Incidentally, **** you, Jenny McCarthy. That is all.

[MikeH]

Only when it's a more dangerous strain than normal like bird flu or swine flu.

Panic would not be raised if it wasn't for irresponsible and ill informed reporting.

[MikeH]

Your source appears to be the WHO themselves...

"Who us? Nah, we got it right."

You said they were scaremongering but you are yet to produce any evidence that they did so.

[MikeH]

At the moment I can't find what they said and you haven't given me the figures to compare with what happened, so I can't make a judgement about whether they did or not. I'm just going by my memory, which is likely faulty, same as you.

[Wezil]

You said they were scaremongering but you are yet to produce any evidence that they did so.

I did actually. The column I posted. Not a primary source but still the best evidence in the thread.

I think we both agree panic was raised the only contention seems to be how far off the WHO was in their estimates.

[MikeH]

And you think that it was unjustified, I think "better safe than sorry" is a good mantra when pandemics are concerned.

[Elok]

Did you know that scientists say antimatter is bad, but thunderstorms are okay?

Pardon my ignorance, but what does the one have to do with the other? Does lightning somehow generate antimatter or something?

[Wezil]

Mike -

You have to persuade people to take precautions. The more credibility you have the easier it is to do this. The WHO and assorted national health services lost huge amounts of credibility with the events of the last year. They have made it harder on themselves to fulfill their stated goals in the future as a result.

Of course it is better to be safe than sorry but human beings don't always behave in rational ways. They behave like humans.

[Asher]

Pardon my ignorance, but what does the one have to do with the other? Does lightning somehow generate antimatter or something?

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/antimatter-lightning/

[Elok]

Ah. Danke.

[MikeH]

Mike -

You have to persuade people to take precautions. The more credibility you have the easier it is to do this. The WHO and assorted national health services lost huge amounts of credibility with the events of the last year. They have made it harder on themselves to fulfill their stated goals in the future as a result.

Of course it is better to be safe than sorry but human beings don't always behave in rational ways. They behave like humans.

It's sad that they lost credibility, especially as I think the media and politicians are to blame, much more than the WHO and health services.

[Wezil]

I took a look for the sources of the numbers but couldn't find anything better than second hand stuff.

That said, the BMJ would seem to agree with my position.

Also of note was the considerable amount on the vaccine scandal. Why is it the UN and everything connected to it is so corrupt?

[MikeH]

Fair enough then.

BMJ is good enough for me.

[Wezil]

I don't know if that was sarcasm or not. I'm admittedly not enough of a science/tech guy to judge the qualifications of the BMJ.

[MikeH]

No, I wasn't being sarcastic.

[MikeH]

I still wasn't with that last post either.