Slashdot Mirror
Flu Models Predict Pandemic, But Flu Chips Ready
An anonymous reader writes "Supercomputer software models predict that swine flu will likely go pandemic sometime next week, but flu chips capable of detecting the virus within four hours are already rolling off the assembly line. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which has designated swine flu as the '2009 H1N1 flu virus,' is modeling the spread of the virus using modeling software designed by the Department of Defense back when avian flu was a perceived threat. Now those programs are being run on cluster supercomputers and predict that officials are not implementing enough social distancing--such as closing all schools--to prevent a pandemic. Companies that designed flu-detecting chips for avian flu, are quickly retrofitting them to detect swine flu, with the first flu chips being delivered to labs today." Relatedly, at least one bio-surveillance firm is claiming they detected and warned the CDC and the WHO about the swine flu problem in Mexico over two weeks before the alert was issued.
All this talk of swines, avians, and now Pan(demic)s make me hungry for bacon & eggs.
uses a technique known as "data mining" to automatically search tens of thousands of Web sites daily for early signs of looming medical problems
Wowzers. People were complaining about being sick on the internets before they went to the hospital? Someone call Ron Paul.
Children are good carriers. Kill the children, it's the only way for humanity to survive.
A few deaths are acceptable to keep the economy running. We're talking millions or billions of dollars of lost economic activity.
The state doesn't exactly have jurisdiction over businesses the way they do (public) schools. Things would have to be far nastier than they are for some sort of state-of-emergency declaration and the shutdown of private businesses to be politically palatable.
"Veratect, based in Kirkland, Wash..."
"The company...has tried unsuccessfully to sell its service to the CDC"
"Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., who talked with the CDC, the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies..said the federal government had made a mistake in not purchasing the company's program"
I think there's a "Dicks for Sale" joke in there somewhere.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
What's the point of closing schools if the virus isn't virulent enough to burn itself out? If it's about as severe and durable as the garden-variety flu strains that circulate everywhere anyway, then it will continue to circulate in Mexico indefinitely, and wherever else it establishes itself. We can't exterminate it any more than we can exterminate other moderate strains of flu.
So when we reopen the schools, borders, or whatever else people are screaming for, the swine flu will be there waiting... waiting to make us cough and hack and stay home from work... waiting to kill children, the weak, the elderly... waiting... just like the regular garden-variety flu that we get every year.
(I'm not a biologist, I'm just baiting a real biologist to correct or clarify anything I got wrong. Please and TIA.)
I've already read World War Z, so I'm not worried -- I'm prepared.
You don't have to reload a blade.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
If you trace back to the original EETimes article (http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=217201126) you'll see this in the opening paragraph:
Swine flu may have been caught early enough to prevent a serious U.S. epidemic, according to computer models developed by Virginia Tech's Network Dynamics and Simulation Science Laboratory (NDSSL).
So why is this Slashdot story claiming:
"Supercomputer software models predict that swine flu will likely go pandemic sometime next week"
So is the author just panicking unnecessarily or is this another case of using fear tactics to push an agenda, in this case boosting sales of a flu detection chip?
First link seems like astroturfing. A better link would of been [NDSSL @ Virgina Tech], where the research is being done.
As long as the governments keep drumming up the alert messages, nothing terrible will happen. Disaster only strikes when there are not enough media coverage!
Flu season kills more than this strain will. Why isn't there a pandemic panic when we get the flu every year? This all seems so overblown to me. If this is a 5 on the scale that goes to 6, how is it that the regular flu doesn't push us to 6 with the number it kills. All these travel restrictions when you are more likely to be killed in any number of ways. The media is out of control on this one.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
2. Wait for a disaster
3. Shout from the roof top, "I warned! I warned!!".
4. ...
5. Profit!
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Do they come coated in a powdered cheese? If so, I'll probably go through at least 3 dozen of them.
I think what you're trying to say here is that unless they declare martial law, closing schools and putting pressure on sporting event center owners is about all they can do to stem this. Unless you're President Madagascar (someone link to the image, thanks in advance)
moox. for a new generation.
TFS leads off with 'OMG! Pandemic next week!', as does the tiny, uninformative blog TFS links to, despite lack of citation to a source that might be more authoritative than a 2-paragraph pseudo-article. Fortunately, that blog links to a story that is actually informative and somewhat related to technical matters. It leads off with the less exciting, but probably more accurate 'Swine flu may have been caught early enough to prevent a serious U.S. epidemic.' Nowhere in the eetimes.com article does it say a pandemic is predicted within a week, and nowhere in the blog TFS links to is there a citation for the author's pandemic prediction.
I'm not saying the disease isn't serious, but will someone please beat some sense into the fearmonger who cut/pasted this shitty summary together? It makes my eyes hurt just to read it, and stinks of someone trying to drive up their blog's hit count.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
2009 H1N1 flu virus
Colloquially known as the heinie virus of 2009.
It isn't the dangerousness, it that no one has any resistance and everyone gets it at the same time. I work at a university and we are following our generic "epidemic" plan - no cases yet, but we would follow the same plan whether it was regular flu or the food service served bad fish for dinner, when 500+ people got sick at the same time in the same place it's a problem..
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
Source, please? Otherwise it's just more overblown panic-inducing hype. Neither the linked article, or the article it links to say this. In fact, the second article says "So far, we haven't even identified the incubation period or how long people are infectious," and if that's the case I don't see how any computer model could be accurate.
Real programmers use "copy con program.exe"
How long after we kill the children would one have to wait to use the old "repopulating the Earth" line to get women in bed? I ask merely out of curiosity.
And a percentage drop in population corresponds to a very real percentage drop in total GDP. Fewer consumers, fewer producers, and slowed growth and achievement.
I've read on Reddit and some other sites some extreme comments, one was along the lines of, "Would it really be that bad if two billion people died?" Yes. Complete meltdown of the social order. That doesn't mean, yay "The caste system in India will be abolished." Yes, there are still prejudices in India against people of the lower caste. No, it means "Fallout (the game) style anarchy, city states and guns for hire... yay?"
Here's the thing, there are entirely reasonable responses, and irrational responses to this crisis. Reasonable responses are like the closing of a school when several students are confirmed to have the virus, or expensive testing of hospital staff for the virus, or even, if a major outbreak occurs, closing down public venues.
Why is this reasonable? Because the moral and economic cost of a widespread pandemic that kills millions or billions of people far outweighs the paltry economic cost of closing down... a school, or a mall. And if it becomes a pandemic, and thousands or hundreds of thousands are known to be infected in a major city, it's for the good of the rest of the nation and the world at large to limit the spread of the disease and close borders and limit travel. Because to do otherwise is insanity. This isn't like throwing billions of dollars at "terrorism" and fighting an ideology, a battle that can't be won. Fighting disease is something we can, and have defeated in the past. Come on, we've damn near wiped out polio, and we actually defeated smallpox.
This is money absolutely well spent. If even 1% of people get this, and 1% of those people die, that's nearly a million deaths. If either of those figures grows by an order of magnitude, it's death on the scale of the Holocaust. And you wouldn't argue that the industrial engine of the Nazi regime is more valuable than their lives, would you?
P.S.: You got Godwined.
It's not a PROVEN epidemic until people have died or are veggetized. WHO cares about Veratect's anecdotal rumor of an epidemic? WHO's not on first!
This flu is nothing, but a distraction from the economy. Notice since the news media jumped on the flu pandemic band waggon, that the stock markets have begun recovering nicely?
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
Cluster Computer Predicts Cluster Fuck For Clustered People.
Film at 11.
I like how the WHO World Health Organization and Chipped Technology are combined together in one article. This should really bring ammunition to the opinion that one day all the people in the world will have chips embedded into their skin or whatever. I also took my liberty, (what I have left that really matters) and decided to do a WHOIS look up of the WHO.int. I had one more brain tickle, site was registered one day before 911. I am a skeptic of many opinions, but one thing is for certain, I will make it clear beyond any doubt that my body is my own. You can screw with my mind all you want. But you can't touch me. And if you assholes do, prepare to die.
The main point is to delay and ultimately prevent the spread if it has a high fatality rate. 100 cases and 1 death don't give us a 1% fatality rate... we have to make sure those 100 people recover.
While we delay the spread, we can learn more about the disease and maybe produce a vaccine.
Exactly.
(A) many more people are expected to get this flu than the regular seasonal flu because humans have no immunity to this flu. In 1918 they figure half the human population eventually got it. So whatever the mortality rate is, we should extrapolate that over a higher total sick population than the regular flu.
(B) Calculating the mortality rate is hard now because there are so few cases and the reliability of the numbers are shitty. It's like trying to predict a winner off the first five minutes of exit-polling in a national election. But let's go with what we have. Mexico has ~2500 suspected (312 confirmed) cases with 169 suspected (12 confirmed) deaths. That's like 4-6% chance of dying if you get sick. There are lots of reasons to doubt these numbers or think they're unrepresentative, so let's just say it's something like 2%. Could be higher. Could be lower. But for discussion, 2%. 2% is a pretty high rate of death. Seriously. It's 1918 bad. Do you feel okay with everyone you know each taking a 2% chance of death if they get sick?
(C) The regular flu kills a lot of people per year, but it still only represents a fraction of 1% of cases.
(D) There is a lot of speculation about the "cytokine storm" factor in Mexican cases-- that this flu is more likely to kill those with strong immune systems than a normal flu. I haven't heard a lot of actual facts about this, admittedly.
(E) As said above, we're at the end of the flu season in North America. Flu viruses mutate. We have no idea what this virus will have become come October. It may be nothing, but it may be something really scary. And the fact that we're all likely to get it makes people uneasy.
(F) As much as people are saying this is a shitty time (with the economy and wars and all) to have this happen, at least we may have some time to get a vaccine going before the mystery mutated version comes along in the fall...
Not to belabor the comparison to 1918, but that was a flu that killed an estimated 2.5-5% of those infected. They say that pandemic killed up to 100 million people worldwide, or 1/3 of the current US population. This was at a time when the global population was less than 2 billion.
My high-school son wants schools to close, too, and I don't think he's too worried about the pandemic.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Try to stay at least seven people away from Kevin Bacon
About a good minute or so with plenty of soap and running water, no more than three and that's if you're up to the elbows.
uhm no. You did not Godwin the previous poster. You did it to yourself.
And if it becomes a pandemic, and thousands or hundreds of thousands are known to be infected in a major city...
Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Just hope that it doesn't feed on nuclear energy, like the Andromeda Strain does.
Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
This is just the boogey man du jour. Got to sell those newspapers and that ad space!
TFA is a prime example of this.
The summary first links to a blog[ad space] that links to the real article[more ad space]. The real article is also written by the author of said blog.
I will give credit for the real article being an interesting read, but why not go straight to the real article in the first place?
To top that off, the second link(also a blog) in the 'fine' article is an astroturf piece for some data mining company that's whining that WHO, CDC, and one other organization are not buying his company's services and software, and pushing an international tracking system that his company 'deserves' to be part of.[his word]
The whole point of this story was to increase adviews on two websites by the same guy, and push an astroturf on another blog.
We used to blast Roland P. for this until he finally stopped. Then shortly died...Hmmm....
There are a small handful of web sites I whitelist in Adblock+, but this crap is one of the main reasons I don't feel bad about using it in the first place.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Civil and mechanical engineering are based entirely on models.
Some of the models reflect our best scientific understanding of the world. Some of them reflect ideas that have worked before and guessing (but this guessing is done very carefully).
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
(Yeah, like anybody studies differential equations anymore...lazy young whippersnappers with your supercomputers...I just hope the mortality curve on this pandemic follows the 1918 model, har, har, har...and get off my lawn...)
"All successful systems accumulate parasites" -- Hal Hixon
In other words, continue doing more or less what we have always done, improving wherever and whenever possible, without panic, fear-mongering, or hyping up the threats.
The current "pandemic" is largely an exercise in ignorance, incompetence, self-delusion, opportunism, corruption, and an unhealthy dose of general idiocy.
(someone link to the image, thanks in advance)
Um, on /. its not a good idea to ask for images... because most of the images on /. are Goatse, and I don't think you want Goatse, unless the President Madagascar is really the Goatse guy...
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
You know, this has all happened before. What's the worst that can happen ?
Well this is what happened last time : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu
In short : 1/20 of the people who were infected died of the infection. This is a number that is too simplified : just about every baby infected died, as did just about every infected person over 75. Least affected were people between 5 and 20 years old.
Worldwide, the pandemic killed about 1% of the population. This totaled about 100 million people. The number is not well known since many hard-hit regions did not have data available : e.g. both the ottoman empire itself, and it's many enslaved populations went nearly totally unaccounted, it is quite certain that tons of black slaves of the muslims died totally untreated, and their numbers are not accounted for at all.
Just about every system in existence, whether related to health care or not was either abandoned or swamped. Entire factories were converted into hospitals, and basically nothing of the economy was operational. Trade, sea travel, ... all worked at severely diminished capacities. Hospitals emptied of docters and nurses, since they very quickly either ran, or became infected and sick themselves.
The pattern was similar to what were seeing today. The virus is present in one form of another in humans and a variety of animals, mainly chickens, monkeys of various species, pigs, goats and sheep. The pandemic was not a single virus but several similarly mutated forms of what is thought to have originated from a single strand. There were "warning" epidemics that started, but failed to cause the disaster the eventual strain caused, like we've seen today with the various small bird flew infections, the slightly bigger epidemics in malaysia and indonesia, and now the mexican outbreak.
Attacking these animals makes no sense, since the same pattern was observed then, and now : the dangerous strain jumped ONCE from animal to human (presumably ... it is also possible the virus mutated inside humans) and then only from human to human. If you want to prevent the infection from getting into a specific region, it's humans you need to worry about (e.g. an American military commander isolated Samoa using military force, which was spared the epidemic)
Please note that while we are capable of testing for the surface proteins of a virus (H1 is such a protein N1 is another) there are dozens of strains with the same surface features. It takes VERY expensive and time consuming tests to determine exactly which strain a patient has, and is rarely done at all, since there is no difference in treatment (despite all our medical knowledge, treatment for a virus infection is basically to make the patient comfortable and make sure he eats healthy).
Because of these limitations, there is very little information known about which strains and which genes were involved in causing the pandemic, and we have no data whatsoever about which genes went to which geographical regions.
The CDC has 141 confirmed cases of Swine Flu. Of those, 1 death has been recorded, in an infant in Texas who already had serious medical complications.
With 20,000 to 30,000 dying yearly of flu complications in the U.S., 1 death is hardly a significant statistic, and certainly not indicative of a pandemic. The WHO is, again, overreacting and fearmongering. The CDC has the most reliable information on the topic for Americans - not sure what equivalent other countries have. I certainly hope you're not relying on the WHO.
This is similar to the 1918 killer flu. From genetic experiments, it seems that there are two critical mutations that made the 1918 flue so deadly. The virus only has RNA (no double helix here), so is mutates very rapidly. It may only be dumb luck that is separating us from a killer of 10s of millions.
Think global, act loco
I'm sorry you were saying?
In this case, it's the Center for Disease Control, at least for Americans.
And in my opinion, just as important as slowing the infection to avoid overwhelming our hospitals, is also making sure the whole country isn't ill at once. It'd be a virtual petri dish, since you'd have a bunch of people spreading to the virus one another while their immune system is down, increasing the likelihood that it could mutate into something bad.
The Spanish Flu did the same thing. It was a mild flu that spread amongst a bunch of people, mutated, and then wiped out a few tens of millions as soon as it was colder. It's a different world for industrial nations than it was in 1918, but not so for southeast Asia, Africa, South America, etc.
Healthily.
You eat healthily.
You sing lovelily.
You act sillily.
Are you, by any chance, secretly a lion?
>And a percentage drop in population corresponds to a very real percentage drop in total GDP. Fewer consumers, fewer producers, and slowed growth and achievement.
But GDP per capita will raise and that's a good thing (for the survivors). Each individual will get more eventually.
http://media.photobucket.com/image/president%20madagascar%20shut%20down%20everything/CaptainFailcon/SHUTDOWNEVERYTHING.jpg
Kill the children, it's the only way for humanity to survive.
Nah. Older people who drive cars use far more resources, produce far more toxic byproducts, and have a much greater effect on the climate change that tends to be a driving factor for these pandemics. Humanity is much more likely to survive if we kill them (er, us) instead. Besides, older people have less to lose.
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
"Would it really be that bad if two billion people died?"
Well, the doctor interrupted me just about then,
Sayin, "Hey I've been havin' the same old dreams,
But mine was a little different you see.
I dreamt that the only person left after the war was me.
I didn't see you around."
Well, now time passed and now it seems
Everybody's having them dreams.
Everybody sees themselves walkin' around with no one else.
Half of the people can be part right all of the time,
Some of the people can be all right part of the time.
But all the people can't be all right all the time
I think Abraham Lincoln said that.
"I'll let you be in my dreams if I can be in yours,"
I said that.
Bob Dylan
More like 1 or 2 days. Read the 6 or 7th entry, "How can someone with the flu infect someone else?":
http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/swineflu_you.htm
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
And a percentage drop in population corresponds to a very real percentage drop in total GDP. Fewer consumers, fewer producers, and slowed growth and achievement.
While that may be true, you forget the consequences. For centuries, economists have been arguing that a growing population is essential to a strong economy and culture. Well, that's as may be, but there's a limit to the number of people that the earth can support. Depending on behaviour, we are either fast approaching or have vastly exceeded this hard limit (where "hard limit" means not that the limit can't be moved, but that it exists and that when it's reached ecosystems (including people) start dying).
If a few billion people die off due to a pandemic, that would go a hell of a long way towards reducing, say, greenhouse gas emissions (especially if there are lots of deaths among the rich, unlikely though that may be). Global warming is projected to kill billions in the worst case, and even if global warming makes less trouble than our best scientists expect, what happens when there is no more clean surface water? Or when erosion due to deforestation washes a few more billions of cubic meters of topsoil out to sea? Or ...
We seriously, urgently need an economy that is not based on growth. For a while, we need one that is based on a shrinking population, and then we need to transition towards one that is based on a roughly constant population. Economists don't like this, but it's a fact of life.
Of course, killing a few billion people will not help: we'll just keep reproducing. It would be pretty convenient if we first figured out how many people we should have on the planet, and then took steps to stabilise the population, and then a few billion died off to help us get there quickly. That's not what's happening here.
I've left compassion out of this argument. Of course compassion is important, but it does not provide any means for sidestepping the fact of limited carrying capacity. And the quicker we act, the more compassionately we will be able to act.
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
No! Follow Jello Biafra's advice: Kill the poor!
A few deaths are acceptable to keep the economy running. We're talking millions or billions of dollars of lost economic activity.
Are you quoting who? Dr. Strange Love?
If you can delay or slow the spread, you build natural immunity in the population the longer it is present.
Getting a vaccine any time soon is secondary pipe dream. We will develop large scale immunity faster than they will get vaccine deployed.
Living in Chile
Avian Flu, Bird Flu. West Nile, etc. The funny part is after the fact most people who got all worried won't even feel stupid afterwords. They will just move on instead of learning something. The real tragedy is one day a real threat will happen but will be treated by people as every other time the news cried wolf
People seem to panic when they hear the word pandemic. What people are not realizing is the true definition of a pandemic. It is simply a disease or sickness that is prevalent around the globe. The swine flu can go panemic, and may not kill very many people.
It seems that most people (with the exception of the 1 child in Texas that was visiting from Mexico) show relatively mild symptoms, and recover fairly quickly from this. You need to ask yourself why numerous people in Mexico die from this, and virtual no one else outside of Mexico are affected other than a few mild symptoms? (My city has around 20 cases, all have recovered at home, or are recovering, nobody hospitalized). There are a few possibilities, 1. Mexico is a third world nation and doesn't have the level of health care that US, Canada, Europe, etc have, 2. The virus may have mutated to a more mild version, 3. Mexicans have a genetic weakness to this influenza.
The media and the WHO seem to be panicing over this, but if this is a more mild form and spreads easily, why not test our defences against a true pandemic such as H5N1 that kills virtually 100% of people who contract it? This is a great way to see if we're ready to battle a pandemic.
I for one am not scared... then again the first wave of the 1918 Spanish Flu was mild, 2nd and 3rd waves killed 100 million world wide...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0wIBkoBhO4
Fighting disease is something we can, and have defeated in the past. Come on, we've damn near wiped out polio, and we actually defeated smallpox.
Just a nitpick, but I really don't think you really can compare present disease with past disease like smallpox. We eradicated smallpox with vaccines, but that was before Wakefield's Epic Trolling and the fears that mercury/aluminum/formaldehyde/anything and everything in vaccines causes autism/cancer/AIDS/diabetes/criminal behavior (I shit you not, I once read something that claimed vaccines cause criminal behavior). If you were to try a widespread vaccination program today, like the one the WHO used to get rid of smallpox, I don't think it would work. For it to be really successful, as in getting rid of something for good, I think we'd need fairly large segments of the population to get vaccinated so the disease has nowhere to go, and now, too many people think that vaccines are proof that 'they' are out to get them in some vague nefarious plot. Vaccines wiped out smallpox and have polio on the ropes, but they now, unfortunately, have way too many imaginary problems associated with them to have the same stopping power.
Expand to the stars, problem solved.
Malthus was right.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
In the 1918 pandemic the world was swept by a mild version that killed very few and infected many. And then in six months in the biomass of humanity the mutagenic properties of influenza found a superflu that killed, by some reports, 100 million or about 10% of all living people at that time. At that, some think we were lucky. It could have been much worse.
But don't panic.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Just to clarify, the earth has a finite limit on the number of humans it can support, but that number is based on a multitude of factors.
The most important of which is the geopolitical policies we have in place that influence the efficiency of our food distribution systems. Right now, we're pretty piss poor as the US has to much food, as do a lot of areas in europe. Most of africa has too little food, or devotes a much higher percentage of their GDP to food production because of the difficulty in farming in their regions. I have no doubts the earth can support 6 billion people, but not very effectively given our current political climate of largely ignoring africa.
I have nothing against an economy that promotes growth, but at the same time I wish to see less social programs ensuring seniors can collect paychecks for doing nothing. If a person made it to 65 years old can't work and didn't have the foresight to save a retirement while he was working, I say let him starve.
Our current social security program is kind of like a pyramid scheme, with old people on top. We need a bigger and bigger pool of people contributing to social security for the pyramid to be solvent. If the young stop contributing, the pyramid collapses.
The only alternative then is to force people to provide their own retirement.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Also the pollution in and around Mexico city. Various reports on respiratory problems in Mexico city say things like 8-20% higher cases of asthma and respiratory related deaths. That might have something to do with why this flu killed so many people there and in the mountains to the east.
According to an NPR story I heard yesterday:
1) "Pandemic" is defined as a new, infectious disease spreading in at least two countries in one region and at least one country in another region. We already have the two, and the other one is likely to be confirmed next week.
2) Computer projections by two independent teams both put the number of cases in the U.S. at around 1,700 by late May.
3) The spread is exponential, so the number at four months is far higher than quadruple the number at one month, and so on.
4) A vaccine like the ones used for seasonal flu can be made, but it will take a few months to get to market. Likewise, with a known demand more drugs like Tamiflu can be made but it will take time.
So by detecting the flu while it's in just a few hundred people, we can take measures to slow its exponential growth. That buys time for countermeasures and stops the epidemic from becoming "serious". If we didn't detect the disease until it was already in 20,000 people, there would be far less time to react and a greater chance of "serious" consequences.
Not at all, unless you're prepared to launch 210,000 people into space every day. That's the growth rate of the world population.
1 is much less than 20,000, yes. But that's 1 in 141 cases. If the entire population of the U.S. were infected and died at that rate, that'd be 2,000,000 deaths.
Some people might avoid infection, making that number lower. And many cases might be unreported, also making that number lower. But some of the current cases might yet become fatalities, making that number higher. There's a lot of uncertainty in those rates right now.
Until the disease is better understood, attempts to study and contain it are warranted. Even if it's just like an extra seasonal flu, trying to save another 20,000 lives is the humane thing to do.
"We seriously, urgently need an economy that is not based on growth."
Yes, I agree completely. But can anyone cite studies of how such an economy might work? What form it would take? Do we even have a clue how to think about it, much less transition to it?
It's also worth noting that the one in Texas was only brought to Texas after his local medical system was unable to deal with his illness.
For all its flaws, the American medical system is tremendously capable. You may legitimately complain about access and availability, but our healthcare system is second to none in terms of dealing with advanced, unique, or otherwise "interesting" (as Dr. House would say) illnesses.
That's important to consider in the mortality statistics for two reasons. One, because the CDC numbers show a near-zero mortality rate in the US. I believe it should properly be zero simply because it's inappropriate to count against us a patient who was severely ill to begin with--it's like starting a baseball team in the bottom of the ninth with two outs, then crediting them with a loss. I fully expect this disease to be a relative fizzle in the US, with very little effect above any other "normal" flu year.
The second reason is that--precisely because we have an atypically-good medical system--other nations are likely to see a greater effect. That's going to lead to all sorts of interesting economic effects, and probably diplomatic effects as well. I'm going to be very interested to see how China, Africa, et al. handle things.
"Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
--Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca
Finally, we have a good reason to 'think of the children!'.
Considering the validity of the analogy, I would say it's appropriate to say he got Godwined.
Is there a single universal definition of the verb form, anyway?
As long as they remain a minority, it will work. If 99% of people are vaccinated, the 1% will have so much less contact with each other that isolation is vastly more feasible. I believe similar studies have been done and there are case studies being made of some poor kids in California whose affluent parents decided their kids were too tough to need childhood vaccines.
The schools were safe until the minority grew to the point where it could spread quickly. If only one kid in the school hadn't had any shots, there would be no contagion. How could there be?
What's the point of trolling if you tell us you're doing it?
Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
For centuries, economists have been arguing that a growing population is essential to a strong economy and culture. ... We seriously, urgently need an economy that is not based on growth. For a while, we need one that is based on a shrinking population, and then we need to transition towards one that is based on a roughly constant population. Economists don't like this, but it's a fact of life.
I'm not sure this is true - surely many Western countries have little population growth, or in some cases near zero?
If anything, sudden population growth can be a problem, as decades later you'll have a surge of people who are retired, and the economy can't support them.
I've been calling it the flying-pig flu for a week now.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Heh, I always heard it as "The article/thread/whatever got Godwined" Thus the thread up until the point of nazis was valid, and sometimes the first couple of nazi-mentioning posts as well.
Also according to some ways I've heard it the poster in question must actually compare someone to nazis not just mention them.
As well, Godwin does not apply when Nazis would come up in the normal course of the subject matter; lets say for example a discussion on European Politics or History in the 20th century.
Or the potentially preventable death of possibly millions of people?
i was concerned about the swine virus so i rang up the national health direct hot-line here in britain - but all i got was crackling! courtesy - the news quiz - bbc
Not when the problem is SPACE FLU.
Pigs in Space?
Bork bork bork