The Swine Flu Panic Of 2009
From Der Spiegel, on the hysteria over the pandemic that wasn't:
On the WHO Web site, the answer to the question "What is a pandemic?" included mention of "an enormous number of deaths and cases of the disease" -- until May 4, 2009. That was when a CNN reporter pointed out the discrepancy between this description and the generally mild course of the swine flu. The language was promptly removed.Apparently German infectious disease experts also misunderstood the official WHO definition of phase 6. An influenza epidemic, according to Germany's national pandemic plan -- updated in 2007 -- is "a long-lasting, international situation involving substantial loss...and causing such lasting damage as to jeopardize or destroy the livelihood of large numbers of people."
The situation on June 11, 2009 did not correspond with these descriptions. Critics were already asking derisively whether the WHO had any plans to declare the latest outbreak of the common cold a pandemic. "Sometimes some of us think that WHO stands for World Hysteria Organization," says Richard Schabas, the former chief medical officer for Canada's Ontario Province.
My favorite bit of paranoia: "May 4, 2009 The legislature in Germany's western state of Saarland imposes a ban on kissing as a form of greeting"
Martin at April 22, 2010 9:23 AM
Well, tongue-kissing as a form of greeting I can maybe understand.
Amy Alkon at April 22, 2010 9:29 AM
Ya, well I am sure someone made a pretty penny off of all those H1N1 vaccines (shelf life is like what, 12 mo?). WHO - latest creator of new jobs!!!
"That was when a CNN reporter pointed out the discrepancy between this description and the generally mild course of the swine flu. The language was promptly removed."
Wish they were this diligent about the HCR bill.
Feebie at April 22, 2010 1:49 PM
The usual criticism of US health care is "We spend more and get less". This is the position of the WHO, which is more of a political organization than a medical one.
USA Healthcare is First - Infant Mortality is Low
() The U.N. World Health Organization (the WHO) itself ranks the US #1 in care delivery that is important to patients. It issues another ranking at 37th because this quality of care costs more and is not delivered by government. The 37th rank is a political judgment that is not related to the quality of care delivered. That is the ranking that the liberal press always references.
Arguments against the quality of US health care are based on flawed infant mortality and life expectancy statistics, a confusion that the WHO promotes.
() Life expectancy at birth is a bad measure of healthcare quality, because it is exactly the countries with socialized healthcare who do not record premature births and births where the child dies within 24 hours. US hospitals record every birth having a single breath, including malformed and premature births, and the subsequent unavoidable deaths. Each time the US includes such a birth and death, it lowers our life expectancy statistic and raises our infant mortality statistic.
US infant mortality is as low as the best statistics in Europe when comparable cases are considered.
It is almost as if the relevant US government agencies want US healthcare to look bad. I haven't seen any statistics from those agencies that make an adjusted comparison.
Andrew_M_Garland at April 22, 2010 4:20 PM
My best friends here in Mexico are a doctor and his pharmacist wife. He told me in April 2009 the new flu was not going to be a serious problem, that it could be handled easily for those who actually went to the doctor.
irlandes at April 22, 2010 4:54 PM
I think the question you're trying to ask can be explained by the following one-line play:
"Pandemic! Pandemic! We need another three billion dollars!"
Cousin Dave at April 23, 2010 8:21 AM
Leave a comment