The Poojer Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 meanwhile the "regular flu" is allegedly responsible for 36,000+ deaths per year...... Link
K-9 Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 I think it's our own bias that determines whether or not the "media" is causing panic or creating hysteria. It's merely reporting. I think it's worth noting that the WHO has issued a level 4 phase of alert. You can read about it here: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influ...e/en/index.html
BuffaloBill Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 I think it's our own bias that determines whether or not the "media" is causing panic or creating hysteria. It's merely reporting. I think it's worth noting that the WHO has issued a level 4 phase of alert. You can read about it here: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influ...e/en/index.html Understand that bias plays into the situation but it goes both ways. If you do not think the media plays to people's fears (irrational or otherwise) then you are kidding yourself. I still say that the media and now governments are guilty of chicken little tactics with this situation.
K-9 Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 Understand that bias plays into the situation but it goes both ways. If you do not think the media plays to people's fears (irrational or otherwise) then you are kidding yourself. I still say that the media and now governments are guilty of chicken little tactics with this situation. Didn't mean to suggest that some media play don't play to people's fears. Simply not all media. The responsible reporting I've chosen to read on the subject has not been sensational in the least. Nor are the sources (which we are better informed by anyway) that the media tap into for information. Like the CDC and/or WHO. Governments? Absolutely. But there are political agendas at play and, again, that taps into everyone's inate biases. Just like they wish it.
DC Tom Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 yea i know what it is that was my attempt at a "worried" face.... Wasn't sure. Went with the "didn't know" option, on the judgement that even if you did, someone didn't... I think is a better worried face, personally.
Wacka Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 SARS is dangerous because most people infected died. This one can be a big problem. Remember, it spreads exponentially. Modern air travel allows it to spread quickly, but medicine is so nuch advanced we may be able to get a handle on it.
Bullpen Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 medicine is so nuch advanced we may be able to get a handle on it. No we won't!!!! We're all DOOMED!!! DOOMED I TELLS YA!!!!
Beerball Posted April 29, 2009 Author Posted April 29, 2009 SARS is dangerous because most people infected died. This one can be a big problem. Remember, it spreads exponentially. Modern air travel allows it to spread quickly, but medicine is so nuch advanced we may be able to get a handle on it. That part bugs me. I fly in and out of Dallas at least twice a month...
Lori Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 Texas suspends all interscholastic activities through May 11: http://www.uil.utexas.edu/db/press_release...p;-KeyValue=312
Captain Quint Posted April 29, 2009 Posted April 29, 2009 Texas suspends all interscholastic activities through May 11:http://www.uil.utexas.edu/db/press_release...p;-KeyValue=312 Why doesn't Chuck Norris just roundhouse kick the virus out of Texas and be done with it? He's the president down there, right?
Beerball Posted April 30, 2009 Author Posted April 30, 2009 Ft. Worth schools closed through May 8. About 80,000 students affected. A couple other individual schools in the area are also closed, FW is the only district to close its doors. They have one confirmed case and at least 3 others that they expect to be confirmed. I'm not sure whether this is an over reaction or good common sense.
Marv's Neighbor Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 We went thru this in the late 70's. As I recall it started at Ft.Dix NJ. I got the shot, didn't get sick, but a lot of people got sick and died and it was blamed on the vaccine.
The Poojer Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 BTW, the WHO says that this 'pandemic' has caused 7 deaths, not 60 as this thread 'reports' and not 150+ like 'mainstream' media has reported....
mcjeff215 Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Understand that bias plays into the situation but it goes both ways. If you do not think the media plays to people's fears (irrational or otherwise) then you are kidding yourself. I still say that the media and now governments are guilty of chicken little tactics with this situation. Yeah, need to remember that for news outlets, it's a ratings game. Higher ratings equates to more advertising dollars. If the stories convey more urgency, they're more likely to hold the audience longer. It's the same reason CNN.com runs stories about Brittany Spears and Angelina Jolie. If those are two of the top ten search terms, they're simply losing out on advertising revenue by not including that crap. That's especially true considering mainstream news outlets are going to rank much higher within Internet search results. It's not the flu itself that worries me, it's all of the somewhat unrelated measures that have taken place. Banning US pork products? Overreaction like that just snowballs.
shrader Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 SARS is dangerous because most people infected died. This one can be a big problem. Remember, it spreads exponentially. Modern air travel allows it to spread quickly, but medicine is so nuch advanced we may be able to get a handle on it. Most people? According to the CDC's website, SARS had a 9.6% fatality rate in the US.
DC Tom Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 We went thru this in the late 70's. As I recall it started at Ft.Dix NJ. I got the shot, didn't get sick, but a lot of people got sick and died and it was blamed on the vaccine. A lot of people got sick and died from Guillain-Barre syndrome, not the flu (and "a lot" in that case means "in the context of Guillain-Barre", which is rare to begin with). It was actually one of the most benign flu seasons on record, because of the high vaccination rate. It's also why there's so few vaccine makers in the country anymore. After the 1976 swine flu fiasco, no one wants to take the liability for vaccine production
BuffaloBill Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Yeah, need to remember that for news outlets, it's a ratings game. Higher ratings equates to more advertising dollars. If the stories convey more urgency, they're more likely to hold the audience longer. It's the same reason CNN.com runs stories about Brittany Spears and Angelina Jolie. If those are two of the top ten search terms, they're simply losing out on advertising revenue by not including that crap. That's especially true considering mainstream news outlets are going to rank much higher within Internet search results. It's not the flu itself that worries me, it's all of the somewhat unrelated measures that have taken place. Banning US pork products? Overreaction like that just snowballs. Agreed ... in the age of 24 hour news across multiple delivery channels the need to grab attention is heightened even more. What gets me is the people that act irrationaly as a result. There are too many idiots who will now think that because the have caught the common cold that they will end up dead from what they believe is the swine flu.
TheMadCap Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Agreed ... in the age of 24 hour news across multiple delivery channels the need to grab attention is heightened even more. What gets me is the people that act irrationaly as a result. There are too many idiots who will now think that because the have caught the common cold that they will end up dead from what they believe is the swine flu. As someone who is severely immuno-compromised (due to renal transplantation), I have a rather unique interest in this matter, since it's ususally my kind that die first. As others have pointed out, with the exception of Mexico, we have not seen a massive mortality rate for "healthy" people as of yet. It's still too soon to panic or blow this off as hype, I think we have to wait and see. Personally, until >50% of those healthy people who contract this flu strain start to croak, I'll be underwhelmed by the sensationalism. It could be (lets all hope this is the case) that this flu is just more easy to catch and is transmitted quicker, rather than deadlier than the average yearly flu virus. But that shouldn't stop the Sheeple from trampling each other to buy up the hand sanitizer at CVS: BAAAAHAHHHH!!!!!!!
BillsNYC Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Just got my hair cut from the lady down the block, she said all of her customers (mostly elderly) are canceling because they're afraid of the swine flu, my niece just called and wanted to leave school because of a rumor a kid had it there, my wife doesn't want me to bring our toddler to the playground near a high school, and the shopping district is quiet by me today. People need to CHILL OUT.
erynthered Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Google swine flu map: http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?hl=en&...amp;t=p&z=2
Recommended Posts