Tamiflu Fraud
- Thread starter anything I don't mind
- Start date
No please do... you obviously have inside information...
No, but I am a microbiologist and can see a decline in effective antimicrobials and antivirals (in this instance) with an increase in strain evolution... plus probability is on my side when we concern the future
Did it wipe us out though?
And 1 in 20 where you get that bull from, more like 3-5 being the very top end of the scale in every 100 people.
So you know 100 people and 3 to 5 of them will die?
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 2,128
Someone has been watching too much Alex Jones.
Did it wipe us out though?
And 1 in 20 where you get that bull from, more like 3-5 being the very top end of the scale in every 100 people.
So you know 100 people and 3 to 5 of them will die?
1 in 20 = 5 in 100
That's very nicely written for someone who can't manage basic maths.
What maths did I get wrong?
Oh sorry so you do accept that Spanish Flu killed approximately 5% of the population and therefore saying 1 in 20 people you know may well potentially die is not such a ridiculous comparison after all.
Of course I am sure you will say that couldn't possibly happen again even though we have no further medical treatments to prevent such an event, minimal capacity for isolation, crumbling NHS infrastructure and a skills drain, decreasing antibiotic effectiveness for treating secondary infections, a climate globally that is both increasing in temperature and humidity, increased population movement and density, etc etc etc.
I guess what I was saying was you write very nicely for someone who posts in such a manner with no effort to substantiate your argument. It is almost as if you are being deliberately provocative. Naturally I assume this is not the case and you will give us a startling rationale of why such an event may not come to pass again rather than leave your argument without any substance as you have to date. Alternatively you could ignore this part and just nitpick over some other point without addressing the actual issue. It's a standard tactic on here that we see rather a lot.
I wonder whether you will address that point - what are these obvious factors you speak of?
Last edited:
There's no "insider information". Anyone will half a brain cell can know the environment for such a pandemic was completely and utterly different back in 1918 than it is today.
General hygiene alone was vastly inferior to what it is now, not to mention quarantine procedures. Both of which would have been a huge blow to the deadliness of the Spanish Flu Pandemic.
There are lots of other things too like the fact very high and lethal dosages of aspirin were prescribed which increased the death rates dramatically.
Fact is someone saying "take a look around you and count 20 people and 3 of them would die" is a stupid and terrible comparison to make
You are worse than a conspiracy theorist. Seriously.
As predicted you have nothing of substance to say.
I've said plenty of things with substance in this thread, thank you.
All you've done is make silly comparisons and attempted lame scaremongering tactics.
I've stated readily available figures and given reasons why we are in no better an arguably a worse situation all you've done is "silly blah blah
ridiculous blah blah".And no-one said 3 in 20 - I said 1 in 20 which equates to 5% .. learn to read
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,749
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Burnsy2023: you seem pretty up to date on the topic of flu vaccines, so I have a question...
Do we have any actual real World evidence that flu vaccines reduce deaths significantly when used on the general population in mass? I understand they work in a lab environment, but what about real World?
For example, the last EU study I saw was around 20,000 deaths per year in all the EU (this might be considered a high estimate given the difficulties coming up with an accurate number) and then around 35,000 deaths per year in the US.
Now in the US flu vaccines are big business. They are heavily marketed every where and around 50-60% of the population (total average) gets them. In Europe it's much lower, around 30% on average.
So why if flu shots are so effective do we have nearly 1/2 the number of deaths, even though the US has double the vaccination rate? AND not forgetting we also have 400 million more people than them. Surely our death rate should be way higher?
I think also flu vaccination rates around the World are even lower than Europe and yet they have lower death rates.
I'm interested to hear why
Also has the mortality rate from flu actually ever really decreased significantly since flu shots were introduced? I apologize for not having the sources at hand, but I remember seeing numerous reports that in fact it's stayed pretty much the same before and after flu vaccines were introduced to the public
So, the thing about flu vaccines is that they only target a single strain of flu. You will only be protected against the one specific strain and if you come into contact with any other variant then you could end up with an infection. The way they choose what flu strain to target is done around 6-8 months in advance and is subject to epidemiologists using computer models and global statistics to predict what the most common form of flu will be in the uk when the winter comes.
This isn't an exact science and so the efficacy is dependant on whether the models are correct and also on what the particular strain is like. Some flu variants aren't as communicable as others, some have milder symptoms and it's difficult to know the properties until it infects enough people. Although there is a lot of science here, there is also an element of luck.
People who are in risk groups such as the elderly, pregnant etc can still get complications from getting other trains of flu. Flu jabs help mitigate some risk, but the sheer diversity of the virus means the goal posts are constantly moving. It's also worth mentioning that people don't die from flu, they die from complications of flu, most commonly pneumonia. The medical care available (or lack of) to cope with these sorts of respiratory issues also contributes to death rate. Flu jabs do work, but the nature of the beast means the efficacy is dependant on a lot of external factors rather than just the jab itself.
Like the war in Iraq? They made a decision with the information at the time and shouldn't be held accountable?
I've stated readily available figures and given reasons why we are in no better an arguably a worse situation all you've done is "silly blah blah
And no-one said 3 in 20 - I said 1 in 20 which equates to 5% .. learn to read
You're taking things too personally, like everything is about your silly Spanish Flu 2014 idea.
The point of this thread is about Tamiflu and it's apparent lack of effectiveness. If indeed H1N1 had been as deadly as Spanish Flu and we'd had no way to contain it (like you say), then we'd be screwed, because apparently Tamiflu did bugger all to help people.
That's the point.
You saying tens or hundreds of millions of people could die from another flu pandemic is indeed unfounded. You have absolutely no basis on which to make that assessment. Just because it happened in 1918 isn't a good enough reason. Or because we have increased population movement or density. Nothing you have said proves 5% of the World's population would die. So yes in that sense you are as bad as scaremongers.
I'm not trying to be aggressive or rude, but you've essentially called me stupid and told me "learn to read" because I've presented no substantial evidence and yet you've gone and done the exact same thing for your own arguments. Slightly hypocritical
Thanks for your reply and explaining the general overview regarding flu vaccines. However, with respect, you completely and utterly ignored my original question... Which was why year on year out does the US have a higher death rate from flu than the EU if there are significantly higher numbers of people vaccinated over there and they have 400 million fewer people?
Are you saying this is all just down to luck?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,749
- Location
- Southampton, UK
That's not quite true. It does have some benefit but not as much as claimed and this affects the economic decision to buy in bulk.
The nature of the flu virus means that a global pandemic that kills millions is perfectly possible. Do we have any evidence it'll happen soon or indeed ever? No, but the flu virus in the most virulent strain could easily do this. Its up to chance if this combinations manifests itself long enough to be self sustaining.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,749
- Location
- Southampton, UK
I'm saying it could be down to all sorts of external factors. Are people in the US likely to go to work and spread flu or stay at home, isolated and wait it out? What is the health care infrastructure like for people who get complications such as pneumonia? Are they likely to wait until the last possible minute before being admitted to hospital? What demographics are being immunised? Is it being targeted at the most vulnerable or are more fit and healthy people getting the jab who otherwise don't need it?
There are so many variables that can affect death rate but this doesn't ignore the fact that clinical trials have shown efficacy for the flu jab in the specific strain it's developed for.