To think that people really need to get a grip over the whole swine flu business?

[wannaBe]

Let's face it, we are all going to die. Nobody knows how, nobody knows when.

100 people have died of swine flu. 100 people. And yet people are talking of panic buying/keeping children home from school/wanting to know why flights from meccico have not been stopped.

100 people. worldwide.

I wonder how many people were killed on the roads during that time?

If you're going to catch swine flu, you'll catch it whether you panic about it or not. And given only 100 people have died of it so far, currently, the odds are pretty slim. And even if it reaches pandemic level (such as bird flu/sars didn't but the media were desparately hoping they would) there's still not much you can do about it.

100 people.

seriously.

Somebody plot the occurrence of health scares in direct proportion to grand scale world events such as war, recession...then plot peaks of fear against election dates.

Really - I dranktheeasterspirits.

I do. I think gordon Brown is capable of pretty much anything and at any cost.

Killing our travel industry is one way of putting it. Blaming the international markets / US is another.

Go back and hear how many times GB / AD have blamed other countries for the mess we are in.

Nothing is going to get us out of it, but a good excuse always helps.

Sorry rhubarb. Cross posted massively.

There is pessimism and there is being blinkered you know. Check out the stocks in travel companies today and then do a rough guesstimate of how many tax paying people work in those industries. Why would any government give themselves such a massive potential for financial meltdown on top of what is already happening.

the US stock market took a dive over more than swine flu though. It took a dive because a low flying aeroplane was seen over jersey city with two fighter jets flying after it.

Rumour was rife that a building had been hit by a plane... that's enough to give the stock market a battering.

On a lighter note... I wonder if there will be a new series of "survivors" soon?

I know a flu researcher, and interestingly she was saying that HIV pandemic outstripped the deathtoll of the 1918 flu epidemic, it's just not as well represented in the press. Yet we're not all running around panicking about that (but we should be).

Also, she's very dubious about any flu facts reported in the press, as they so often get it very very wrong and inflate figures in order to make a better story.

But, can we just remember that Gordon Brown isn't looking for a solution (primarily because there isn't one), he's looking for an excuse

Totally different.

Anyway, no, I'm not worried about swine flu. Think I'll leave it there.

Wil someone please acknowledge my joke!

If we are talking stocks it is worth mentioning that drug company shares surged today.

Swings and roundabouts really.

I missed it Orm, do it again.

Idrank/wannaBe - the US stock market was off at the opening but up marginally now.

Tour operators and airlines are off but drugs companies are up.

Personally I am hoping the oil market collapses, it sparks an Asian financial crisis and a flight to the safety of US/UK Govt bonds as I have some bets in that direction and it would pay my rent next year. Still don't want to see people die though.

The 20 out of 103 number is what I suspected.

ABetaDad: bollocks with they. Newer generation reactors are not built the same way as Chernobyl was.

RubberDuck - true there are no Chernobyl type reactors now but all reactors require cooling water circulating to keep them from spontaneously heating up and going into catastrophic meltdown.

If there are no plant operators or the external electricty supply is cut off and the backup fuel supply runs out that powers the auxilliary water pumps all reactors would just start to heat up under their own power.

Not a likely outcome but it would kill us all if it happened - even if the virus didn't get us first.

Just a thought.

I hear its a pig to get rid of that swine flu.

The HIV thing is completely different to this situation, flu is alot easier to catch then HIV, in most cases a few sensible precautions will stop anyone contracting HIV.

Well if it is going to kill us ALL ABetaDad then that bothers me even less.

It's that awful smile Riven, anyone who grins like that is up to something.

Please don't scaremonger, ABetaDad.

For a start, even worse case scenario suggests a 5% death-rate, I think they'll be a few trained nuclear reactor staff available for a while.

Not only that, but the fail safes are much more sophisticated than that, they don't need power OR water circulating. Gravity means the rods drop out of the reactor, and simple convection can prevent the reactor core from overheating. No person or intervention required.

Honestly, there's enough hysteria without blatant misinformation as well.

I would hazard a guess ABetaDad was being amusingly facetious.

Orm, I noticed your joke, but I was in the middle of stuff and couldn't say anything.

Been out shopping and can't believe this is still ongoing. FFS the British amongst us should be happily wandering around saying things like 'I'll believe it when I see it' or 'the bombs didn't stop us and no bad bloody cold will either'.

And of course it's Gordon's fault.

Orm Hilarious. Feeling better now?

RubberDuck - an expert in nuclear power told me this.

However, I was also being facetious ( at hobbgoblin) because nuclear meltdown is incredibly unlikely to happen. Just like a flu pandemic that kills more than 100,0000 people is unlikely to happen.

I used to teach a professional risk management course and even people who are used to dealing with risk as a job typically have a very a hard time separating probability of a risk occuring from its consequences. Ultra low probability risk with high consequences (e.g severe earthquake) worries people far more than a high probability medium consequence risk (e.g a car crash) where they are in reality far more likely to die.

Returning to the original wannaBe statement - yes we do need to get a grip!

The probability of a global pandemic is low, even if we have one the consequences may not be severe. The probability of a very severe pandemic with >10% of the global population dying is incredibly low and would not actually mean the end of human life.

Th 24 hour rolling news we have now managed and manipulated by political media spin doctors is feeding a sense of hysteria.

I think a flu pandemic is very likely to happen as opposed to unlikely.

The BMA have been preparing for 5 years as even they expect one. My boss is a doctor and he seems to think we are actually overdue one.

As someone pointed out earlier, this flu virus is very virulent because it passes person to person, you don't need to be in contact with a pig or bird to catch it.

I am now a "wee bit" worried, as two cases have just been confirmed not a million miles away from me at Monklands Hospital in Airdrie.

MumHadEnough - yes I agree a pandemic is likely. Indeed it is bound to happen.

However, will it be bad enough to kill millions of people? A pandemic that severe is very unlikely and we know that as a historical fact.

I just was listening to a very sensible and learned woman on Sky from Oxford who is an expert in emerging diseases and she suggested that the severity of the actual cases we had seen so far were not that bad.

She effectively said the news is running far ahead of the actual known facts about the severity of the epidemic so far and indeed the reporter later said that the story is 'taking off' in the media and across the internet via word of mouth.

For instance, we are talking about it. That makes it seem worse than it actually is as well.

Yes it is real, yes people will die, but we know it is happening and doctors are dealing with and caring for patients as soon as they become aware of them. That will also reduce the impact.

We should stay calm, not panic, and wait for proper information as the woman from Oxford said.