Obama gets billions for ‘pandemic’ Swine Flu

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Nov 17, 2009.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    Buried amid news stories about World Breastfeeding Week, World Suicide Prevention Day and World Rabies Day, the WHO has a small item giving the latest supposed count of ‘laboratory confirmed H1N1 cases. It is something on the order of 55,000 persons worldwide since this April at a factory pig farm in Veracruz Mexico a small child got ill and the world was told of a deadly new ‘Swine Flu’ that was allegedly spreading from pig to person. Yet the US Government is gearing up as if it ere preparing for the new outbreak of the dreaded 1918 ‘Spanish Flu’ pandemic. The reality does not support the government response. Is something else going on?



    Although neither the WHO nor the US Government’s Centers for Disease Control nor the Robert Koch Institute nor the Pasteur Institute nor any government or private agency in the world has yet to scientifically isolate, to photograph with means of electron microscopy and to list the chemical characteristics of the ‘novel H1N1 Influenza A virus’ as it is now officially called, the WHO has seen fit to declare a global “Pandemic Alert” Phase 6 alarm.

    More Here
     
  2. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    for a 'pandemic' they had to redefine the word in order to use it, without the new defination there would be no 'pandemic'. It figures, more money.
     
  3. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thas't not true. A pandemic is defined as an epidemic illness that spreads to multiple countries simultaneously. An epidemic is defined as a rapidly and extensively spread of infection affecting many individuals in an area or a population at the same time. The spread of H1N1a categorically qualifies as both a pandemic and epidemic. that doesn't mean it's not overblown by the media, but it meets the qualifications, and those qualifications are the same now as they have been previously.

    Also, aside from the fact that the link in the OP is from a crackpot conspiracy theorist website, the article is from June of 2009.
     
  4. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
  5. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    It matters not how good you are at math, nor what the actual numbers are, we have been informed in no uncertain terms that the swine flu is both pandemic and epidemic.

    Don't even think about questioning it.
     
  6. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmmmmmm!

    6 Billion people in the world.

    55,000 infected.

    6,000,000,000 people.
    55,000 infected.

    Isn't that the same as saying 55 cases in 6 million.......
     
  7. donnA

    donnA
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    There was a thread here rescently, in the last couple of weeks, that shows they had to alter the defination of 'pandemic' in order to call h1n1 a pandemic. So if your debating that this is the wrong thread.
     
  8. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    1) It is a good thing that electron microscopy and chemical characterization of microorganisms have never been a prerequisite for response to infectious diseases or public health officials would never have the time to respond to outbreaks in a manner that would actually be effective at controlling their spread.

    2) If the author is trying to insinuate that nobody has seen this virus, then I present to you an electron micrographic image of H1N1 Human swine-flu influenza virus published in Nature magazine. Here are some more images from the CDC.
     
    #8 Gold Dragon, Nov 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2009
  9. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    Your estimates of infection are off by a factor of 10. It might be because you are relying on old data and there are 10 times more infections since your data.

    So the death rate is 1.2% of infections. 1 out of every 100 people.

    Just for comparison, the death rate of normal influenza in the state of New South Wales, Australia is 12.1 deaths per 100,000 or 0.012%. Link. So the swine flu appears to be 100 times more fatal than regular influenza. Still low at 1.2% compared to things like ebola, but not insignificant.
     
  10. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Why are the C.D.C's and the W.H.O's numbers so different ?
     
  11. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    The CDC probably only tracks infections in the US.'

    If you are talking about the 22 million number by the CDC, the WHO is only tracking laboratory confirmed cases of swine flu. There are many others that are unconfirmed and that probably explains the large CDC number for infections. So the 1.2% number is high because it does not account for laboratory unconfirmed infections.

    It is possible that there are 100 times as many unconfirmed cases as there are confirmed cases. That would make 50 million cases which is just under 1% of the world population. Then it would bring the swine flu death rate to the same level as the normal flu. My guess is that it is somewhere in between 1.2% and 0.012%.
     
    #11 Gold Dragon, Nov 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2009
  12. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    There is a lot of room between those two numbers.....just sayin'.
     
  13. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Also, the C.D.C. is a .gov site. Since they are the ones pushing this, if there was an inflated stat, my guess is it would come from there.

    Again, just sayin'....
     
  14. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
  15. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yes. The number of unconfirmed cases is usually much higher than the number of confirmed cases for something like influenza where many people have mild cases and do not even make a GP visit before recovering. Most GPs would not swab every flu-like illness they see since treatment is the same regardless of what strain of influenza it is. I would consider swabbing every flu-like illness I see as a waste of health resources. However, with the increased vigilance surrounding H1N1, there is likely a public health initiative to encourage GPs to swab more so that there is more data to track the progress of the virus. It is good public health policy in this situation because of the potential savings from minimizing the outbreak of H1N1 is much greater than the cost of the extra swabs. But this would not be normal practice for most flu seasons.
     
  16. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    The thread you're referring to claimed a change in wording on the WHO site. This has nothing to do with that. In reality, though, the wording wasn't "changed" on the site in the manner that WND claimed. WND was actually looking at two completely different pages on the WHO site that were addressing two separate topics. There was no "redefinition" as WND claimed.
     
  17. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    157

    Your data is either very old or very inaccurate. See below from just one country:

    Note that is 250,000 just in the Ukrane.
     
  18. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    His data is both. Note the date on it, which is June of 2009, not to mention, it's a crackpot conspiracy website that's being cited. Regardless of the source, the data in and of itself is easily shown to be inaccurate (even for June of '09).
     
  19. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure that this "Swine Flu" epidemic is as bad as the Obama administration is saying. Considering his propensity to lie, this might just be another attempt to gain more control over the gullible American public.

    As far as Flu shots are concerned. I have not found them to be very effective at all. Just more money for the pharmaceutical industry.
     
  20. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    A fatality rate of .028%.
     

Share This Page

Loading...