| | Swine flu: no reason to worry | |
|
|
| Author | Message |
|---|
SteveL

Number of posts: 260 Location: Toronto Registration date: 2008-06-04
 | Subject: Swine flu: no reason to worry Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:34 am | |
| 2009 swine flu outbreak| Quote: | | The strain responsible for the 2009 swine flu outbreak in most cases causes only mild symptoms and the infected person recovers fully in a few days. [Wikipedia, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
| Quote: | | Despite the scale of the alert, the WHO stated on April 29 that the majority of people infected with the virus make a full recovery without the need for medical attention or antiviral drugs. [Wikipedia, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
| Quote: | | Most of the previously reported swine influenza cases recovered fully from the disease without requiring medical attention and without antiviral medicines. [WHO, 27 April 2009, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
| Quote: | | For reasons not yet well understood, all but one of the fatalities to date have been in Mexico. Furthermore, in Mexico (but not elsewhere) the illness has primarily killed young, healthy adults, much like the deadly Spanish Flu of 1918, possibly because of the phenomenon known as cytokine storm. Most other influenza strains produce the worst symptoms in young children, the elderly, and others with weaker immune systems. [Wikipedia, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
1918 Influenza pandemic
| Quote: | | The majority of deaths were from bacterial pneumonia, a secondary infection caused by influenza, but the virus also killed people directly. . . . [Wikipedia, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
". . . a hallmark of the 1918–1919 fall and winter waves" (as compared to the much milder spring wave) was the "rapid progressions [sic] from uncomplicated influenza infections to fatal pneumonia". ["1918 Influenza: the Mother of All Pandemics", Jeffery K. Taubenberger and David M. Morens, CDC]
| Quote: | | In fast-progressing cases, mortality was primarily from pneumonia, by virus-induced consolidation. Slower-progressing cases featured secondary bacterial pneumonias, and there may have been neural involvement that led to mental disorders in a minority of cases. Some deaths resulted from malnourishment and even animal attacks in overwhelmed communities. [Wikipedia, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
| Quote: | | Antibiotics are the treatment of choice for bacterial pneumonia. [Wikipedia, accessed 29 Apr. 2009] |
|
|
 | |
Conrad

Number of posts: 5647 Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands Registration date: 2007-07-21
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:57 pm | |
| Well, it has arrived, in the Netherlands.
some 3 year old punk kid that came from Mexico brought it to Amsterdam 4 days ago. |
|
 | |
T.E.M.
Number of posts: 281 Registration date: 2008-12-04
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:55 am | |
| I guess it's a good time to not be a Mexican! hurrah! |
|
 | |
wilheldp

Number of posts: 191 Registration date: 2007-10-12
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:39 am | |
| I'm heading to El Paso for work early next week. I'm really looking forward to being close to the Jaurez drug wars and the Swine Flu capital of the world. _________________ I philosophize, therefore I evangelize
|
|
 | |
Conrad

Number of posts: 5647 Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands Registration date: 2007-07-21
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:06 am | |
| | wilheldp wrote: | | I'm heading to El Paso for work early next week. I'm really looking forward to being close to the Jaurez drug wars and the Swine Flu capital of the world. |
I wish you well, my son. |
|
 | |
wilheldp

Number of posts: 191 Registration date: 2007-10-12
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:06 am | |
| If I catch the flu down there, I'm just going to require my company to give me extra PTO days since it was their fault I got it in the first place. _________________ I philosophize, therefore I evangelize
|
|
 | |
Conrad

Number of posts: 5647 Location: Amsterdam, the Netherlands Registration date: 2007-07-21
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:42 am | |
| | wilheldp wrote: | | If I catch the flu down there, I'm just going to require my company to give me extra PTO days since it was their fault I got it in the first place. |
good, then you can collect them in hell... |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:03 am | |
| I have a hard time listening to more than about 5 minutes of Alex Jones at a time, but I have found that he gets his facts right as far as I can tell. He had some guy on talking about the 1918 flu epidemic (which killed my grandfather) saying that it was engineered by means of a vacination given to military people of some sort, and spread from there. In other words, the government was trying to create a vaccine and fucked up royally. I have no idea whether or not this is true, and I've never heard it before, but it is an interesting theory to keep your ears open for, for whatever interest value it may have. Another reason to be very suspicious about getting vaccinated, as well.
Supposedly there will be more info on this on InfoWars.com when the info is passed to the right person.
- NonE |
|
 | |
Deep Purple
Number of posts: 147 Registration date: 2008-05-09
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:25 am | |
| My Google-fu turns up no such evidence. Wikipedia talked about the WWI draft process being a possible method of spreading, and that genetic drift might have caused the outbreak to originate in a military base. But the sources I found indicate that there is no concensus on how the disease originated. There were a few people (who weren't scientists) who claimed that vaccines or the government caused the 1918 flu, but it's such a fringe idea without any scientific or primary source documentation that I can't take it seriously. One woman ( here)simply claimed (writing in the 1970s) that only people who got the vaccine came down with the flu. Check out her whole book (available at the link) for a summary of lots of anti-vax quackery. The woman is even worried about our precious bodily fluids being ruined by flouridation. Of course, even a stopped clock is right twice a day, so just because she's nutty in one area doesn't mean she's wrong all around. I just don't find it credible. |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:34 am | |
| | NonEntity wrote: | | I have a hard time listening to more than about 5 minutes of Alex Jones at a time, but I have found that he gets his facts right as far as I can tell. |
The fact that he's such a big believer in "God" goes to show that the guy doesn't even have a basic understanding of things like evidence, proof, rationality, skepticism, scientific inquiry, etc.
He deals in speculation and truth claims (anything that can't be substantiated). If he even applied a moderate amount of rational skepticism to the evaluation of "evidence", his whole life and livelihood would suddenly become pointless. |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:46 am | |
| I don't argue that he deals in speculation, is a fear monger and a god freak, but the actual data that he presents is generally well documented if not common knowledge. On another level, there is an excellent article by Dr. Mercola on the swine flu thing today. I don't buy all of Mercola either, but do consider him well worth reading and considering. - NonE |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:52 am | |
| | NonEntity wrote: | but the actual data that he presents is generally well documented if not common knowledge.
|
Doesn't most of the "documented data" that he deals with more or less represent documented truth claims?
I mean... the Bible was "well documented", but it's all just a bunch of useless truth claims. That seems to be the sort of thing that Jones considers to be "evidence", when all it evidences is a claim of some sort (made by some individual or organization). |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:09 am | |
| I really don't care to argue Alex Jones. I find him obnoxious and bad for anyone's mental health. He DOES point to some things which are factually true however, and this may be one of them. That's all I wanted to say. I've read so much by seemingly credible people on the dangers of vaccines that this bit of information just appeared to me to be worthy of possible further examination as a data point in the vaccine discussion. OKAY??? - NonE |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:25 am | |
| | NonEntity wrote: | | I really don't care to argue Alex Jones. I find him obnoxious and bad for anyone's mental health. |
Well... I think the issue of Alex Jones has relevance to the subject of epistemology, and the question of "how do we know what we know?"
| NonEntity wrote: | | He DOES point to some things which are factually true however, and this may be one of them. |
What we know is that there was a flu epidemic in 1918 and that the outbreak appeared to (or was demonstrated to) have originated in a military base.
If those are the facts, then they are not an issue of dispute. However, the established facts do absolutely nothing to corroborate or legitimize what ever other unsubstantiated claims people make about the epidemic.
So... if someone claims that the epidemic was intentionally "engineered", there is absolutely nothing to substantiate that claim, other than other claims (which are equally unverifiable).
The difference between the "facts" and the "claims", is that the facts were determined through observation of physical events, whereas the claims have no such empirical basis.
This brings us back to the question of how do we know what we know:
Do we "know" something, just because someone said it? Are unsupported claims a valid basis for truth? That is the philisophical issue here (as far as I see it). |
|
 | |
Guest Guest
 | Subject: Re: Swine flu: no reason to worry Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:45 am | |
| Perhaps I should have used a different word than "engineered." I did not mean that a global pandemic was intentionally created. Rather, I meant that perhaps a human designed program created a disaster which would most likely not have occured without the intentional intursion of man into the process of viral evolution and exposure. And on that note, I think I'll defoo from interaction with you on this subject.  - NonE |
|
 | |
| | Swine flu: no reason to worry | |
|