|
Post by PhantomWolf on May 1, 2009 13:09:04 GMT -4
Deter you from what exactly? It puzzles me why you would hitch your wagon to 2 dubious websites and Jones at the exclusion of all other sources of information and post their baloney here of all places. I don't know you but your behavior - from constant links to Jones' show and your recent "I got it too" teaser - is indicative of lame board-baiting, nothing more. Deter me from casting my pearls before ...ummm...swine. I suggest you check again, what you think are paerls apppear to have been dropped by sheep. Some people here don't follow any news, others get it from various sources. The difference between you and us is that we use reputable sources. Then why mention it at all? Jones is a liar and perveyor of enflamatory Conspriacies. He says whatever he can to be anti-Government and contraversial because it gets him ratings and money. His conclusions are wrong because he makes stuff up, twists quotes, and relies on looney CTs as if they are fact, then spreads that FUD to gullible people so he can make himself even more money. If you are willing to continually fall for his tripe, well fine, it's your loss, but don't expect to pedal it here without being challenged on it.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on May 1, 2009 13:38:19 GMT -4
PW, I wish you'd stick to the topic (how serious is this the flu and whether it justifies the reaction of local, state and federal governments).
To all: I don't give a crap whether or not anyone "likes" me. I don't post here to be validated or popular. You're wasting your time if you hope to hurt or intimidate. I don't need your approval, I don't cry, I don't lose sleep, this board is not my life and I will continue to post what I think needs to be examined until I'm banned. Get it?
|
|
Ian Pearse
Mars
Apollo (and space) enthusiast
Posts: 308
|
Post by Ian Pearse on May 1, 2009 13:51:51 GMT -4
I've read the first 2 paragraphs and spotted an error already. The WHO statement said "After all, it really is all of humanity that is under threat during a pandemic." If you read the statement, the context of that quote is a general observation, not specifically related to this particular virus. As such, there's nothing wrong with it that I can see. As far as the rest of it goes.... so what? We all know that the hype from the media tends to blow these things out of proportion, that's how they sell papers. So only 12 people are known to have died from this so far - so what? Governments have to act on the potential, not the actuality, in something like this. As with SARS, Avian Flu, BSE, there is a devestating potential in something like this. You don't sit back, do nothing until the death toll is in 6 figures, then start to move. You look ahead, assess the potential, and start to put together plans that you hope you will never need. Any government that didn't do this would be hounded out at the next opportunity, and they know it. Of course, people like Mr Jones focus on the worst-case scenario and don't bother to think it through, just come out with this alarmist stuff instead. I'll watch the news as it comes in and use my judgement, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on May 1, 2009 14:02:34 GMT -4
Jones cites his sources which can be checked. And when they are and he's shown to be wrong, it bothers you not at all. You still trust him--because he says what you want to hear. We're not talking about who likes you here. We're talking about who thinks your information is at all valid. We're talking about who respects what you have to say. We're talking about your intellectual honesty, or serious lack thereof, not how we feel about you as a person. You may be quite nice. That doesn't help if you're persistently willfully ignorant.
|
|
Ian Pearse
Mars
Apollo (and space) enthusiast
Posts: 308
|
Post by Ian Pearse on May 1, 2009 14:05:51 GMT -4
One thing in that infowars.com article still intrigues me - it mentions the fact that all the Tamiflu doses that the US and UK governments bought up in 2005 and 2006 is approaching the end of it's shelf life... why is that relevant, may I ask?
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on May 1, 2009 14:12:43 GMT -4
One thing in that infowars.com article still intrigues me - it mentions the fact that all the Tamiflu doses that the US and UK governments bought up in 2005 and 2006 is approaching the end of it's shelf life... why is that relevant, may I ask? Good question. In a pandemic, this drug will be more valuable than gold (even though it doesn't work, but most people haven't checked that out). Big pharma isn't going to give it away. They're going to sell it. No panic, no sales.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on May 1, 2009 14:24:16 GMT -4
Jones cites his sources which can be checked. And when they are and he's shown to be wrong, it bothers you not at all. The news information he provides hasn't been proven wrong. It's verifiable. I'm repeating myself here, but I think what people disagree with is what Jones makes of the news--global takeover.
|
|
Ian Pearse
Mars
Apollo (and space) enthusiast
Posts: 308
|
Post by Ian Pearse on May 1, 2009 14:28:28 GMT -4
One thing in that infowars.com article still intrigues me - it mentions the fact that all the Tamiflu doses that the US and UK governments bought up in 2005 and 2006 is approaching the end of it's shelf life... why is that relevant, may I ask? Good question. In a pandemic, this drug will be more valuable than gold (even though it doesn't work, but most people haven't checked that out). Big pharma isn't going to give it away. They're going to sell it. No panic, no sales. Well, I don't know how they do it in the US, but when the UK government buys stocks of drugs for situations like this, it is for use by the NHS at the point of treatment, as and when required. Initial cost is irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on May 1, 2009 14:40:54 GMT -4
Good question. In a pandemic, this drug will be more valuable than gold (even though it doesn't work, but most people haven't checked that out). Big pharma isn't going to give it away. They're going to sell it. No panic, no sales. Well, I don't know how they do it in the US, but when the UK government buys stocks of drugs for situations like this, it is for use by the NHS at the point of treatment, as and when required. Initial cost is irrelevant. I'm not sure what arrangements our government has with the pharmaceutical companies. Flu vaccines are free to us. A drug like Tamiflu is obtained by prescription from the doctor and paid for by the individual at a pharmacy.
|
|
|
Post by archer17 on May 1, 2009 14:43:40 GMT -4
...To all: I don't give a crap whether or not anyone "likes" me. I don't post here to be validated or popular. You're wasting your time if you hope to hurt or intimidate. I don't need your approval, I don't cry, I don't lose sleep, this board is not my life and I will continue to post what I think needs to be examined until I'm banned. Get it? Not really. What you post is not an objective "examination" of the facts, it's simply repeating and linking to what a charlatan says elsewhere. You claim you don't cite "mainstream" sources because you assume we already peruse them but that's not good enough. Any serious examination of this (or any) topic doesn't cherry-pick the information available for any reason. I questioned your motivations because I don't know you, not to court you. To me you are just the sum of the words you type and those words lead me to believe you are board-baiting. I could be wrong, maybe you "just don't get it" or maybe you're Alex Jones himself. (shrugs) That's not my problem. As far as buying into Jones' spiel I don't care if you believe it. My goal here is probably the same as most of the other members, to address bunk when we see it so that those lurkers that aren't up on their news/science/woo can see it for what it is. The fact that you obviously chose to abrogate critical thinking, and are oblivious to it, by deferring to Jones instead of thinking for yourself is a bonus with regard to our non-participating audience. So keep the garbage coming DH, but don't let the attention your link-filled CT-parroting gets from me or others go to your head. It's not really about you, it's about what you type.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on May 1, 2009 14:48:52 GMT -4
Good question. In a pandemic, this drug will be more valuable than gold (even though it doesn't work, but most people haven't checked that out). Big pharma isn't going to give it away. They're going to sell it. No panic, no sales. The monsters!! How dare they try to recoup the costs involved in manufacturing durgs, and then try to invest those profits in new drug research! It's almost as if they expect to be PAID for doing their job!
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on May 1, 2009 14:55:54 GMT -4
Good question. In a pandemic, this drug will be more valuable than gold (even though it doesn't work, but most people haven't checked that out). Big pharma isn't going to give it away. They're going to sell it. No panic, no sales. The monsters!! How dare they try to recoup the costs involved in manufacturing durgs, and then try to invest those profits in new drug research! It's almost as if they expect to be PAID for doing their job! So you're okay with them selling a drug which is known to be ineffective against H1N1?
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on May 1, 2009 15:29:14 GMT -4
The monsters!! How dare they try to recoup the costs involved in manufacturing durgs, and then try to invest those profits in new drug research! It's almost as if they expect to be PAID for doing their job! So you're okay with them selling a drug which is known to be ineffective against H1N1? I have read several statements by public heath and research physicians that contradict this. Do you have a reliable source medical (not Jones) for this claim. Aside form this particular item, Tamiflu is effective against other flu viruses and is sold as such. Have you any information that the manufacturer is making specific claims for H1N1? The company does not sell to individuals but to pharmacies who sell it based on a doctors prescription. If a doctor mis-prescribes the medicine on a basis other than false or misleading information from the manufacturer how is it the companies fault? If the government stockpiles the drug and it is not effective against a new variant, how is that the companies fault? Some clarity here would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on May 1, 2009 15:41:08 GMT -4
One thing in that infowars.com article still intrigues me - it mentions the fact that all the Tamiflu doses that the US and UK governments bought up in 2005 and 2006 is approaching the end of it's shelf life... why is that relevant, may I ask? Good question. In a pandemic, this drug will be more valuable than gold (even though it doesn't work, but most people haven't checked that out). Big pharma isn't going to give it away. They're going to sell it. No panic, no sales. The typical reaction when medicines are in short supply is to impose government rationing, masking the pricing mechanisms that ration most goods. Whether this is a good thing or not is debatable, but it is the more likely scenario, IMO. If Roche could ramp up production it would be justified in raising prices. However all this is likely moot as the flu season is almost over and this is going to play out soon. Flu viruses do not spread well in warm humid environments. Just speculating, but Mexico City may be harder hit because of its higher altitude and cool, drier climate.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on May 1, 2009 15:46:59 GMT -4
The monsters!! How dare they try to recoup the costs involved in manufacturing durgs, and then try to invest those profits in new drug research! It's almost as if they expect to be PAID for doing their job! So you're okay with them selling a drug which is known to be ineffective against H1N1? Times Online disagrees with you: Emphasis mine.
|
|