Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum

At The Back => Time Out => Topic started by: Afghan Dave on April 29, 2009, 11:09:54 PM

Title: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Afghan Dave on April 29, 2009, 11:09:54 PM
"Step up to Red Alert!" "Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb"..

Well the latest case has just been found in Barnet London, just next to Johnny Mac and myself so we may not be long for this life.  :(

Is it just me or does this appear to be a great chance for drugs companies and there share traders to make money & politicians to bury bad news.

Not a conspiracy but simply a symptom of modern society living in fear.

Keep the public scared of disease / terrorism / paedophiles and keep em quiet.

All we need now is the "perfect storm"

An Islamic paedophile scout leader with swine flu auditioning for Simon Cowell and I'm sure Jesus and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse will be just around the corner.

 PDT_038 PDT_025
 
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Jonny on April 29, 2009, 11:12:19 PM
I really don't know if you're afraid, or not.

Or if you're using humour to hide it or.. I don't know.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Afghan Dave on April 29, 2009, 11:14:37 PM
NOT!

My dear Jonny... though I fear for the big J-MAC..

He is a as we all know, a delicate little flower...
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: MDV on April 29, 2009, 11:16:24 PM
I really genuinely cant believe the fuss people are making.

Repeat after me

"My chances of getting swine flu are less than winning the lottery. If I contract it my chances are still 95% survival, if I only had access to the standard of healthcare found in Mexico. "

Edit - thats not to anyone here.

In fact so far as I can tell its only to those in journalism and politics.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: MDV on April 29, 2009, 11:18:44 PM
Besides, its an incurable 100% lethal hybrid of swine and avian flu thats going to kill us all - the Flying Pig virus.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Afghan Dave on April 29, 2009, 11:20:09 PM
Winning the lottery = Roche manufacturers of Tamiflu.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: MDV on April 29, 2009, 11:25:38 PM
Winning the lottery = Roche manufacturers of Tamiflu.

Quite.

And its something else big and scary the gubberment can protect us from. After, of course, we've been convinced that it is in fact big and scary. Which it isnt.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Jonny on April 29, 2009, 11:37:54 PM
The one who died in the US was only a couple of months old. So I don't think it's a reliable er- thing, to go by.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: gwEm on April 29, 2009, 11:58:00 PM
Or if you're using humour to hide it or..
its this one jonny...
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: HTH AMPS on April 30, 2009, 12:04:57 AM
it's the new 'bird flu'  :roll:
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: JDC on April 30, 2009, 03:34:23 AM
you've got more chance of dying by falling down stairs, but that's common enough to not sell newspapers

it's also cheaper for the media cover pig flu or jade goody than a serious issue, but then the general public are daft enough to get emotionally connected to a talentless celeb they've never met and have no rapport with
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: noodleplugerine on April 30, 2009, 03:37:03 AM
I'm gunna roll around in bacon for a few hours to gain immunity.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: CaptainDesslock on April 30, 2009, 04:53:05 AM
far as I can tell its just another way to sell the paper and cause hysteria, I'm much more afraid of terrorists and car crashes than swine flu
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Adam.M on April 30, 2009, 05:49:54 AM
First birds, now farm animals. What's next, tree flu? wait no best not give them any ideas!
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: hamfist on April 30, 2009, 07:24:23 AM
Glad to see that logic is prevailing here.

It's sometimes frightening to see how the "public" falls so easily for the media's scare tactics.

And it is the media. I think the govt. is basically just responding in a "reasonable" way - which is usually as "belt and braces" as they can be in these sort of situations. It's the media that hypes it up out of all proportion by never publishing or broadcasting any of the many rational voices out there which are saying "hang on a minute, this isn't really so bad".
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: WezV on April 30, 2009, 07:30:50 AM
i am getting really miffed with the reporting on it

here is a nice map from the BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8021547.stm

currently we have 7 confirmed deaths from swine flu in mexico - that was 20 yesterday.

watch any other news channel and its more like 150-170 deaths from swine flu.  just swapping words like 'suspected' or 'confirmed' around to create a panic


Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Adam.M on April 30, 2009, 07:45:01 AM
Glad to see that logic is prevailing here.

It's sometimes frightening to see how the "public" falls so easily for the media's scare tactics.

And it is the media. I think the govt. is basically just responding in a "reasonable" way - which is usually as "belt and braces" as they can be in these sort of situations. It's the media that hypes it up out of all proportion by never publishing or broadcasting any of the many rational voices out there which are saying "hang on a minute, this isn't really so bad".

There was someone interviewing people coming back from Mexico yesterday and there was one fella, when asked if they are doing enough to stop it coming here he said they definitely were and i swear the silence felt like a whole minuite. The reporter clearly wasn't expecting someone to be rational on TV!
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Will on April 30, 2009, 07:45:15 AM
First birds, now farm animals. What's next, tree flu? wait no best not give them any ideas!

Birds are farm aminals :?
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: hamfist on April 30, 2009, 12:40:19 PM
First birds, now farm animals. What's next, tree flu? wait no best not give them any ideas!

Birds are farm aminals :?

The ones who drink down my local certainly are !
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Will on April 30, 2009, 12:46:34 PM
What I meant was: I had to have a flu jab last autumn as they were afraid of human flu mixing with bird flu and going nuts (kind of what swine flu is doing?). I think DEFRA sent out lots of letters to people that work closely with birds to send them for flu jab. Its a shame really, have had to keep all our ducks, geese, and chickens inside which isn't ideal for them.

DEFRA itself should be able to put its usual restrictions down on movement, as long as the PM doesn't get involved and decide he knows better (eg.Foot and Mouth crisis).

Farming rant over :D
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: ailean on April 30, 2009, 12:56:32 PM
The governmant can't win in a situation like this. If they react quickly and on a large scale then they contain a dangerous situation, so there is no 'pandemic' and then get accused of over reacting and wasting money. If they fail to contain it and thousands catch it, and lots of people die, then they should have done more.

While I agree the risk to the public is remote, if this sort of thing isn't brought to the public awareness then people will just assume they have a cold, spread it around, and then by the time everyone is aware you have potentially hundreds of cases and a very hard job to contain it.

If it is highly contaigous then it should be treated as such, something like this gets loose in a hospital? Not good.

I remember a few years ago, 1 person at work caught the Norovirus (stomach bug). Within a week a third of the company was off sick with it. Thats in a population of about 400 at the time. Now even if that had a mortaility rate of 1% (it's non leathal) then chances are 1 or 2 people would have died from that 1 index case.

Yes the media overplay these things (they overplay EVERYTHING), but it should be taken seriously.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Elliot on April 30, 2009, 01:10:13 PM
In 28 days time few of you will be here and those that are will be zombies coming out at night looking for rats to eat.... :D
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Jonny on April 30, 2009, 02:13:41 PM
The governmant can't win in a situation like this. If they react quickly and on a large scale then they contain a dangerous situation, so there is no 'pandemic' and then get accused of over reacting and wasting money. If they fail to contain it and thousands catch it, and lots of people die, then they should have done more.
The government's our little bitch, so to speak but that's being ignorant and not looking at what good they have done. It's a simple matter of it being easier to criticise than compliment.

While I agree the risk to the public is remote, if this sort of thing isn't brought to the public awareness then people will just assume they have a cold, spread it around, and then by the time everyone is aware you have potentially hundreds of cases and a very hard job to contain it.

If it is highly contaigous then it should be treated as such, something like this gets loose in a hospital? Not good.
Surely it'll be the other way around- there will be panic if someone sneezes and they'll all be like OMG SWINE FLU- GTF AWAY FROM ME! AGGGGGGGGHHHHH WE'RE ALL GONNA DIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE!

And probably half the time people think they have it or think they are getting it, they don't.

I remember a few years ago, 1 person at work caught the Norovirus (stomach bug). Within a week a third of the company was off sick with it. Thats in a population of about 400 at the time. Now even if that had a mortaility rate of 1% (it's non leathal) then chances are 1 or 2 people would have died from that 1 index case.

Yes the media overplay these things (they overplay EVERYTHING), but it should be taken seriously.
As above.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Denim n Leather on April 30, 2009, 02:32:22 PM
A lot of questions are answered here:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/30/ep.swine.flu.questions.answers/index.html
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Roobubba on April 30, 2009, 04:19:13 PM
Far be it from me to stand up for Pharmaceutical companies, but I would like to point out that the amount of money it costs to discover and develop a marketable drug is mind-blowingly huge. It typically takes 10 years from the start of a programme to a successful drug making it to the clinic, and there are SO many more drugs which fail to make it to the clinic than those which are successfully marketed.
A lot of people have apparently got a big beef with Big Pharma, but I for one believe that view if often unfounded and third-party in nature.
Now, I'm not going to try to defend the decisions Pharma companies make on what targets they decide to go for - especially when antibacterials are so neglected at large (I speak as a scientist who did a PhD with an antibacterial drug discovery theme who has since moved to a leading cancer research institution, so perhaps I'm being a little hypocritical in saying this!), but ultimately the money that Pharma makes from successful drugs is ploughed back in to new projects working on new therapeutic areas which - almost by definition - help people!

Rant over.

Now, back on topic... Swine 'flu - yeah whatever. This is not 'the one'. It will come, an influenza strain of similar virulence and pathogenicity as the 1914 'flu, but this is not it.

Roo
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Jonny on April 30, 2009, 04:25:56 PM
Quote from: CNN.com
"11. Could this new swine flu virus have been manufactured by bioterrorists?"
I actually smiled.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: MrBump on April 30, 2009, 05:44:38 PM
There was a good one in the paper yesterday, something along the lines of:

"When bird flu came out I wasn't worried, given that I'm a bloke.  Now I'm shiteting myself, given that I'm something of a male chauvinist pig..."

Mark.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: ailean on April 30, 2009, 07:20:53 PM
Surely it'll be the other way around- there will be panic if someone sneezes and they'll all be like OMG SWINE FLU- GTF AWAY FROM ME! AGGGGGGGGHHHHH WE'RE ALL GONNA DIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE!

And probably half the time people think they have it or think they are getting it, they don't.

Oh yeah, I'm not saying that isn't going to happen, my point was that if you down play this sort of thing, and everyone takes the attitude that they are fine, then it can quickly become a problem.

This is the sort of thing I actually don't mind people over reacting to. Better that than the alternative.

Roo's right this isn't 'the big one', but I read today that London's worst case scenario is 94,000 deaths. Even if the odds are small, that's still a scary number.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Johnny Mac on April 30, 2009, 09:45:43 PM
NOT!

My dear Jonny... though I fear for the big J-MAC..

He is a as we all know, a delicate little flower...

He is, 2nd week back at work from the steel door tear up and i got a cold yesterday and now feel like cr@p! Is it or isn't it swine flu  :lol:? Well if the Koch jokes stop then send round the government quarantine swat team to suppress the viral threat!
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Muttley on May 01, 2009, 12:04:29 AM
I phoned the Swine Flu hotline earlier, but all I got was crackling.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: gingataff on May 01, 2009, 01:19:49 AM
I phoned the Swine Flu hotline earlier, but all I got was crackling.


PDT_038
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: CaptainDesslock on May 01, 2009, 03:32:03 AM
i just think the silly thing is its relevant danger, here in the states, one person has died of swine flu, not that I am trying to sound cold or callous, but between now and then probably a hundred people have died from a car crash, lung cancer, homicide, and the like; like its been said I'm much more scared of a car crash than swine flu.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: MDV on May 01, 2009, 10:24:00 AM
In the time between captain desslocks post and mine approximately 1200 people died of malaria.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: psy on May 01, 2009, 10:51:24 AM
I phoned the Swine Flu hotline earlier, but all I got was crackling.
*rim shot* :mrgreen:
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: CaptainDesslock on May 01, 2009, 02:29:34 PM
In the time between captain desslocks post and mine approximately 1200 people died of malaria.

THEN STOP POSTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: ToneMonkey on May 01, 2009, 02:34:40 PM
I phoned the Swine Flu hotline earlier, but all I got was crackling.
*rim shot* :mrgreen:


Whatyou do in your private life is no concern of ours  :lol:

I must have told about three people that joke after I red it on here.
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Elliot on May 01, 2009, 03:14:53 PM
I feel sorry for pigs - they get  blamed for everything and then they end up as bacon
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: JDC on May 01, 2009, 05:17:17 PM
if swine flu was going kill us all at least it would then fix the over population problem no ones talking about

if we cut the world population in half, maybe bio fuels would be economically possible without sending food prices through the roof, and so the human race would have sustainability
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: WezV on May 01, 2009, 05:24:09 PM
if we cut the world population in half, maybe bio fuels would be economically possible without sending food prices through the roof, and so the human race would have sustainability

are you volunteering to go first! :P

Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: blue on May 01, 2009, 05:29:49 PM
moral dilemma, isn't it? yes, the world population has gotten too big, and keeps growing.  but how do you control it ethically?  maybe something like bird flu or sars or whatever is nature's way of balancing population.

maybe we should draw straws?

russian roulette?  live on tv?  make Simon Cowell go first? :D
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Will on May 01, 2009, 06:28:12 PM
Get swine flu to Luton, that will do some good.

JDC: Food costs are so high due to fertiliser costs being so high, which I think is in relation to oil prices being high.

There was also a govt idea to use Oilseed rape as a biofuel, my Father went to a conference. Nobody was interested...
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: JDC on May 01, 2009, 07:45:06 PM
Get swine flu to Luton, that will do some good.

JDC: Food costs are so high due to fertiliser costs being so high, which I think is in relation to oil prices being high.

There was also a govt idea to use Oilseed rape as a biofuel, my Father went to a conference. Nobody was interested...

I forgot about the oil price and fertiliser relation but oil was $50 to $60 a barrel last time I checked, not the $150 it was a few months back

from what I've seen of bio fuel, the next generation of the stuff will be much better (in theory) as it uses the waste from food sources and so it will have less impact on the amount of land needed for growth

but your right the general public isn't interested, as they don't see how it affects their lives and so they don't worry about sustainability

the way I see it, the earth is limited resource, a very big one, but limited none the less, therefore as we run out of oil the price will go up but renewable sources of energy will be more economically viable

another way that might cure over population is to get everyone out of poverty as richer families have less children, but if you cure poverty you also slow down economic growth because people don't try as hard since the minimum standard of living will be comfortable and no government will want a slow down in economic growth

whoops I've gone off on a bit of a rant, and without some data to back up my opinions it's worth a pinch of salt :)
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: MrBump on May 02, 2009, 11:04:49 AM
maybe something like bird flu or sars or whatever is nature's way of balancing population.

Ahhh.  Something rings true there...  Nature tends to find away... it's been around longer than us...
Title: Re: SWINE FLU?
Post by: Darbyjack on May 06, 2009, 12:07:08 AM
ZOMG SWINE FLU WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!11