Earlier, I was reading an article, courtesy of The Independant. It basically stated that the worst of the flu was now over in the UK. Though the total
official death count more than doubled last week- rising from 50 to 112- the article points out that these victims will have caught the virus some
time before, and only passed away after several days of suffering with it. The article also clearly states that the number of patients in intensive
care as a result of flu has fallen from 783 to 661, and is gradually declining- these are the words of Dame Sally Davies, the Government’s interim
Chief Medical Officer. You can see the article here:
However, much to my surprise, a few hours later I noticed a freshly published article by The Guardian. The title of said article says it all- "Flu
death toll rises as millions at risk remain unvaccinated." The link for that article:
So, the article, which was published only just over 1 hour ago, plays on these deaths, when, as the original articled I cited clearly stated, these
deaths are only a kind of knock-on effect to figures from cases which originated in previous weeks. This second article actually does go on to say
this, but after an exaggerated title tried to push the reader into a certain mind frame. In fact, the quote cited in the article says many of these
deaths may have actually occurred weeks before, but were only added to official figures recently because of a back log.
However, the article then produces a quote saying that these deaths are only a portion of the actual figures, again, instilling more fear. This is
normal though, isn't it? Flu kills thousands every year during winter..yes, the paragraph after this quote, the Health Protection Agency say this is
an annual occurance- so, they admit this is normal, then stress we must all get vaccinated this year via scare tactics.
The shadow health secretary, John Healy, then goes on to say "The big jump in deaths and the high numbers seriously ill in hospital suggest we're
still not through the worst of this flu outbreak.." - Both articles admitted that the death figures are not directly proportional to how bad the
infection is at that current time- that's just common sense- yet, he sites this as proof it's getting worse. He also references the high numbers of
seriously ill in hospital- which the first article stated, with official figures backing it up, that the numbers are falling- so again, a false
statement by him. He then uses these false, unproven statements as vindication for a possible new advertising push for vaccines!
Now, I don't know how old the quotes from the second article are, maybe they are slightly out-dated- however, this article was "printed" approximately
an hour ago and therefore the very reputable Guardian are implying they are most recent. This may not be a mega-conspiracy, but I find it pretty
shocking that two of the UK's best known broadsheets can produce such contrasting stories- one saying though there is still a threat, the worst has
passed, the other saying that we're all at risk and it's getting worse.
edit on 13-1-2011 by ScepticalBeliever because: (no reason