dd have the vaccine still caught swine flu.

Added to that, at the very least, there is mercury in all these vaccines, and mercury is very toxic to the body and very, very difficult to clear from the body.

Statistics are one more strategy the corrupt PTB use continually to mislead, misinform and lie, in IMHO cross checking against other non-governmental sources should always be done if we are to even approximate the truth.

The link which I posted in a previous post is a starting point for researching this. A few google searchs on the topic will also lead you to lots of information, if you wish to pursue it.







[edit on 3-8-2010 by wcitizen]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Peruvianmonk
 


Oh, and believe me, this is ALL about dollars, and population reductoin to boot.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


interesting, either way, the swine flu was not as deadly as the seasonal flu, and lets remember, they said this would be big, and it end up being a hoax



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 06:54 AM
link   
It did NOT cost £1.2Billion to save 26 lives.

It cost whatever the going rate of 26 doses of vaccine was at the time.

The rest was wasted money for what appears to have been an extremely hyped non-event that enriched the pharmaceutical industry and it's embedded governmental medical advisors. Doubtless quite a few others as well, but you get the picture!



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 07:02 AM
link   
well it appears that this info is just about the UK!




In the end, just 342 people died in England. At the height of the panic, chief medical officer Liam Donaldson warned that as many as 65,000 could die.


MAN, if this is true, than its amazing ... to imagine that the predicted death number would be 65,000 and just 342 people died and 1 billion was spent on that, man, thats just a LOT of money ...

another thing ... the study about it wasnt released yet




They calculated that between 26 and 67 lives were saved by the swine flu vaccination programme.

It may also have prevented 10,000 hospital admissions - but this only saved the NHS between £6.7million and £21.5million.


reply to post by Britguy
 


actually it did -based on the studies they did ... we need to wait for this study to be released, but it looks serious

[edit on 3/8/10 by Faiol]



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by StevenDye
Since when did we start putting a price on a life? It was still worth it if it saved 26 people.



Haha, you beat me to it.



*Let's just all pretend that many more lives could have been saved with that money had it been used more efficiently.

Let's take cancer - how many people could have been treated with that all that cheese?

How about diabeetus - how much insulin could all that cheddar buy?



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join