1.The WHO says the spread of the pandemic, within affected countries and to new countries, is considered inevitable and unstoppableNumber 1 is an assumption and really nothing more. Yet, while they assume this is the case the WHO has not even suggested a travel ban??? Why?
2. The WHO says the counting of individual cases is now no longer essential for monitoring either the level or nature of the risk posed by the pandemic virus or to guide implementation of the most appropriate response measures.
3. The WHO says monitoring is still needed for unusual events, such as clusters of cases of severe or fatal pandemic infection, clusters of respiratory illness requiring hospitalization, or unexplained or unusual clinical patterns associated with serious or fatal cases.
4. WHO also claims health services are having difficulty coping with cases mean that such systems are under stress but they may also be a signal of increasing cases or a more severe clinical picture - but a strategy that concentrates on the detection, laboratory confirmation and investigation of all cases, including those with mild illness, is extremely resource-intensive
"The global travel and tourism industry welcomes the news that, despite the move to phase 6 pandemic status of the A(H1N1) influenza virus, the UN Secretary-General and the World Health Organization have both recommended against restrictions on travel and border closures,"Pretty strange considering the WHO's assumption?
On to Number 2: How is it that it is no longer necessary to monitor individual cases for the level or nature of risk? What justifies this decision? Especially with regards to .......
Number 3: If monitoring is still needed for "unusual events", how then are unusual events to be determined if not through monitoring of individual cases, which is no longer needed?
Because unusual events would have to be determined by an inordinate number of individual cases, which are no longer being counted. Since the individual cases are no longer being counted how then would an unusual event be identified?? Which leads us to .......
Number 4, WHO claims that all this individual monitoring is resource intensive and therefore has to be stopped, but, how else would one monitor a pandemic? It is also known that, according to the WHO itself, this pandemic has been characterized by the mildness of symptoms in the overwhelming majority of patients.
So by reading through this information I am left to ponder?
There have been NO travel restrictions, the majority of H1N1 cases are mild, the WHO says stop counting, monitoring no longer needed. Is it possible that a so called 'pandemic' could be manufactured, with the media's help of course, and massive immunizations justified?
After all, who is counting cases anymore? Not Canada. Canada is following the advice of the World Health Organization and is giving up counting individual H1N1 cases. Read that here.
And yet, there is indeed talk of massive flu vaccinations in Canada.
The decision about whether to undertake a mass vaccination of Canadians against swine flu has been all but taken, the country's chief public health officer said Thursday.Pause for a moment and watch this video Dr. Neil Rau, an infectious disease doctor, from Toronto, ON, Canada. He talks about the previous round of swine flu vaccines administered in 1976. What is most interesting he says "I personally would not be lining up to get the vaccine until I knew more about it"
Dr. David Butler-Jones said given the behaviour of the new H1N1 virus and the risk it poses, there is little chance Canada wouldn't push ahead with a vaccination program in the fall.
In 1976 massive immunizations were doled out but no pandemic materialized.
The episode triggered an enduring public backlash against flu vaccination, embarrassed the federal government and cost the director of the CDC his job.
Here is a sampling of commercials promoting the swine flu shot in 1976
Swine Flu Vaccination Propaganda from 1976
Oh and one more thing, if the swine flu vaccines make you sick, paralyzes you, or kills a loved one, you will have no recourse.
In 1976 people could sue for damages.
In 2009, the government is way ahead of the curve, and the manufacturers of swine flu vaccines have legal immunity. Don't believe me, well read this..
Legal immunity set for swine flu vaccine makers
ATLANTA — The last time the government embarked on a major vaccine campaign against a new swine flu, thousands filed claims contending they suffered side effects from the shots. This time, the government has already taken steps to head that off.
Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from any new swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, government health officials said Friday.