Wagging the dog?

[ReBirth 0]

http://www.pandemicflu.gov

Considering the negative publicity the WH has been getting lately. And considering that every expert analysis I've seen says that the gov't is making a bigger issue than needs be with talk of quarantines, travel restrictions and massive deaths....anyone think this is a legitimate issue to worry about?

My inclination is it's being used as a diversionary tactic, and so that later when we aren't keeling over in the streets, they can claim success.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

My inclination is it's being used as a diversionary tactic, and so that later when we aren't keeling over in the streets, they can claim success.

And if they did nothing and people did start keeling over in the streets, then you'd cry about how irresponsible it was of Bush not to be prepared?

[Lindsey 0]

I think it is only a matter of time until we have another flu pandemic. I think it's better for people to have information than not, and I don't see how being proactive could be perceived as a bad thing. Timing may be a fortunate coincidence, but I sure don't see providing information to people as a diversionary tactic of any sort. If providing information were to improve the outcome, then they can claim success legitimately.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[AlexCrowley 0]

I just think people have short memories about every other year's pandemic of the month club. The government only responds based on the publics interest and judging from what I've seen there are some scared people out there.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[ReBirth 0]

I never said they should do nothing, but did you see Bush's speach on the subject? He made it sound like it would be Armageddon and was a foregone conclusion.

Is it a possibility that we need to prepare for? Yes. Is a 20 minute speach of impending doom beneficial to the nation? I don't think so.

[markd_nscr986 0]

I think there is a lot of over-reaction to it.........
both on the governments' part and the publics part.......I am not too concerned about it

Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004

[ReBirth 0]

The biggest thing that worries me about it is Bush stating that he has plans to restrict travel and enforce quarantines with military troops if necessary. I've seen a lot of info saying that any such tactics may delay the spread by a few weeks, but overall, would have virtually no effect on the number or severity of infections.

I went by the Eckerd drug store yesterday and they had a sign up that their yearly flu clinic has been cancelled for ALL of their locations due to "circumstances beyond their control" and that if you wanted more details to contact your state's HHS department. There's no shortage this year, but I've read a lot of articles about crappy distribution systems.

The only effective strategy to containing a pandemic would be to get vaccinations distributed as widely and as quickly as possible. Anything else is so much fluff.

[Mike111 0]

Ditto - very good point.

Same in UK - e.g. Notting Hill

People complained about the lack of police presence, and when they investigated incidents they were accused of harassment.

"make up your fucknig mind" was the general order of the day.

[AlexCrowley 0]

They can vaccinate against strains that dont exist?

Limiting travel is standard procedure. For a recent reference look at the UK's response to Foot and Mouth disease earlier this (last?) year.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

They can vaccinate against strains that dont exist?

No, that's my point. You need an effective distribution system so that when the strain that is spread by people is discovered and a vaccine is developed, it can be distributed quickly and effectively. It appears the current system is ineffective at that for the normal flu vaccine that's been available for months.

Quote

Limiting travel is standard procedure.

I'm aware, and the standard response from experts is that it's mostly ineffective.

[kelpdiver 2]

the Experts(tm) seem to think it's not enough, so I don't see it as a diversion. More of paying lip service to a potentially serious threat. Worst case scenarios involve hundreds of millions dead and a world wide recession.

Personally, I think it's oversold - SARS and Avian flu lead to some pretty spectacular responses for something that killed a few hundred people or less. Meanwhile 45000 die on American roads. But as proven by recent hurricanes - no planning means no fucking clue when the shit really does hit the fan. So it's money well spent. Such planning can also be used for other threats - biological weapons attacks for example.

[ReBirth 0]

good points.

[Lindsey 0]

21 million people died worldwide in the flu pandemic of 1918-1919. 549,000 of those were in the US.

The CDC estimates that 20,000 people die each year of influenza....just your regular ol' flu that most of us have at least some level of immunity against.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[Channman 2]

>...20,000 people die each year of influenza...

Thats 10 time the amount of Americans killed in Iraq, and all in one year. Add the 45,000+ killed in auto accidents, not counting the Drunking Drivers at about 60,000+ and the many thousands more killed by murder, thousands dying from cancer...its just not safe any where.

Life in a Nut Shell, can be cramped and uncomfortable. I feel fluish

[ReBirth 0]

And almost 7 times as many as were killed on 9/11.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

My inclination is it's being used as a diversionary tactic, and so that later when we aren't keeling over in the streets, they can claim success.

This pandemic has been talked about a good bit. You can claim that the speech was to "Wag the Dog" if you like. But the simple fact is that if he had NOT talked about it someone, maybe you, would have claimed he is ignoring a big problem.

People who are that closely watched will get in trouble no matter what they do.

If this pandemic does happen, people will say he didn't do enough. If it does not happen, people will say it was just a diversion.

[ReBirth 0]

I'll tell you what. Don't make claims about what I would do under hypothetical situations and I'll do the same for you, deal?

[EricTheRed 0]

No. When a pandemic hits (it is a matter of when, not if) the world will not be ready.

It may not be H5N1, but we are too close together, and too interconnected for a high lethality, contagious disease to not cull a significant portion of the population.

The current political turmoil only excerbates the situation as people are distracted.

The US MIGHT fare OK in the overall death toll, but once a disease breaks out, there will be little hope for impoverished countries because the wealthy countries will likely ignore them untill their own houses are in order.

I expect that a few 100's of millions dead will be quite possible.

illegible usually

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

If this pandemic does happen, people will say he didn't do enough. If it does not happen, people will say it was just a diversion.

One sentence describes the American presidency (just replace "pandemic" w/ whatever you want).

[kallend 2,113]

Interesting that evolutionary biology predicts the likelihood of a killer mutation, provides guidelines for the kinds of vaccines needed, and Bush responds. Creationism, on the other hand, has nothing whatever to say on the matter and is incapable of predicting anything.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ReBirth 0]

Wow...deep.

[wmw999 2,555]

Quote

Wow...deep

Well, funny

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[ReBirth 0]

Actually..my guess is that Jesus told him to pursue his current policy...not evolutionary biology. That's his loophole and he's sticking to it.

[billvon 3,083]

>One sentence describes the American presidency (just
>replace "pandemic" w/ whatever you want).

Well, it describes roughly a third of the population. There is another third that will praise him for taking action if it happens no matter what the outcome, and praise him for saving money if it doesn't - again, no matter what really happens. (Replace pandemic with anything.)

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

The biggest thing that worries me about it is Bush stating that he has plans to restrict travel and enforce quarantines with military troops if necessary.

Well, it has a 50% mortality rate. I'd say that calls for some damned drastic measures if it gets loose. It could be like the black plague that wiped out millions in Europe.

And you're suggesting that he just not even bother trying to stop it, because it's hopeless?