- Image via Wikipedia
As the number of confirmed cases increase, we should be concerned about swine flu. However, I thought it would be interesting to look at the situation with a somewhat cynical eye.
First, there are good reasons to think that the media is hyping the flu. While some medical reporting has been responsible, folks in the news media have been using rather extreme headlines/leads, making use of dramatic music and images, and also using the various tricks of the trade to play up the situation. While the media should be covering the story, some of the coverage provided can be seen as “fear mongering.” The obvious motivation is that fear sells newspapers and attracts viewers. As such, the media folks have a commercial interest in playing up the story. Naturally, this sort of behavior is morally questionable because it helps create unnecessary levels of fear in the public and can lead to panic.
Second, some might suggest that politicians are also exploiting the situation in order to show that they are handling things. To use a specific example, the current administration could see this as an opportunity to show how much better it is than the Bush administration when it comes to crisis management. Whereas the Bush administration showed gross incompetence in handling Katrina, the Obama administration can create the image of being cool, calm and in control of the situation. Interestingly, while there is a swine flu command center in operation, there is no comparable system in place to deal with the normal flu-an illness that kills about 36,000 Americans a year. Of course, the normal flu does not provide the sort of scenario needed to craft an image. This is because, despite the deaths, Americans are rather complacent and seemingly unconcerned about the standard flu.
Third, it might be suspected that the situation is being exploited by the politicians and the pharmaceutical companies. While the CDC does collect specimens and do research on the virus, they hand off their data to these companies who will develop (and sell) any vaccines or treatments that are developed. Also, by declaring the situation to be an emergency, millions of dollars are freed for use. Some of this money is, obviously enough, being funneled into the pharmaceutical companies. For example, Tamiflu is no doubt selling very well now.
Naturally, each of these three concerns can be countered; but a cynical look in situations like this one is always well worth considering.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png)
Swine Flu? Obama’s cruise missles?
You think “these” views are cynical? Here’s an idea that’s actually floating around parts of the blogosphere: Hype ‘swine flu’ deaths,and soon you’ll have forced vaccinations and more. Fear will increase, and maybe martial law will be declared. People will be turning in their neighbors for not going along with the program. Government will do anything to strip us of our freedoms. And blah, blah.
On a more serious note. When the swine flu swings by again in the fall, which may happen, it could be far more virulent than it is now. As I understand it, that was the case with the flu pandemic of 1918. 36,000 deaths could be a “best” case scenario. A sensible approach would seem to be to take whatever effective advance measures can be taken and cynicism be damned.
For Obama to do otherwise would be foolish–he’s going to be damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t anyway. He could choose to do little or nothing. But,I would think the specter of possibly hundreds of thousands of deaths would argue against that route. His best approach would seem to be over-preparation. He may suffer ridicule from his political enemies for a few months, but if H1N1 proves to be a major killer in the fall, more lives may be saved and the naysayers will be left red-faced for at least one more news cycle.
The only way it will is if the amount of cases outpaces the total number of hospitals’ abilities to treat the most severe cases. Then the tricky part is figuring out who needs the most attention the quickest. I still severely doubt it will be a problem here in the U.S. Cleanliness, diets and communication has improved drastically since the early 1900’s.
True. Our medical knowledge and infrastructure is vastly improved since the 1918 flu. Also, the media often fails to note one critical factor: WWI. In the US, the flu seems to have been aided by the fact that so many healthy young men were confined closely in barracks and on troop transports. Jam a lot of people together in those conditions and that is what happens.
Also, there are other factors that arose from the fact that the world had been at war-those factors need to be considered when assessing swine flu.
Though I think virtually everything is hyped, I think that the precautions taken were appropriate. The WHO is one of the few competant global entities.
True. But it is interesting how we do not take the same precautions against the seasonal flu and other illnesses.
I think that actually we do. Are you confusing media over reporting with adequate steps taken by people who will be fired or brought up on charges if something like this does turn out to be really bad.
I don’t really see any steps that were taken that weren’t prudent. Again, just as with terrorism, media over reporting does not equal over reaction by the entities with jurisdiction. I don’t want people at the WHO blowing things off like this. And, if there was an over reaction, do you know anyone’s life who was affected. I don’t.
Well, I haven’t seen a seasonal flu command center or a President speaking about the steps being taken to fight it.
How about 45,000 deaths from auto accidents a year? It doesn’t get as much press as this crappola. everything is so out of prospective with what we are fed for information.
True. We tolerate such deaths for many reasons. One is that they are spread out over time and hence there is no one single event that can be a point of fixation. Another reason is that people are rather committed to cars-could you imagine people deciding to walk or bike just to save 40,000+ people a year?