Recent Flu Outbreak

BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
0Complications said:
This sure would be a convenient way to stir up the masses into consenting to some type of radical health care reform that wouldn't have any hope in hell of passing without "imminent danger".

Let's see if this makes sense... Avg flu deaths annually ~36,000 in the United States. Morbidity rate of the swine flu... ~160 all of which are assumed to have not sought treatment and 0 of which are in the United States.


http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/pressrel/r030107.htm


Sounds a little like someone in charge is drumming up the population and getting us ripe for some new political change. My prediction is that within the next 2 months we're going to hear about some radical proposition by the new Obama administration and assuming the "Swine Flu" has the desired affect on causing hysteria and pandemonium, it will most likely pass.
Click to expand...

Really? The card you're going to play here is that Obama is using swine flu as a cover for passing massive health care reform? What does swine flu have to do with insurance coverage/rising cost of healthcare (which is what the whole medicare/medicaid thing is about)? What's Obama going to say? "My fellow Americans, if we pass my health care plan, no one will ever be sick again, and disease will disappear from the face of the earth."? Get real.

Fundamentally, it's a public health issue, not really a question of medical care. You can treat as many sick people as you like, but if you don't stop the pandemic the bodies will start to pile up and your hospitals will get overcrowded. As is stands, we are confronted with an unknown, novel strain of the flu (subtype H1N1). It has the potential to be very bad indeed (total deaths from Hong Kong flu, which was the same subtype and had a similar presentation, were 700,000 back in 1968, and predicted deaths for swine flu assuming worst case scenario reach 7 million.) Also, of 26 confirmed cases in Mexico, 7 have died, giving you a mortality rate close to 25% (btw, mortality rate=people who die from a given disease per 1000 population or people dead/people infected, morbidity rate=people infected with a given disease per 1,000 population. Correct terminology goes a long way). That's huge. Obviously more figures are needed, and while I highly doubt that the final mortality rate will be anywhere close to that (I would think that between 0.1% and 1.0% would be more realistic if it does reach pandemic levels), it makes sense to shut down schools and public spaces as a precautionary measure.

To answer your first point, the current flu strains kill 36,000 per year, but mostly the very young, very old, and the immunocompromised, whereas swine flu has killed young, healthy people (biphasic mortality curve, same as 1918 pandemic), indicating that the H and N antigens are indeed novel. Again, worst case scenario, we will have a lot more than 36,000 deaths from the flu this year. Your argument boils down to "Currently the flu is a big problem, so why should we care if it turns into a bigger problem?"

Panic is certainly not the solution, but this is certainly a case where an ounce of prevention can go a long way - if we get a pandemic (and the WHO just kicked it up to a Level 4 pandemic threat, btw) then public health measures and playing the situation conservatively could help a lot. If they (CDC and WHO) are wrong, it's SARS all over again (but SARS was never as contagious anyway, so horrible analogy) and no-one dies. If they're right, less people die. If they don't do anything, lots of people could die. Seems like the first two options end up better than the third.

As for my opinion, I think that it won't be as severe as predicted (certainly not another 1918), but that it will be fairly major (certainly not another SARS). Right now there's really just not enough data to say anything meaningful, but jumping to the conclusion that Obama will use this to revamp the American health care system is just paranoid.
 
Last edited:
Wiingy said:
Really? The card you're going to play here is that Obama is using swine flu as a cover for passing massive health care reform? What does swine flu have to do with insurance coverage/rising cost of healthcare (which is what the whole medicare/medicaid thing is about)? What's Obama going to say? "My fellow Americans, if we pass my health care plan, no one will ever be sick again, and disease will disappear from the face of the earth."? Get real.

Fundamentally, it's a public health issue, not really a question of medical care. You can treat as many sick people as you like, but if you don't stop the pandemic the bodies will start to pile up and your hospitals will get overcrowded. As is stands, we are confronted with an unknown, novel strain of the flu (subtype H1N1). It has the potential to be very bad indeed (total deaths from Hong Kong flu, which was the same subtype and had a similar presentation, were 700,000 back in 1968, and predicted deaths for swine flu assuming worst case scenario reach 7 million.) Also, of 26 confirmed cases in Mexico, 7 have died, giving you a mortality rate close to 25% (btw, mortality rate=people who die from a given disease per 1000 population or people dead/people infected, morbidity rate=people infected with a given disease per 1,000 population. Correct terminology goes a long way). That's huge. Obviously more figures are needed, and while I highly doubt that the final mortality rate will be anywhere close to that (I would think that between 0.1% and 1.0% would be more realistic if it does reach pandemic levels), it makes sense to shut down schools and public spaces as a precautionary measure.

To answer your first point, the current flu strains kill 36,000 per year, but mostly the very young, very old, and the immunocompromised, whereas swine flu has killed young, healthy people (biphasic mortality curve, same as 1918 pandemic), indicating that the H and N antigens are indeed novel. Again, worst case scenario, we will have a lot more than 36,000 deaths from the flu this year. Your argument boils down to "Currently the flu is a big problem, so why should we care if it turns into a bigger problem?"

Panic is certainly not the solution, but this is certainly a case where an ounce of prevention can go a long way - if we get a pandemic (and the WHO just kicked it up to a Level 4 pandemic threat, btw) then public health measures and playing the situation conservatively could help a lot. If they (CDC and WHO) are wrong, it's SARS all over again (but SARS was never as contagious anyway, so horrible analogy) and no-one dies. If they're right, less people die. If they don't do anything, lots of people could die. Seems like the first two options end up better than the third.

As for my opinion, I think that it won't be as severe as predicted (certainly not another 1918), but that it will be fairly major (certainly not another SARS). Right now there's really just not enough data to say anything meaningful, but jumping to the conclusion that Obama will use this to revamp the American health care system is just paranoid.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with a lot of what you're saying. My point is simply that the swine flu is not warranting the concern, in my eyes, that it is getting. I am aware of the infection rates, the typical individuals of infection and mortality of the flu. I am simply trying to elucidate that even though the swine flu has infected 20 healthy young adults in the US it has not killed any of them. To even compare the swine flu with the 1918 flu is asinine. Those 20 individuals would most likely be dead by now if this swine flu were anywhere near as virulent as the 1918 flu pandemic.

As far as your illustration of my point, "why should we care?" that was not my point. Feel free to reread my post if you would like, but I was simply making a statement that government tends to use fear states to help propagate it's agenda. Whether you like it or not, this occurs. If you have some interest in reading about it you can get some great info by looking up terror management theory and related social psych theories dealing with government policies and the effects of the masses recently made aware of their own mortality.

I'm not saying the government is going to pimp one policy over the other, I'm simply saying that it seems a lot like propaganda to push something, whatever that may be.

But as you have stated, we'll know sooner rather than later.
 
According to AP:

"The number of confirmed cases in the United States was raised to 64, but states and cities were reporting more suspected cases. In New York, the city's health commissioner said "many hundreds" of schoolchildren were ill at a school where some students had confirmed cases.

President Barack Obama asked Congress for $1.5 billion in emergency funds to fight the fast-spreading disease.

But Richard Besser, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said in Atlanta: "I fully expect we will see deaths from this infection.

That was echoed by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. "It is very likely that we will see more serious presentations of illness and some deaths as we go through this flu cycle," she said.


But for all the government intervention, health officials around the world suggested the flu virus strain was spreading so fast that efforts to contain it might prove ineffective."

:scared:.
 
64A7B535-FBB2-48D6-816A-08F3D1E30CB2.jpg
 
roughly 60% of the worlds population lives in developing nations... most of which you cannot even get access to aspirin let alone a flu shot... what happens when a flu strain, of a noticeably higher mortality rate than the common flu, spreads without control in these nations??? it took many years to eradicate small pox... and the WHO is almost 20 years past its originally intended goal of eradicating polio... it is easy to sit back and say this swine flu isnt a problem when you drive a hummer to work and toast the sunset with bourbon... when will you people learn that it is NEVER about you!!!!! you are not that important...
 
DoktorB said:
A better government system?? lol. I just got back from a 2 month trip over there.. it has historically been one of the most corrupt governments in the world. They are currently under partial military martial law with a tactical force called the RAB that can do anything they want when they want to. They are fighting crime and corruiption for now, but there is nothing governing their actions at all. Yes they have kept out terrorists and reduced drug trafficking etc.., but at the expense of a rediculously fluid and immature government that really has no centralized leadership. They have the 7th largest population in the world (1/2 the US pop), and if you have seen the size of Bangladesh on a map lately you will realize how unbelievably cramped that is. Poorest place I have ever seen. Hands down. Mexico looks like the Ritz Carlton compared to Bangladesh. Take a look at the GDP's. They don't even compare.
Click to expand...

lol, im not saying they are not a third world country... I'm simply saying that there are aspects of the country which are better than that of mexico's...
and as u mentioned, there many more mexican qualities that are better than bangladesh's...

im just saying, that given the conditions of the country, probably one of the worst geographical location to be in and as u mentioned - the crazy pop. size, they're not the worst of the third world countries... imho.
 
NotAndrew said:
My friend is from Bangladesh, he is also gay, he's afraid to go back because they stone gays. Sounds pretty awful if you ask me.
Click to expand...

ummmm... who r u to judge their culture...? thats how the country has functioned in the last 5 decades or so..

look at what has happened after the "gay" revolution in the last 3 decades... due to the "first- world countries"

more and more people are coming out to be gay or bisexual..

but it may also be a good thing... cuz if gays don't have kids and adopt children - one less suffering child imo... also, that keeps the pop. growth in check..
 
vickpick said:
ummmm... who r u to judge their culture...? thats how the country has functioned in the last 5 decades or so..

look at what has happened after the "gay" revolution in the last 3 decades... due to the "first- world countries"

more and more people are coming out to be gay or bisexual..

but it may also be a good thing... cuz if gays don't have kids and adopt children - one less suffering child imo... also, that keeps the pop. growth in check..
Click to expand...

Holy hell, you're a monstrous bigot, unless I'm reading your post wrong. Are you saying it's good that homosexuals can't adopt or have children?

Just curious, do you keep wet wipes with you at all times in case someone gets "the gay" on you?
 
TMP-SMX said:
I read that as they don't have children, but they do adopt and therefore there is one less suffering child in foster care. Maybe I'm wrong though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I read it both ways...it's sort of hard to decipher without punctuation, sentences, or whole words...
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
Holy hell, you're a monstrous bigot, unless I'm reading your post wrong. Are you saying it's good that homosexuals can't adopt or have children?
Just curious, do you keep wet wipes with you at all times in case someone gets "the gay" on you?
Click to expand...

90% sure thats not what he's saying. Actually make that 99%.

They can adopt, thus lessening the population growth.
 
vickpick said:
ummmm... who r u to judge their culture...? thats how the country has functioned in the last 5 decades or so..

look at what has happened after the "gay" revolution in the last 3 decades... due to the "first- world countries"

more and more people are coming out to be gay or bisexual..

but it may also be a good thing... cuz if gays don't have kids and adopt children - one less suffering child imo... also, that keeps the pop. growth in check..
Click to expand...

So many things wrong with this post. 1. You're saying it's ok to stone gays as long as it has been happening for a really long time? 2. What does the part in bold even mean? 3. The last part is also just silly. 4. If calling Mexico a ****hole gets a warning than this post needs to be a perma ban with no questions asked.
 
Wiingy said:
Fundamentally, it's a public health issue, not really a question of medical care. You can treat as many sick people as you like, but if you don't stop the pandemic the bodies will start to pile up and your hospitals will get overcrowded. As is stands, we are confronted with an unknown, novel strain of the flu (subtype H1N1). It has the potential to be very bad indeed (total deaths from Hong Kong flu, which was the same subtype and had a similar presentation, were 700,000 back in 1968, and predicted deaths for swine flu assuming worst case scenario reach 7 million.) Also, of 26 confirmed cases in Mexico, 7 have died, giving you a mortality rate close to 25% (btw, mortality rate=people who die from a given disease per 1000 population or people dead/people infected, morbidity rate=people infected with a given disease per 1,000 population. Correct terminology goes a long way). That's huge. Obviously more figures are needed, and while I highly doubt that the final mortality rate will be anywhere close to that (I would think that between 0.1% and 1.0% would be more realistic if it does reach pandemic levels), it makes sense to shut down schools and public spaces as a precautionary measure.
Click to expand...

I think the latest figures from mexico show a 7% mortality of infections that are recognized in the hospital. It's certainly lower than that because does not include ppl who have flu-like symptoms and don't get the disease. But I still think it'll be greater than 1% mortality for hospital patients because of the mechanism. It's the body's response that seems to be responsible for the deaths and not the infection itself. Makes treating it a bit trickier than just supportive measures. Though it's still not clear why we're not seeing ARDS here like they are in Mexico
 
0Complications said:
I don't disagree with a lot of what you're saying. My point is simply that the swine flu is not warranting the concern, in my eyes, that it is getting. I am aware of the infection rates, the typical individuals of infection and mortality of the flu. I am simply trying to elucidate that even though the swine flu has infected 20 healthy young adults in the US it has not killed any of them. To even compare the swine flu with the 1918 flu is asinine. Those 20 individuals would most likely be dead by now if this swine flu were anywhere near as virulent as the 1918 flu pandemic.

As far as your illustration of my point, "why should we care?" that was not my point. Feel free to reread my post if you would like, but I was simply making a statement that government tends to use fear states to help propagate it's agenda. Whether you like it or not, this occurs. If you have some interest in reading about it you can get some great info by looking up terror management theory and related social psych theories dealing with government policies and the effects of the masses recently made aware of their own mortality.

I'm not saying the government is going to pimp one policy over the other, I'm simply saying that it seems a lot like propaganda to push something, whatever that may be.

But as you have stated, we'll know sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

Ah, very sorry to have jumped down your throat then - it seems that I read too far into your post and thought that you were trying to stir up panic about an unrelated topic (it was fairly late when I wrote that and I wasn't in the greatest mood). Governments do use panic to push their agenda - but in this case I don't see how swine flu could lead to a push for health care reform (I may of course be overestimating the average intelligence of voters, but I like to think that deep down we're all at least semi-rational). I'll also admit to misreading your statement which I interpreted as "Why should we care?"

I would disagree that all of the attention that swine flu is getting is propaganda, in that this information might help to save lives, i.e., the government is propagating the information to protect the populace, not to position themselves as a savior. I'd be interested for any reading you can recommend on the topic - my library is not so big on that subject.

Let me reiterate that I do not think that this pandemic will be anywhere near as bad as 1918 - I just brought that up for historical example, esp. in terms of the biphasic death curve (I had also wanted to mention cytokine storm response but for some reason I left that out). However, if this outbreak were as bad as 1918, then only about 5 people of the 20 you mentioned (total number of American cases is now at 64) would be dead (2.5-5.0% mortality rate for 1918 strain). Again, 1918 is not a real possibility, but 1968 is.
 
Rendar5 said:
I think the latest figures from mexico show a 7% mortality of infections that are recognized in the hospital. It's certainly lower than that because does not include ppl who have flu-like symptoms and don't get the disease. But I still think it'll be greater than 1% mortality for hospital patients because of the mechanism. It's the body's response that seems to be responsible for the deaths and not the infection itself. Makes treating it a bit trickier than just supportive measures. Though it's still not clear why we're not seeing ARDS here like they are in Mexico
Click to expand...

The latest numbers I've seen were in last night's WHO update (http://www.who.int/csr/don/2009_04_28/en/index.html), which is where I took the 26/7 from. They may well have changed, but I completely agree with you that we're seeing a sampling bias here - not everyone with flu symptoms is going to get checked out for swine flu, so it's highly likely that we're missing a lot of the milder cases.

Regarding the cytokine storm response, from what I've read there's really not enough evidence to prove or disprove that theory at this time. It's certainly possible, and one very interesting theory on that that I found (my GoogleFu is weak today) relates to higher auto-immune problems in certain indigenous Mexican tribes caused by Type II Diabetes and other genetic factors, which is thought to maybe account for the regional occurence of cytokine-storm like symptoms. ARDS might also be a rare effect of the disease that we're not seeing in the US (yet) due to a low sample size.
 
More real news: 5 European countries (UK, Spain, Portugal, Austria, and Germany) now have confirmed cases. At this point, it looks like a worldwide distribution of the disease is getting more and more likely.
 
I know we're seeing a lot of flu prescriptions coming into the pharmacy. Doctors down in the Rio Grande valley are running out of TamiFlu and surgical masks, so we're being bombarded with their scouts.

When the news was still breaking about the flu, I figured it was just another "avian flu." (It was real, just not here). A woman asked where she could find face masks if we were out in First Aid. I had a brain fart and said "Hardware or Home Depot." :laugh:
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
Holy hell, you're a monstrous bigot, unless I'm reading your post wrong. Are you saying it's good that homosexuals can't adopt or have children?

Just curious, do you keep wet wipes with you at all times in case someone gets "the gay" on you?
Click to expand...

i was saying its a good thing they can adopt a child 😎
 
According to AP:

"A 23-month-old toddler in Texas became the first confirmed swine flu death outside of Mexico as authorities around the world struggled to contain a growing global health menace that has also swept Germany onto the roster of afflicted nations. Officials say the death was in Houston.

Kathy Barton, a spokeswoman for the Houston Health and Human Services Department, said Wednesday that the child had traveled with family from Mexico to Brownsville in South Texas. The child became ill in Brownsville and was taken to a Houston hospital and died Monday night, she said."
 
NotAndrew said:
So many things wrong with this post. 1. You're saying it's ok to stone gays as long as it has been happening for a really long time? 2. What does the part in bold even mean? 3. The last part is also just silly. 4. If calling Mexico a ****hole gets a warning than this post needs to be a perma ban with no questions asked.
Click to expand...

i didn't say its okay to stone gays. I was just respecting their culture. On the other hand, you were disrespecting a whole nation - culture and all. Unless you are living in a trailer, you should wonder who built ur house or apartment.

Also, there is such a high number of mexican illegal immigrants due to the NAFTA which basically lead to mexican farmers getting paid less for their food. NAFTA was proposed by the US. So, how does that make Mexico an *******? Please get your facts straight. Also, you said that the last part of my post was silly. Dude - I was just saying that in some ways I think the presence of homosexuality is good as its helpful in keeping the high pop. growth rates in check.

From your post, I suspect you are a homosexual - who is just fed up with the world and just won't ever adopt a child because thats just not how you roll. Lol.
 
BlueElmo said:
According to AP:

"A 23-month-old toddler in Texas became the first confirmed swine flu death outside of Mexico as authorities around the world struggled to contain a growing global health menace that has also swept Germany onto the roster of afflicted nations. Officials say the death was in Houston.

Kathy Barton, a spokeswoman for the Houston Health and Human Services Department, said Wednesday that the child had traveled with family from Mexico to Brownsville in South Texas. The child became ill in Brownsville and was taken to a Houston hospital and died Monday night, she said."
Click to expand...

So was the child from Mexico who became ill and died in Texas or was he/she from Texas who took a trip to Mexico and later died in Texas? A death in the US is certainly reason for concern, however the USA is still 66 for 67.
 
NotAndrew said:
So was the child from Mexico who became ill and died in Texas or was he/she from Texas who took a trip to Mexico and later died in Texas? A death in the US is certainly reason for concern, however the USA is still 66 for 67.
Click to expand...

I believe your latter statement is true. You can check out the NY Times or CNN.
 
vickpick: i didn't say its okay to stone gays. I was just respecting their culture.


@ everybody: Sorry I know this is waaay of topic.


Ahh the Bangla/Bangladeshi culture:
Which gave birth to such wonderful things as-
The Rabindrasangeet
Delicious fish curries
The Bengal Renaissance
And of course, stoning gays to death (because of course this is an unquestionable part of THE monolithic bangla culture)
all equal and valid
 
Last edited:
BlueElmo said:
According to AP:

"A 23-month-old toddler in Texas became the first confirmed swine flu death outside of Mexico as authorities around the world struggled to contain a growing global health menace that has also swept Germany onto the roster of afflicted nations. Officials say the death was in Houston.

Kathy Barton, a spokeswoman for the Houston Health and Human Services Department, said Wednesday that the child had traveled with family from Mexico to Brownsville in South Texas. The child became ill in Brownsville and was taken to a Houston hospital and died Monday night, she said."
Click to expand...


Looks like it's spread to the central texas area, too. My younger brother's school district is closed until May 11 because of swine flu.
 
Xueli said:
vickpick: i didn't say its okay to stone gays. I was just respecting their culture.


@ everybody: Sorry I know this is waaay of topic.


Ahh the Bangla/Bangladeshi culture:
Which gave birth to such wonderful things as-
The Rabindrasangeet
Delicious fish curries
The Bengal Renaissance
And of course, stoning gays to death (because of course this is an unquestionable part of THE monolithic bangla culture)
all equal and valid
Click to expand...

again, its how their culture works... no one says that the Pope should be banned because he promotes unprotected sex in catholic countries to give birth to more catholics - thus spreading more STD's, then y should the bangla's practice of stoning gays shunned by us- the others?

well, yea this is way off topic.. i dont even know how this started...
 
Let's just get back to swine flu case before the thread gets closed, okay?
 
vickpick said:
i was saying its a good thing they can adopt a child
Click to expand...

Oh! Well, then I apologise for taking it the wrong way 🙂. Living in the south has made me a bit jaded about people's views toward homosexuals...immigrants...blacks...women...pretty much anyone who isn't a white, male Nascar fan. Such a wonderful place, the south :scared:

vickpick said:
again, its how their culture works... no one says that the Pope should be banned because he promotes unprotected sex in catholic countries to give birth to more catholics - thus spreading more STD's,
Click to expand...

I do. Why should we let an old man with little practical knowledge of medicine, and an obvious misunderstanding about the usefulness of condoms in preventing disease, scare his followers with threats of condemnation, thus propagating an even larger HIV crisis in nations with infection rates creeping closer and closer to 50%?

then y should the bangla's practice of stoning gays shunned by us- the others?
Click to expand...

Because stoning ANYONE is wrong. I'm not saying we should invade Bengal and make them stop, but we should certainly not include them in the world theater. If they want to continue stoning homosexuals they should understand that this means we will not trade with them, our allies will not trade with them, and we will certainly not help should Pakistan or India decide they want more land. *shrug* It's their choice.
 
Wiingy said:
Ah, very sorry to have jumped down your throat then - it seems that I read too far into your post and thought that you were trying to stir up panic about an unrelated topic (it was fairly late when I wrote that and I wasn't in the greatest mood). Governments do use panic to push their agenda - but in this case I don't see how swine flu could lead to a push for health care reform (I may of course be overestimating the average intelligence of voters, but I like to think that deep down we're all at least semi-rational). I'll also admit to misreading your statement which I interpreted as "Why should we care?"

I would disagree that all of the attention that swine flu is getting is propaganda, in that this information might help to save lives, i.e., the government is propagating the information to protect the populace, not to position themselves as a savior. I'd be interested for any reading you can recommend on the topic - my library is not so big on that subject.

Let me reiterate that I do not think that this pandemic will be anywhere near as bad as 1918 - I just brought that up for historical example, esp. in terms of the biphasic death curve (I had also wanted to mention cytokine storm response but for some reason I left that out). However, if this outbreak were as bad as 1918, then only about 5 people of the 20 you mentioned (total number of American cases is now at 64) would be dead (2.5-5.0% mortality rate for 1918 strain). Again, 1918 is not a real possibility, but 1968 is.
Click to expand...

If you're genuinely interested in looking it up (it's pretty interesting research) you can just find articles online (I'm sure you're library has a database online that gives you access to them and an ILL program if they don't have a specific article) your best best it to start with Terror Management Theory and Pyszczynski, T. He is is one of the guys that came up with it. Some of his stuff is out there, but his talks and articles are very informative and interesting.

Another good place to start your search is Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory

There are some decent articles on the primary page.

Other things that might give you some good reading material is a search under Mortality Salience and In-group out-group studies.
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
Because stoning ANYONE is wrong. I'm not saying we should invade Bengal and make them stop, but we should certainly not include them in the world theater. If they want to continue stoning homosexuals they should understand that this means we will not trade with them, our allies will not trade with them, and we will certainly not help should Pakistan or India decide they want more land. *shrug* It's their choice.
Click to expand...

lol, true..

but no one want that terriblly located land of theirs 😛

of course, it'll be nice to drill oil from the bay using their land... but gas is cheap these days... haha..

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-04-29-egypt-flu_N.htm

300,000 pigs are going to lose their lives.. lolz.. Human domination 😡:meanie:
 
We are now at level 5...I am assuming that the WHO is doing this to equate the situation with the end of days....personally, I will be signing off from SDN now and retreat to my bunker, stocked with supplies for the next 6 months.

Good Night and Good Luck
 
Siverhideo1985 said:
We are now at level 5...I am assuming that the WHO is doing this to equate the situation with the end of days....personally, I will be signing off from SDN now and retreat to my bunker, stocked with supplies for the next 6 months.

Good Night and Good Luck
Click to expand...

Just remember: the swine flu, like a nuclear bomb, can be protected against by ducking under a small, wooden/metal school desk. It always seemed to work in the PSAs, at least.
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
Just remember: the swine flu, like a nuclear bomb, can be protected against by ducking under a small, wooden/metal school desk. It always seemed to work in the PSAs, at least.
Click to expand...
What, that doesn't work?
 
Kaustikos said:
What, that doesn't work?
Click to expand...

I hope so, otherwise, how wil lwe defend ourselves against air raids, tornadoes, earthquakes, or atomic bombs.

As a sidenote, how weird is it that they always taught us to do the same duck and cover for all these things? I mean, really? You think my desk is going to hold up to any sort of bomb? And that's assuming the entire 50-year old school building doesn't collapse in on us...nice.
 
oh, dont worry, they just want you to look funny in case you die. lol, dead while ducking! I mean really! Who would duck and cover in case of real earthquake..

I was in India when the 7.6 earthquake happened - I walked out to my mom who was talking to the neighbors and I was like, Mom- stop talking to loudly, the house is shaking. They're like - nah.. its a earthquake. After that, I lost faith in my mom... hehe.. I was in my house for the 30 seconds of the 1.5 minutes of the earthquake and my mom didn't even care. Funny thing, I was watching TV and the TV stand hit the wall and I was like eff this old TV stand. (I thought it broke randomly...)
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
I hope so, otherwise, how wil lwe defend ourselves against air raids, tornadoes, earthquakes, or atomic bombs.

As a sidenote, how weird is it that they always taught us to do the same duck and cover for all these things? I mean, really? You think my desk is going to hold up to any sort of bomb? And that's assuming the entire 50-year old school building doesn't collapse in on us...nice.
Click to expand...

They teach those things to offer people a way to believe they have some sort of control over the situation.

Plus, if some people under desks don't die you can bet your @ss they are going to tell everyone that the desks are what saved them... :laugh:
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
I hope so, otherwise, how wil lwe defend ourselves against air raids, tornadoes, earthquakes, or atomic bombs.

As a sidenote, how weird is it that they always taught us to do the same duck and cover for all these things? I mean, really? You think my desk is going to hold up to any sort of bomb? And that's assuming the entire 50-year old school building doesn't collapse in on us...nice.
Click to expand...
I think the idea behind duck and cover is to protect yourself from broken glass more than crumbling bombed buildings...
 
tigerLSU said:
I think the idea behind duck and cover is to protect yourself from broken glass more than crumbling bombed buildings...
Click to expand...

I dunno about you guys but my middle school desk in math class had a bomb shelter build in under the tabletop....3 feet concrete bunker walls and all...
 
tigerLSU said:
I think the idea behind duck and cover is to protect yourself from broken glass more than crumbling bombed buildings...
Click to expand...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0K_LZDXp0I[/youtube]
 
tigerLSU said:
I think the idea behind duck and cover is to protect yourself from broken glass more than crumbling bombed buildings...
Click to expand...

I'm just going to throw this out there...if there is a freaking air raid or ATOMIC BOMB going off in your general vicinity, you would love for your only problem to be broken glass in your face, haha.

I'm going to go with the previous poster and say it's a mental trick to make you feel as if you have some sort of control. A sense of loss of control can induce panic in crowds, which is never a good thing in an emergency.
 
VneZonyDostupa said:
I'm just going to throw this out there...if there is a freaking air raid or ATOMIC BOMB going off in your general vicinity, you would love for your only problem to be broken glass in your face, haha.

I'm going to go with the previous poster and say it's a mental trick to make you feel as if you have some sort of control. A sense of loss of control can induce panic in crowds, which is never a good thing in an emergency.
Click to expand...
It's why they have seatbelts in cars and oxygen masks on planes😱
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

crknwk2000
PSA to those with recent A's
Replies
2
Views
1K
j_diggity
j_diggity
S
"Anything else?" -- Mention recent publication or save for update letter?
Replies
4
Views
876
doctadank
doctadank
W
Stanford Neuroscience Summer Research for recent College graduates?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Wildestdreams25
W
S
  • Question Question
Ruined Cycle by Flunking Master's, What Should I Do Next?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Med Ed
Med Ed
hihihohohaha84
I recently found out that there are certain phases in my secondaries that are very similar to one my letters of recommendation. How bad is this?
Replies
8
Views
850
Moko
Moko
Top