New Swine Flu Deaths in the UK

In the last few days there has been two deaths of otherwise healthy individuals in the United Kingdom caused by swine flu. These deaths are in complete contrast to the other swine flu related deaths that had previously affected people with underlying health problems.

The recent death is of a six year old girl who is rumoured to have only had tonsillitis before she died. It seems that the young are more seriously affected by swine flu than the old. And some are beginning to wonder if the swine flu virus isn't starting to mutate.

Scientists have responded by stating that there is no evidence that the virus has changed significantly in the last few weeks. However, the increased number of swine flu related deaths is worrying a sign of the speed of its spread and the random nature of its capacity to cause serious illness.

For more information go to:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org/

Swine Flu Deaths and the Media

The official explanation for this unusual disparity is that the initial reports were only suspected cases. But what made these cases suspect in the first place? Did these 159 unfortunate Mexicans die of respiratory disease or not? Apparently, Mexico doesn’t have the facilities to isolate and confirm cases of swine flu. Samples have to be sent to the United States to be verified and confirmed.

If that’s the case how could such a furor have been stirred up about something that wasn’t real at the time? Before the media got on the swine flu bandwagon shouldn’t someone have verified the numbers?

For more information go to:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org/

What happened to the number of Swine Flu deaths?

If I remember correctly wasn’t the number of deaths due to swine flu in Mexico something close to 150 people? No, in fact on the 29th of April 2009 a number of media agencies stated that the official death toll was in fact 159. From the BBC to CNN it seemed that the numbers that were succumbing to swine flu were growing rapidly.

Now the number of deaths is less than half that amount, what happened? Is there something going on the background that we should be privy to?

This strikes of a swine flu cover up.

For more information look at:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org/

Swine Flu has just got Serious

It seems that the swine flu situation isn’t going to just go away and disappear like some previous instances of new contagious diseases. It has become a world-wide phase six pandemic, that is spreading faster than it can monitored. It can no longer be contained the virus is now truly… wild.

Now health experts are in agreement that the infection rate in most northern industrialized countries could surge to an unbelievable 100,000 cases a day by the beginning of September. There could also be further spikes in new cases in the autumn and winter.

Luckily the disease is still relatively mild.

But from the statistics it seems very likely that a vast majority of people will eventually contract the disease.

What can we do to make sure that we are protected? Is there a way to avoid getting swine flu?

For more information about swine flu go to:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org/
http://www.swine-flu-facts.info

Swine Flu and the suspicious behavior of the Media

Pandemics unlike diseases like cholera or malaria are not local and are not isolated to instances where an area suffers from poor hygiene. Pandemics are global. Anybody, anywhere can catch a disease that has reached true pandemic status. A disease like swine flu does not discriminate, rich or poor, young or old anyone can become a victim of its symptoms. Millions, even billions of people could potentially be infected with the disease. The potential devastation of a major pandemic is phenomenal. The 1918 Spanish flu pandemic infected one third of the world’s population and killed more than 50 million people. In the last century, pandemics killed more people than all the worlds natural disasters put together. The scales of death caused by pandemics were comparable to those of world wars.

The more skeptical among us will be quick to remind us that there is a major difference between diseases like malaria and cholera compared to a disease like swine flu.
Swine flu is a true pandemic, it can kill anyone… especially those in the industrialized world. As mentioned before diseases like malaria and cholera are localized to poorer regions of the world. The media could have focused on swine flu more intensely for the simple reason that it had the ability to affect the industrialized nations immensely. Disrupting the proper workings of governments and possibly crippling economies globally.

But does this make the media bad?

In view of the potential of pandemics the media had no option but to cover the swine flu situation the way they did. The more informed we are, the more prepared we are and we can’t be too informed when it comes to something as potentially dangerous as a new form of influenza.

For more information go to:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.info
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org

Media's involvement with Swine Flu

Possibly… but not likely.

Firstly, why would the media take such a course of action? Who would benefit the most? Surely not the media themselves, they’ve already taken some criticism for their over-exuberant coverage of the swine flu epidemic. The only ones that would benefit from such coverage are the major governments of the world, not necessarily the media themselves.

Secondly, what do we mean by the ‘media’? Are we talking about one interconnected, interrelated conglomerate that are seemingly separate but in reality are one united global organization? There is no evidence to substantiate this idea and it smells too much of a conspiracy theory.

Why the media covered the swine flu epidemic the way they did was because they had no choice. If we remember back to early 2004 when cases of avian flu just came to light we can see that the media coverage was just as intense. There are tragic historically reasons for not taking swine flu or any potential pandemic lightly.

For more information go to:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.info/
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org/

Why did the media make so much noise about the of the threat of swine flu? Over the same period of time thousands of people died of the normal seasonal flu as well as a number of other persistent human diseases. Why didn’t these diseases get as much coverage?

Swine flu was new; we had no protection against it. Its potential was unknown, its capacity to cause devastation was a real possibility. But was this reason enough for the over-exaggerated coverage of the disease by the media?

The more cynical among us will be quick to point out that we are in the middle of 2009 and are currently undergoing a global recession. What could distract the masses more than the threat of a killer disease? What could invoke the fear of God more than the prospect of facing one’s own mortality in light of a devastating, indiscriminate, rapidly transmitted disease?

Could the media have deliberately stoked up the dangers of swine for their own reasons?

For more information go to:
http://www.swine-flu-facts.org/
http://www.swine-flu-facts.info