The only thing I know for sure is that he is a womanizing slimeball! LOL!
(Oh, and a hypocrite, but that is a conversation for another day...)
H1N1 Cost overruns
- Thread starter Cycleguy007
- Start date
(Oh, and a hypocrite, but that is a conversation for another day...)
Yup. What's confusing about that? He starts out by mentioning that in the 1930's it used to be believed that the death toll was 25-40 million. Then using more modern methods and better data he re-estimates it at 50 million, but points out that he knows his number is a lower bound, and that the upper bound might be 100% more.
The conclusion is that the true number of deaths is somewhere between 50 and 100 million.
Seems straight forward to me.
If you are looking for an exact count, no it's not. All we know is that it is at least 50 million and probably not more than 100 million that died of H1N1 between 1918 and 1920.
Coincidentally "50 to 100 million" is exactly the claim you asked me to justify with a citation, and you see that I have done that now.
Yes it is a world-wide total.
Yes. We have several things going for us now that we did not have back then, with respect to treating the flu:
1. We have proper vaccines, such as the current program
2. We have anti-viral medications, tamiflu and relenza
3. We have advanced ICU's with mechanical lungs
Now #3 is a limited quantity, we have only 10000 ICU's in Canada capable of properly treating a serious case of influenza, versus estimates that a 1918 style pandemic would result in hundreds of thousands of seriously ill people. Plainly the ICU isn't the answer.
So we have to fall back on stockpiling and distributing anti-flu drugs. First there are the vaccines, to try and prevent all those cases in the first place. Then there are the anti-virals, which mitigate the risks in some, but not all of the cases (if it was a magic bullet we wouldn't have so many people in ICU).
So yes, you are exactly right, the vaccine program we have to day is our first line of defense against something like 1918 happening again, and because we do have overall competent public health administrators in this country we in fact will prevail and I believe such an event will not happen again.
Of course, we have to deal with people like you, who undermine the most fundamental protections we have against something like this happening again.
Hopefully now that you've been educated you'll see why it's so important to maintain these defenses against the flu.
Straight forward? "Somewhere" between 50 and 100 million. Hmmm... you "might" be out by 50 million. That's a +/- factor of A HELLUVA LOT! **rolls eyes** Anyway, like I said... NO ONE knows for sure. And... how many of those deaths were due to COMPLICATIONS of whatever flu was going around at the time, and not solely from the H1N1 or Avian strain or Spanish flu or god knows what else was floating around back then.
As I suspected... But my claim is that politicians are using this "hype" to commit BILLIONS of $ towards fighting it... which is exactly what they are doing. Since I live in Canada and pay taxes here, I could give a rats ass what they are doing in other countries.
As for the rest of your drug pushing pontification... That is NOT what I was referring to- I was referring to proper sanitary and hygiene practices, the availability of clean water, the proper disposal of sewage etc... You can't honestly compare the societal living conditions of today with that of the early 1900's! **rolls eyes**
Ya, that's right... "I" am part of the problem!
Come on Fuji- you seem like a rather intelligent individual or at the very least well educated, (there IS a difference) but even you cannot be daft enough to suggest that just because I don't subscribe to the drug pushing lifestyle the medical and pharmaceutical companies have been pushing on us for the last 40 years to conclude that I am part of the problem. PULLEASE! **shakes head**
I eat properly and exercise daily and have adopted impeccable hygiene practices. I never get sick, I never have a need to see the doctor aside from a regular check up to get a clean bill of health. I rarely if ever take any form of drug and I live a clean lifestyle. I don't smoke and although I do drink alcohol, I rarely get drunk and NEVER drink and drive. Ya... "I" am part of the problem! **rolls eyes again**
Yet you, who obviously subscribe to this drug pushing society we have conveniently created for ourselves, choose to point your finger at me!
Got a question for you... what do you think all these chemicals that you are so fond of taking are doing to our bodies? Hmmm? How can you possibly think pharmaceutical drugs are so good for us when the disclaimers for the "possible side effects" from taking them are far longer than the marketing used to promote them? Add to this all the chemicals that is laced in our daily food sources due to the processing of "ready in 3 minute" meals, in fast foods and the general "industrialization" of our food supply and you have a virtual petri dish of chemicals growing inside each of our bodies. (Cancer... perhaps? Hmmm...)
And you have the audacity to accuse ME of being part of the problem!
And don't go asking me for citations because I have none... and even if I did, you would simply discount them as fiction written by so called wack jobs.
Lastly... I'm still waiting for a report from some "medical experts" to support your claim that the death toll could be in the neighbourhood of 20,000 lives for Canada. Or was THAT more hype?
Last edited:
Now you're just bein silly... that remark was obviously meant in the figurative sense not the physical sense. I know your disappointed with my repeated refusal of your advances, but I'm sorry toughb... I'm just not interested in a sexual relationship with you. I'm strictly interested in female companionship when it comes to that sort of thing.
***
Fortunately I remember I've never made any advances towards you. I guess it's that heterosexual thing. Remember?
It's only been 22 times... but I do admit to once writing a thread with step by step instructions for you as well. And you STILL can't get it right! **shakes head in disbelief**
***
My dear chap as hard as it seems to be people do not have to conform to your way of thinking and doing things. Thank God.
Not at all... I answered all your questions clearly and accurately based on my own "sometimes twisted" perspective of course.
***
Hallelujah, we agree on one more thing...
It's sunny out. Good day for a ride.
What's your point? If 50 million makes your point stronger, use 50 million. If 100 million makes your point stronger use 100 million. In either case it's a hell of a lot of dead people.
Think that one through. That would be 300k people in Canada dying of the flu, versus usually more like 6000. It isn't even remotely possible that randomly one year 294000 people more than usual suddenly came up with "complications".
99.9% of them died of H1N1 directly.
In Canada in 1918 we had chlorinated water and good sanitation and yet hundreds of thousands died of H1N1.
Oh yes you are. You start thread after thread disparaging one of the only things we have going for us now versus then that could prevent millions upon millions of deaths. You most certainly are part of the problem.
You have some sort of anti-scientific, voodoo mentality by which you go around saying ridiculous things like "no-one knows for sure" despite being confronted with hard evidence that we do know for sure. You disbelieve in key results results which have been proven to save lives. You go around trying to persuade others to disparage those results.
You are part of the problem. Like it or not.
Extending out lifespan. Clearly.
If you produced a citation to a solid, peer reviewed journal, I would take it very seriously. If you produced a citation to some conspiracy theory website--sure, wack job land. No doubt about it.
Uh, dude, that is what the 1918 citation was about. It's not just a theoretical possibility, it has actually fucking happened. 20k is on the low end. Were we to have an UNTREATED, UNVACCINATED round of H1N1 per 1918 we would see more like 300k to a million dead in Canada. It would kill 2-3% of everybody.
Precisely because we DO have vaccinations and we DO have tamiflu and we DO have relenza, whoops, "chemicals", we would save many of those lives. Not all, but many.
***
Even at the lowest number, 21.5, that's too many people for me.
Personally I'd like you to be right. Life is just too precious a thing to take lightly.
...
To get back to the original point, after CG's diversion into the voodoo twilight of "no-one knows for sure", depsite the fact that we damn well do:
The number 1.5 billion is very small relative to the potential costs of a pandemic outbreak. If we actually saw hundreds of thousands die in a pandemic in Canada, that has a cost in the trillions.
More likely modern medicine would save many of those people, as we have better medical care these days, we have treatments like Tamiflu and Relenza which the government is stock-piling for just such an emergency. More than anything else, we have vaccines now.
Vaccines save lives.
Mass vaccination whenever there is even a small chance of a killer pandemic is incredibly cheap compared to the costs that will unfold were we to do nothing.
Were 1918 to re-occur and we did NOT vaccinate widely and we did NOT have enough anti-viral medication for everybody, our hospitals simply do not have enough beds to treat all those people--we would see a similar death toll to 1918.
The reason why we won't os precisely because we do in fact mass vaccinate and we do in fact stockpile Relenza and Tamiflu. That is exactly why we won't see that number of dead again in Canada.
If you figure a healthy, young adult human life is worth 2.5 millio or so to society, you only need to save about 600 of them to justify spending 1.5 billion.
There oculd not be a better use of taxpayer money than this, few things pay off that well.
The number 1.5 billion is very small relative to the potential costs of a pandemic outbreak. If we actually saw hundreds of thousands die in a pandemic in Canada, that has a cost in the trillions.
More likely modern medicine would save many of those people, as we have better medical care these days, we have treatments like Tamiflu and Relenza which the government is stock-piling for just such an emergency. More than anything else, we have vaccines now.
Vaccines save lives.
Mass vaccination whenever there is even a small chance of a killer pandemic is incredibly cheap compared to the costs that will unfold were we to do nothing.
Were 1918 to re-occur and we did NOT vaccinate widely and we did NOT have enough anti-viral medication for everybody, our hospitals simply do not have enough beds to treat all those people--we would see a similar death toll to 1918.
The reason why we won't os precisely because we do in fact mass vaccinate and we do in fact stockpile Relenza and Tamiflu. That is exactly why we won't see that number of dead again in Canada.
If you figure a healthy, young adult human life is worth 2.5 millio or so to society, you only need to save about 600 of them to justify spending 1.5 billion.
There oculd not be a better use of taxpayer money than this, few things pay off that well.
Last edited:
Fuji= HYPE...
Your mastery at taking one's words and twisting them around are truly awe inspiring! I bow to your superior intellect!
Anyone know where a guy can get a flu shot?
Can wait to get me some more DRUGS!!!!!
Give me a break!
Your mastery at taking one's words and twisting them around are truly awe inspiring! I bow to your superior intellect!
Anyone know where a guy can get a flu shot?
Can wait to get me some more DRUGS!!!!!
Give me a break!
(I take back what I said about you being in the pharmaceutical industry.... you are clearly a politician!)
Last edited:
The likelihood that someone is unintelligent but educated is nowhere near as likely that someone is unintelligent and uneducated. We simply live in a world where uninformed opinion is too highly valued, and too much suspicion attaches to the opinions of the better educated.
And note camera boy missed the memo, the one that looked like this:Don't mess with the fuji, you'll find I'm usually right
I'll let you know when I'm wrong.
To: nolabel
From: Society for Being Politically Correct
Subject: claiming to be intelligent in the modern world is like being the only living human in a crowd of zombies
Of course I applaud the act of sticking it to the . . . little man!
Said it before, and will say it again - there are some who think everything begins and ends with them. A pandemic, as Fuji notes, is unlikely just because of mass vaccination. The CG's of the world are basically free riding (kind of a pun in CG's case!) on the large scale public programs they otherwise attack. Just to be clear, this doesn't mean CG is in anyway wrong to embrace a healthy lifestyle. If more did similarly, that would be great, especially given the extent of obesity and poor eating habits in western societies (especially). But just because one is doing everything within their power to take care of themselves, this should not blind you to the real ways in which you benefit from things you otherwise reject.
CG, if you were riding around in a soupy population of completely unvaccinated individuals, trust immunologists, you would be getting quite sick. Of course pharmaceutical companies cannot be entirely trusted . . . witness your general practitioner mindlessly dispensing anti-biotics. So you're right to be suspicious in that sense. But all this hoopla about drug companies and the medical industry, as if it's all some evil empire, basically reads like a smokescreen to make myopic selfishness look like some kind of freedom fighting. Maybe a bit more actual education would encourage a bit more reasonableness, where reasonableness means we sometimes have to look beyond our own noses.
I know of, and personally know, some young people who have or have had very serious cases of this flu, and without medical intervention at least some would have died. I have never before in my life known of anyone, other than very senior people, who have been this sick with seasonal flu. So I'm not inclined to think of it being innocuous.
Having said that I'm in no panic for the vaccine myself as I probably was exposed to the 1970's or 60's variant and may/probably would have some resistance. However, when the shot is available to us non priority folks I probably will get it (just in case)
Suggest that you don't believe everything you hear. That for example. It is simply not true. At all. And not possible.
No shit, but you do realize Gyass has an automatic out by saying it was a joke. Just saying!
Summary for those who don't want to read.
"Hi I'm cycleguy. I'm sticking my head in the ground."
i have to disagree... all the gobbledygook mumble jumbo aside, fuji made a claim way back on page one saying that the death toll would be 20,000 (in canada) without the flu shot... cycle called him on it, and so far he has failed to produce any such report. granted, fuji is pretty darn good at coming up with a diversionary tactic on his own... quoting all sorts of bs which is irrelevant to the conversation at hand... but he still hasn't give cycle the proof he asked for about the 20,000 deaths. in my book, that adds up to more hype... and there has already been way more hype over this thing than is necessary.
not that i give a rats ass anyway... i'm fucking sick of hearing about it all anyway. carry on.
Considering all that has been discussed here and elsewhere, Harris Decima/Ekos polls say that 25% of those polled don't plan to get vaccinated and I believe 30% don't know. That'll change when and if numbers start to climb just like the rush when that young hockey player died. Too bad.
WHO and CDC said this was the worst year on record since they began keeping record in '58. No numbers as they change constantly, just trends. Time will tell. In 1958, Canada had 1.7 million people and lost 2000 to the asian flu alone and over 3 million people were sick with it, 18% of total population. This is not theoretical, this is historical fact. We now have twice that many people and two major flu attacks expected. Back then, many schools had vaccination programs for all students. That's gone now because of the fear by school board of litigation, should anything go wrong and don't let anyone tell you different. I was one of those children that got the shot, along with polio and small pox, all not done now, so at this time I'm less likely to be serious sick if at all.
Deaths in Canada number approximately 190 as per HC and in the US approx 4000 as per CDC. Considering we have per capita twice as much vaccine, something tells me it might be working. Maybe it's the fact that we only have 14 chefs in the kitchen and the US has 51.
I'm not a fear-monger. We're all grown ups here and make up our own minds, but I want you to be mindful of the history and the trends.
I don't think that Fuji's estimate of a possible 20,000 deaths 'without' the shot was out of the realm of possibility, but since many have been receiving the shot (20%) we'll never know. With an expected penetration rate of 50% inoculated (33% definite+17% quite certain) that will bring numbers down a lot.(EKOS polling).
WHO and CDC said this was the worst year on record since they began keeping record in '58. No numbers as they change constantly, just trends. Time will tell. In 1958, Canada had 1.7 million people and lost 2000 to the asian flu alone and over 3 million people were sick with it, 18% of total population. This is not theoretical, this is historical fact. We now have twice that many people and two major flu attacks expected. Back then, many schools had vaccination programs for all students. That's gone now because of the fear by school board of litigation, should anything go wrong and don't let anyone tell you different. I was one of those children that got the shot, along with polio and small pox, all not done now, so at this time I'm less likely to be serious sick if at all.
Deaths in Canada number approximately 190 as per HC and in the US approx 4000 as per CDC. Considering we have per capita twice as much vaccine, something tells me it might be working. Maybe it's the fact that we only have 14 chefs in the kitchen and the US has 51.
I'm not a fear-monger. We're all grown ups here and make up our own minds, but I want you to be mindful of the history and the trends.
I don't think that Fuji's estimate of a possible 20,000 deaths 'without' the shot was out of the realm of possibility, but since many have been receiving the shot (20%) we'll never know. With an expected penetration rate of 50% inoculated (33% definite+17% quite certain) that will bring numbers down a lot.(EKOS polling).
You show yourself to be scientifically illiterate and something of a luddite with your notion that any sort of medical evidence is "gobbledygook mumble jumbo", your lack of appreciation for reason, logic, science, medicine, is clear, you have some sort of dark-ages voodoo mindset.
I stand by that prediction (I predicted as different number than you are quoting though). Eventuallly, it in fact would kill that many in Canada without vaccination. That represents a kill rate of approximately 1/20th of 1% which is not very high, and it's only 2x or 3x the kill rate of the seasonal flu which usually kills a few thousand every year to begin with.
That was train, not cycle, and my claim was always and is still that without vaccination it will kill a lot of people.
It looks like it will kill less now than it did back then, but it will still kill significantly more people than seasonal flu, depending on how widely adopted the vaccination program is.
Those sorts of numbers arise from the following scenario:
There is a large outbreak in a big city that exceeds the capacity of ICU to treat people. People get really sick and need a ventilator to survive, but none is available, so they die.
We would see the mortality rate of this flu jump some 10x if that were to happen as many people who we are able to save today via treatment in ICU would die.
