The Precautionary Principle...... OR

21 Apr 2010

Government induced hysteria ?
This is a serious subject and I hope some of you guys will engage with me on this cos I don't see an end to something which seems to have become a scourge of modern life and has really come about in the last 15 years.
The Precautionary Principle is an expression being bandied about on various blogs but it really related to State mismanagement in respect of risk assesment and ensuing widespread public panic/hysteria and it is not just limited to this country - it is a world wide phenomina.
Who remembers:
Millenium Bug
Edwina Currie and the egg crisis (salmonella)
CJD / BSE
Bird Flu
Swine Flu
and most recently - The Ash Cloud
There is of course the grand daddy of them all still out there in the name of global warming but does it not strike you as odd that ALL of these hysteria events follow the same pattern in the way that strange circumstances get examined by the media and so called Experts rustle up a theory. The doomsday theory is then deemed newsworthy and the worlds press get hold of it. Governments then step in - in the name of public safety and totally over react and mismanage the situation and the cost is in the £ billions. Eventually the scare fizzles away and we are left wondering what it was all about and decidely the poorer as a result.
Whilst this is not a Global warming thread per se, I just wonder if the worlds governments had the threat of being sued like the UK government was yesterday by the airlines - would we see a more committed and transparent scientific approach to the whole global warming issue.
It may be my age but I am just overwhelmed with cynicism at the moment. I can't say I even think it is a conspiracy theory - I think it is total ineptness and by abiding to the "Precautionary Principle" it seems better to allow the worlds population to suffer one major panic after another and seemingly with no end in sight.
Anyone got any comments other than to have a valium sandwich?

21 Apr 2010

An interesting thread - needs more thought for a full answer.
My initial reaction is that the reasoning breaks down into more than one area - sociology and social-economic considerations to start with.
There is another factor, and that is the way that all facts are skewed by the media.
Plim :sad:

21 Apr 2010

Quote by Plimboy
An interesting thread - needs more thought for a full answer.
My initial reaction is that the reasoning breaks down into more than one area - sociology and social-economic considerations to start with.
There is another factor, and that is the way that all facts are skewed by the media.

Plim :sad:

Or more, that Governments exploit a situation by skewering the media...
I'm a conspiracy theorist, through and through. This is a Government's way of controlling the population with the intention of making them ever so grateful that they exist.
You only have to see the mortified look on GB's face when DC talks of big society and small Government. All their hard work controlling everything that we do will disappear down the pan and people may once more be able to take control of their lives.

21 Apr 2010

I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.
I was proved right. They paid more attention to that than road deaths or MRSA, all of which take far greater lives.
The problems often lie with the so called " experts ", who are usually appointment by the Government. Do they say what they think or what they think the Government want them to say?
The Ash problem it seems has been blown ( no pun intended ) out of all proportion.
Planes were flying through British air space from Europe, either going to the USA or coming from the USA. How crazy that planes were flying through our air space from other countries, but British planes were not allowed to fly. That sort of sums up some of the madness.
Global warming theories will rumble on forever, as the great thing for Governments is that whatever proof is put on the table that it does not exist, they will come up with another set of theories. When really it is all about money and getting as much out of the population as possible.
How long before another one comes along? Not long if you believe the experts.

21 Apr 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.
I was proved right. They paid more attention to that than road deaths or MRSA, all of which take far greater lives.
The problems often lie with the so called " experts ", who are usually appointment by the Government. Do they say what they think or what they think the Government want them to say?
The Ash problem it seems has been blown ( no pun intended ) out of all proportion.
Planes were flying through British air space from Europe, either going to the USA or coming from the USA. How crazy that planes were flying through our air space from other countries, but British planes were not allowed to fly. That sort of sums up some of the madness.
Global warming theories will rumble on forever, as the great thing for Governments is that whatever proof is put on the table that it does not exist, they will come up with another set of theories. When really it is all about money and getting as much out of the population as possible.
How long before another one comes along? Not long if you believe the experts.

Yes, but hadn't the height at which they could keep at got something to do with that?
Plim

21 Apr 2010

Possibly.
But the ash is still spilling out and yet they have now decided to open the airports again.
Is it any better now than it was five days ago, or are the airlines starting to make huge noises to the Government over their huge financial losses?
I prefer that option as forever the cynic.

21 Apr 2010

The Dutch and Germans were complaining bitterly on Friday that the computer model created by VAAC Europe (Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre - which incidentally is the UK Met Office) was flawed and that one model was influencing UK NATS and Eurocontrol. Unfortunately, neither NATS nor Euroncontrol have the powers to ground only the respective Departments for Transport and in the name of European Unity they all acted together but never actually spoke together until Monday (5 days after the event). By yesterday morning, the rest of Europe had started to operate and the UK was in danger of being the odd man out sticking steadfastly to the Met Office model and when BA launched 24 aircraft towards LHR the pressure was too much and Lord Adonis had to finally put his balls in the drawer. Stand by now for the biggest bout of buck passing for a long time because ultimately it is the Commander of an aircraft who holds the final say in whether an aircraft can fly safely and that right was taken away by the respective DfT's on the strength of data supplied by a computer model from the UK Met Office. The airlines will argue that they had choice taken away from them and this will be the basis of their legal actions and we will all end up paying for the ineptness of the Met Office and the overall European regulatory response.
In respect of the greater principle in all of these debacles I am coming round to the belief that it is not a conspiracy theory but either:
a) Total and absolute incompetance OR
b) The fear of litigation is so great that the Precautionary Principle (ie do nothing) applies until such time as the tipping point of even greater litigation from the other side requires a course of action which is proportionate to the size of the perceived litigation OR
c) A mixture of both of the above.

21 Apr 2010

Quote by Plimboy
I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.
I was proved right. They paid more attention to that than road deaths or MRSA, all of which take far greater lives.
The problems often lie with the so called " experts ", who are usually appointment by the Government. Do they say what they think or what they think the Government want them to say?
The Ash problem it seems has been blown ( no pun intended ) out of all proportion.
Planes were flying through British air space from Europe, either going to the USA or coming from the USA. How crazy that planes were flying through our air space from other countries, but British planes were not allowed to fly. That sort of sums up some of the madness.
Global warming theories will rumble on forever, as the great thing for Governments is that whatever proof is put on the table that it does not exist, they will come up with another set of theories. When really it is all about money and getting as much out of the population as possible.
How long before another one comes along? Not long if you believe the experts.

Yes, but hadn't the height at which they could keep at got something to do with that?
Plim
Well, yes. Above 20,000 feet it was ok but below that it was not.
But tell me, how the f*ck do aircraft get to 20,000 feet except by flying initially below that level dunno

There was also a whole fleet of commercial prop aircraft grounded when they were saying that it was only jets afftected by the ash :confused:
Why in the name of common sense did they dispatch a warship to Santander when they could have used military prop aircraft (which were not subject to the ban) to repatriate "our boys" from the Rifles after spending 6 harrowing months in Afghanistan :huh:
Sheer unadulterated incompetence.
Just as well they didn't appoint Adonis as Education Minister, he can't say his r's and he is sure as hell useless in a crisis - as has been found before!
GB's no better.. he tells the nation that there are 100 coaches in Madrid to bring people home when the real number is 5!! No wonder we got in a financial mess if the ex-chancellor can't understand the difference between these two numbers :embarrased:

21 Apr 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
***snip****I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.

Sorry to cut your post apart - I really don't know whether swine flu was a load of rubbish or not. What I do know, is that I, and many other health-care professionals worked very hard before and during the "main epidemic" doing a lot of extra work to help contain the problem. We all believed the WHO info and everyone did what they were supposed to do. It is possible, that without all the extra work, precautions, vaccinations etc the virus would have turned out to be nothing. It is also possible that if nobody had taken these precautions many would now be dead. I can see how difficult it must be to release this information - it seems a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" sort of scenario to me. I think I would rather know about a potential risk than be ignorant of it. I can then at least deal with it in my own way.

21 Apr 2010

Quote by ForestFunsters
***snip****I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.

Sorry to cut your post apart - I really don't know whether swine flu was a load of rubbish or not. What I do know, is that I, and many other health-care professionals worked very hard before and during the "main epidemic" doing a lot of extra work to help contain the problem. We all believed the WHO info and everyone did what they were supposed to do. It is possible, that without all the extra work, precautions, vaccinations etc the virus would have turned out to be nothing. It is also possible that if nobody had taken these precautions many would now be dead. I can see how difficult it must be to release this information - it seems a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" sort of scenario to me. I think I would rather know about a potential risk than be ignorant of it. I can then at least deal with it in my own way.
No problem with sniping my post.
As you are a health care worker can you tell me how many people died from Swine flu in the UK?
Also as you work in that field can you tell me how many people roughly die a year through MRSA in the UK?
I can tell you that eight people EVERY day die on our roads, that is people per year.
Also I wonder what percentage of people were actually vaccinated against it? Because the vast majority were not yet still the deaths were very low, in fact I would say much lower than a normal years flu.
The WHO are people who thrive on scare tactics, and I believe that whilst they warned us, they were big time covering their arses. It still means no matter what we may or may not say, the " pandemic " never happened....in fact in was more like a damp sponge.
Whether that was due to vaccinations or warnings, you nor I cannot be sure, but as the majority of people were not vaccinated I would say it was a scare that had no real substance. Just like bird flu, and the others that have been mentioned on this thread.

21 Apr 2010

Quote by Kaznkev
***snip****I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.

Sorry to cut your post apart - I really don't know whether swine flu was a load of rubbish or not. What I do know, is that I, and many other health-care professionals worked very hard before and during the "main epidemic" doing a lot of extra work to help contain the problem. We all believed the WHO info and everyone did what they were supposed to do. It is possible, that without all the extra work, precautions, vaccinations etc the virus would have turned out to be nothing. It is also possible that if nobody had taken these precautions many would now be dead. I can see how difficult it must be to release this information - it seems a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" sort of scenario to me. I think I would rather know about a potential risk than be ignorant of it. I can then at least deal with it in my own way.
It is a fact that some people will deny risk until it directly affects them ,at which point they scream blue murder that enough was not done to protect them.
As the daughter and granddaughter of people in vunerable groups i am grateful to those in the nhs who worked hard to ensure they got vaccinated.
On this part I have to reserve judgment until I can see the figures, I have a sneaking suspicion though that no more died of flue last year than any other year.
I have to agree some what with the OP, not sure if it is because I am getting older or what the reason is, but I have become a bit of a doubting Thomas.
I think it could be because we have been told so many porky pies over the last few years that one becomes distrustful. the problem I now see is the boy who cried wolf syndrome. When a real life threatening problem arrives, no one will believed the hype!

21 Apr 2010

Quote by ForestFunsters
***snip****I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.

Sorry to cut your post apart - I really don't know whether swine flu was a load of rubbish or not. What I do know, is that I, and many other health-care professionals worked very hard before and during the "main epidemic" doing a lot of extra work to help contain the problem. We all believed the WHO info and everyone did what they were supposed to do. It is possible, that without all the extra work, precautions, vaccinations etc the virus would have turned out to be nothing. It is also possible that if nobody had taken these precautions many would now be dead. I can see how difficult it must be to release this information - it seems a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" sort of scenario to me. I think I would rather know about a potential risk than be ignorant of it. I can then at least deal with it in my own way.
the key sentance here is:
"We all believed the WHO info and everyone did what they were supposed to do."
The assumption being that the WHO was acting correctly and on solid information which it turned out not to be. On a global scale, the resort city of Cancun was devastated last year when overnight the flights stopped arriving and the great irony was that there was not a single case of swine flu in Cancun at that time. This is the sort of overly dramatic and overly cautious approach that is being questioned. Is it time to stop having blanket faith in these Organisation and demanding transparent and robust investigation before committing the world on a huge and costly exercise that may prove unnecessary.

21 Apr 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.
I was proved right.

Really? Please direct us all Mr Kent to the stunning bit of medical research wot you must have done to show up all these so-called medical experts'? confused

You may not use hindsight, 20-20 vision, or back-to-front binoculars to support your argument. :P

"We all believed the WHO info and everyone did what they were supposed to do."
The assumption being that the WHO was acting correctly and on solid information

Too Hot, you are arguing from a point in time where certain things are partially known. You ever been responsible for life or death decisions at a time when you weren't in full possession of all the facts? At all? Have you ever, in your life, had the lives of hundreds / thousands / millions of people right there in the palm of your hand, just waiting for a nod from you? I think not! I think I can say that with some certainty!
Using your ash cloud example, if the Govt had said 'case not proven' and had allowed jet aeroplanes weighing several hundred / thousand tons full of people and inflammable liquids to fly, on the basis that all concerned signed a disclaimer saying they flew at their own risk, what would you have said if the aforesaid jet fell out of the sky and landed on your house, killing you and everyone in it?
Would you have applauded them for not giving in to the 'hysteria', or would you have been looking for a set of balls to tear off? Not that you'd be doing either, cos you'd be dead, obviously, but you take my point? ;)
Possibly we are too litigious, and possibly there is a tendency to inflate and over-estimate real risks, and there is no doubt a tendency to stoke up the fear factor for politically expedient reasons in certain circumstances when it suits. ((( I have a good book by Dan Gardner called 'Risk : The Science and Politics of Fear' beside me on the bookshelf as I write. ))) Maybe you just picked bad examples, but the precautionary principle as far as Swine Flu, volcanic ash clouds, is British egg production in the late 1980's really, generally speaking, somewhat riddled with Salmonella, given that the one thing you'd expect to find in an egg factory full of not-very-healthy chickens is Salmonella, etc, seems sound? confused

N x x x ;)

21 Apr 2010

Quote by neilinleeds
Too Hot, using your ash cloud example, if the Govt had said 'case not proven' and had allowed jet aeroplanes weighing several hundred / thousand tons full of people and inflammable liquids to fly, on the basis that all concerned signed a disclaimer saying they flew at their own risk, what would you have said if the aforesaid jet fell out of the sky and landed on your house, killing you and everyone in it?
Would you have applauded them for not giving in to the 'hysteria', or would you have been looking for a set of balls to tear off? Not that you'd be doing either, cos you'd be dead, obviously, but you take my point? ;)
Possibly we are too litigious,and possibly there is a tendency to inflate and over-estimate real risks ((( I have a good back by Dan Gardner called 'Risk : The Science of Politics and Fear' beside me on the bookshelf as I write. ))) but the precautionary principle in the examples ((( Swine Flu, volcanic ash clouds, is British egg production in the late 1980's really, generally speaking, somewhat riddled with Salmonella, given that the one thing you'd expect to find in an egg factory full of not-very-healthy chickens is Salmonella, etc . . . ))) you cited seems sound?
N x x x ;)

1) The governments were inept at handling this whole ash cloud debacle and everyone in European aviation knows this. Aircraft fly through dispersed plumes all the time because there are about 20 volcano's erupting somewhere in the world at any one time and this particular one is small in volcanic terms. The Met Office (VAAC) computer model did not factor in large scale dispersal and assumed that the ash would be as it was when the BA flight was so badly damaged in 1982 (the incident that prompted the writing of the ICAO document about flying through volcanic ash). The fact is that any jet at any time could theoretically fall out of the sky and land on my house and the best chance I had of that never happening was in the last six days - ash or no ash just illogical risk aversion by the DfT. Dispersed ash will never down an airliner and cause catastrophic structural failure and that would be the only reason it would fall on my house. Even the largest airliners glide and any engine malfunction if there were one would not cause the aircraft to suddenly fall out of the sky. You may already know that the funny sensation you get about 20 minutes from landing is when the thrust is reduced on the engines and the aircraft makes a controlled descent under little or no power. Notwithstanding this, the engines would not fail with so little ash anyway. As an aside, I can offer a pretty good guess that a number of people driving instead of flying over this last few days have been killed and seriously injured on European roads - this would not have happened had they been flying again because the ash was so dispersed to make the effect on the engines insignificant. So - irony of ironies - aircraft get grounded for unnecessary reasons citing safety and a % of those who would have flown get injured/killed on the roads.
2) Swine Flu was an over reaction by the WHO and eggs as we all now know are packed with protein and nutrients and cause less death and disease than other food which is consumed after being incorrectly chilled, covered or has been contaminated. Salmonella was present in a small sample of eggs and may have only affected anyone consuming them if they were eaten raw. Certainly cooking your egges thoroughly may have been better advice than what was given which was effectively that eggs give you salmonella poisoning.

21 Apr 2010

Quote by neilinleeds
I stated many times, on this forum also that the Swine flu pandemic was a load of rubbish.
I was proved right.

Really?Please direct us all Mr Kent to the stunning bit of medical research wot you must have done to show up all these so-called medical experts'? confused

You may not use hindsight, 20-20 vision, or back-to-front binoculars to support your argument. :P
Too Hot, using your ash cloud example, if the Govt had said 'case not proven' and had allowed jet aeroplanes weighing several hundred / thousand tons full of people and inflammable liquids to fly, on the basis that all concerned signed a disclaimer saying they flew at their own risk, what would you have said if the aforesaid jet fell out of the sky and landed on your house, killing you and everyone in it?
Would you have applauded them for not giving in to the 'hysteria', or would you have been looking for a set of balls to tear off? Not that you'd be doing either, cos you'd be dead, obviously, but you take my point? ;)
Possibly we are too litigious, and possibly there is a tendency to inflate and over-estimate real risks, and there is no doubt a tendency to stoke up the fear factor for politically expedient reasons in certain circumstances when it suits. ((( I have a good book by Dan Gardner called 'Risk : The Science and Politics of Fear' beside me on the bookshelf as I write. ))) Maybe you just picked bad examples, but the precautionary principle as far as Swine Flu, volcanic ash clouds, is British egg production in the late 1980's really, generally speaking, somewhat riddled with Salmonella, given that the one thing you'd expect to find in an egg factory full of not-very-healthy chickens is Salmonella, etc, seems sound? confused

N x x x ;)
You must have been asleep then Neil if you have not seen how many times I have stated it was all blown out of proportion.
No medical expert here matey, other than the use of my common sense, and as it happens I WAS right matey....it was NO pandemic at all....or are you now saying that it was???
I should have taken bets on it and I would have ended up very rich indeed.
I have seen Governments use their scare tactics....of course they were right and I was wrong when I also stated the bird flu was rubbish.
They should employ me as I am more accurate than their so called experts, being paid shit loads of money to wrongly predict things.

21 Apr 2010

Better safe then sorry......an old chestnut I know but one minor incident caused by the ash and the government,airlines,C.A.A. et al would have been crucified....but now it seems your money is more important than your safety..nothing new there then

22 Apr 2010

Quote by Kenty
No medical expert here matey, other than the use of my common sense, and as it happens I WAS right matey....it was NO pandemic at all....or are you now saying that it was???

In the sense that the virus originated in some small corner of Central America, allegedly, and has since spread around the globe, well yes Kenty, I suppose I am saying it was a pandemic. Possibly we're arguing at cross purposes, and using different definitions of the word? confused

Quote by Too Hot
1) The governments were inept at handling this whole ash cloud debacle and everyone in European aviation knows this.

Everyone in the aviation industry knows this, but governments across Europe aren't so sure? Who to trust? Those with a profit margin to maintain currently losing millions of pounds a day, or those with a duty of care to their subjects / citizens? It's a tricky one!

Quote by Too Hot
Aircraft fly through dispersed plumes all the time because there are about 20 volcano's erupting somewhere in the world at any one time and this particular one is small in volcanic terms. The Met Office (VAAC) computer model did not factor in large scale dispersal and assumed that the ash would be as it was when the BA flight was so badly damaged in 1982 (the incident that prompted the writing of the ICAO document about flying through volcanic ash).

That's a cracking paragraph Too Hot. Looks very technical? confused

One question . . . how would you feel if the plane you were on started diving towards a very hard surface at a ferocious rate of knots? Would you be thinking 'Well, I'm glad I left it up to the airlines to decide that their planes were perfectly safe when they took a few hundred quid off me', or would you be thinking 'Bloody VAAC computer models. What do the Met Office know? Never once factored in large scale dispersion, or ran a calculation of just how many particles of volcanic ash of a certain size of a certain composition can be safely sucked through an engine running at a certain temperature', as the rest of your fellow passengers plummet screaming to their deaths? I mean, as far as yer balance of probabilities goes, noone could possibly have seen it coming, cos that whole past experience thing where a plane actually fell out of the sky with not a single one of it's four engines running was purely anecdotal, eh?
Not that massive engine failure is really all that much of an issue anyways, obviously, cos like you say all pilots are capable of non-powered landings from any single point in space, regardless of mileage or available runways, in the same way that all helicopter pilots can auto-rotate down to a soft landing when their engines fail? Let's ignore 15:1 glide ratios or thereabouts for 747s and what have you, purely for the sake of argument.
N x x x ;)

22 Apr 2010

Quote by flower411
From the Oxford English dictionary it appears that it was a pandemic ...

I haven`t seen an ounce of "proof" that contradicts this.

I know. All those ''so called'' experts who say it was a pandemic, but it can't have been because Kenty didn't die of it.
Incidentally, I had swine flu, and I didn't die. So it probably wasn't worth the NHS giving me tamiflu, and treating me as a swine flu victim, with all the extra advice and interventions they put into caring for people like me, because I didn't die. Bloody so called health care professionals. Why did they bother eh? I mean, it's not as if I died. Coming next week, my seminal peer reviewed paper on why the police shouldn't bother having a murder squad because I haven't been slaughtered in my bed this week, a successor to my ground breaking paper 'Virgins shouldn't use condoms because they haven't got anyone pregnant yet.'
If I could ban two words it would be 'so called'. When deployed in debate they usually indicate that someone who's not an expert is about to display their ignorance of expert knowledge in order to make ill informed assertions about a topic on which they know the square root of sod all.

22 Apr 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Better safe then sorry......an old chestnut I know but one minor incident caused by the ash and the government,airlines,C.A.A. et al would have been crucified....but now it seems your money is more important than your safety..nothing new there then

No, it is the illogical response to the perceived risk that was wrong. If we made flying as safe as driving we would accept three aircraft a day falling out of the sky somewhere in the world every day. That is unacceptable to anyone, but the government in fact made flying 100% safe by grounding aircraft for 6 days for a risk that most people in aviation new to be negligible. If safety was the most over-riding factor in the world all road speed limits should be reduced to 30 mph on motorways and 15 mph urban. All vehicles should be limited in power/speed and DIY should be made illegal. Can you see any government mandating such risk aversion policies?

22 Apr 2010

At the risk of being condemned as a conspiracy theorist, fear is a bloody good way to manage people. Governments are in the business of managing the populace. Im not posting any links but if you want a smile about this kind of thing search three monkeys on the usual video sites.
There is another aspect and I think it comes down to the generally low skill levels we the human race have at assessing and managing risk. Dont forget people understand probability things so badly that they will happily buy lottery tickets expecting to win.

22 Apr 2010

Quote by Too Hot
Government induced hysteria ?
This is a serious subject and I hope some of you guys will engage with me on this cos I don't see an end to something which seems to have become a scourge of modern life and has really come about in the last 15 years.
The Precautionary Principle is an expression being bandied about on various blogs but it really related to State mismanagement in respect of risk assesment and ensuing widespread public panic/hysteria and it is not just limited to this country - it is a world wide phenomina.
Who remembers:
Millenium Bug
Edwina Currie and the egg crisis (salmonella)
CJD / BSE
Bird Flu
Swine Flu
and most recently - The Ash Cloud
There is of course the grand daddy of them all still out there in the name of global warming but does it not strike you as odd that ALL of these hysteria events follow the same pattern in the way that strange circumstances get examined by the media and so called Experts rustle up a theory. The doomsday theory is then deemed newsworthy and the worlds press get hold of it. Governments then step in - in the name of public safety and totally over react and mismanage the situation and the cost is in the £ billions. Eventually the scare fizzles away and we are left wondering what it was all about and decidely the poorer as a result.
Whilst this is not a Global warming thread per se, I just wonder if the worlds governments had the threat of being sued like the UK government was yesterday by the airlines - would we see a more committed and transparent scientific approach to the whole global warming issue.
It may be my age but I am just overwhelmed with cynicism at the moment. I can't say I even think it is a conspiracy theory - I think it is total ineptness and by abiding to the "Precautionary Principle" it seems better to allow the worlds population to suffer one major panic after another and seemingly with no end in sight.
Anyone got any comments other than to have a valium sandwich?

always start from the premis....in who's interests does it serve ? follow the money... in the fraudulent case of global warming...goldman sachs...carbon cedits/offsets carbon tax.
global warming in the last 2 years has changed to "climate change" because the earth has actually been cooling for the last 8 to 9 years. solar activity has always been avoided because it has a far greater effect on the earths temperature (hot or cold) than the sum total of mans activity throughout history.
this is not an anti clean enviromental argument, on the contrary, we should always look after our surroundings micro or macro.
when considering a supposed pandemic and its declaration, if you research it carefully enough. you will find many clue's as to its integrity. never trust politicians or big financial interests and always follow the money.
other examples to be sceptical about on the same basis are 9/11 7/7 dr david kelly robin cook war in iraq war in afghanistan war on terror al qeader osama bin laden threats against iran nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists etc. questioning and reasoning official explanations does not make you a conspiracy theorist. it means you are critical thinking being and not a mushroom. you will very quickly realise that the media's purpose as well as profit is more importantly, thought control.
information comes to us through the media as a series of unconnected dots or flashes/pictures and not interconnected, living, continueous, like a movie. history, present and future. example :- very few of us can explain what we are doing in afghanistan other than repeating the politicians line that its to overcome some kind of percieved terrorist plot/organisation.
total nonesense and laughable. billions are being spent (profit for someone) and millions killed in an unending war to protect us from some percieved fear (created by politicians and their lapdog media).
kagikistan, uzbekistan, afghanistan and the caspian sea area, generally central eurasia contain more of the worlds known oil and gas than the rest of the world put together. now with pakistan holding the ground to a deep sea port in the south, it is now being destabilised by guess who ? cia qaeder of course.
now if you join up the snap shots (dots), it becomes clearer and explanable as to why we and america are in iraq, afghanistan etc and threaten iran over nuclear activty.
always question information that comes your way. always look beyond the appearance and penetrate to its essence. this makes you a thinking human being and not a sheep. it also warns and forarms you to be able to take evasive action if something untoward comes your way.

22 Apr 2010

Quote by Too Hot
Government induced hysteria ?
This is a serious subject and I hope some of you guys will engage with me on this cos I don't see an end to something which seems to have become a scourge of modern life and has really come about in the last 15 years.
The Precautionary Principle is an expression being bandied about on various blogs but it really related to State mismanagement in respect of risk assesment and ensuing widespread public panic/hysteria and it is not just limited to this country - it is a world wide phenomina.
Who remembers:
Millenium Bug
Edwina Currie and the egg crisis (salmonella)
CJD / BSE
Bird Flu
Swine Flu
and most recently - The Ash Cloud
There is of course the grand daddy of them all still out there in the name of global warming but does it not strike you as odd that ALL of these hysteria events follow the same pattern in the way that strange circumstances get examined by the media and so called Experts rustle up a theory. The doomsday theory is then deemed newsworthy and the worlds press get hold of it. Governments then step in - in the name of public safety and totally over react and mismanage the situation and the cost is in the £ billions. Eventually the scare fizzles away and we are left wondering what it was all about and decidely the poorer as a result.
Whilst this is not a Global warming thread per se, I just wonder if the worlds governments had the threat of being sued like the UK government was yesterday by the airlines - would we see a more committed and transparent scientific approach to the whole global warming issue.
It may be my age but I am just overwhelmed with cynicism at the moment. I can't say I even think it is a conspiracy theory - I think it is total ineptness and by abiding to the "Precautionary Principle" it seems better to allow the worlds population to suffer one major panic after another and seemingly with no end in sight.
Anyone got any comments other than to have a valium sandwich?

always start from the premis....in who's interests does it serve ? follow the money... in the fraudulent case of global warming...goldman sachs...carbon cedits/offsets carbon tax.
global warming in the last 2 years has changed to "climate change" because the earth has actually been cooling for the last 8 to 9 years. solar activity has always been avoided because it has a far greater effect on the earths temperature (hot or cold) than the sum total of mans activity throughout history.
this is not an anti clean enviromental argument, on the contrary, we should always look after our surroundings micro or macro.
when considering a supposed pandemic and its declaration, if you research it carefully enough. you will find many clue's as to its integrity. never trust politicians or big financial interests and always follow the money.
other examples to be sceptical about on the same basis are 9/11 7/7 dr david kelly robin cook war in iraq war in afghanistan war on terror al qeader osama bin laden threats against iran nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists etc. questioning and reasoning official explanations does not make you a conspiracy theorist. it means you are critical thinking being and not a mushroom. you will very quickly realise that the media's purpose as well as profit is more importantly, thought control.
information comes to us through the media as a series of unconnected dots or flashes/pictures and not interconnected, living, continueous, like a movie. history, present and future. example :- very few of us can explain what we are doing in afghanistan other than repeating the politicians line that its to overcome some kind of percieved terrorist plot/organisation.
total nonesense and laughable. billions are being spent (profit for someone) and millions killed in an unending war to protect us from some percieved fear (created by politicians and their lapdog media).
kagikistan, uzbekistan, afghanistan and the caspian sea area, generally central eurasia contain more of the worlds known oil and gas than the rest of the world put together. now with pakistan holding the ground to a deep sea port in the south, it is now being destabilised by guess who ? cia qaeder of course.
now if you join up the snap shots (dots), it becomes clearer and explanable as to why we and america are in iraq, afghanistan etc and threaten iran over nuclear activty.
always question information that comes your way. always look beyond the appearance and penetrate to its essence. this makes you a thinking human being and not a sheep. it also warns and forarms you to be able to take evasive action if something untoward comes your way.

23 Apr 2010

Quote by gulsonroad30664
Government induced hysteria ?
This is a serious subject and I hope some of you guys will engage with me on this cos I don't see an end to something which seems to have become a scourge of modern life and has really come about in the last 15 years.
The Precautionary Principle is an expression being bandied about on various blogs but it really related to State mismanagement in respect of risk assesment and ensuing widespread public panic/hysteria and it is not just limited to this country - it is a world wide phenomina.
Who remembers:
Millenium Bug
Edwina Currie and the egg crisis (salmonella)
CJD / BSE
Bird Flu
Swine Flu
and most recently - The Ash Cloud
There is of course the grand daddy of them all still out there in the name of global warming but does it not strike you as odd that ALL of these hysteria events follow the same pattern in the way that strange circumstances get examined by the media and so called Experts rustle up a theory. The doomsday theory is then deemed newsworthy and the worlds press get hold of it. Governments then step in - in the name of public safety and totally over react and mismanage the situation and the cost is in the £ billions. Eventually the scare fizzles away and we are left wondering what it was all about and decidely the poorer as a result.
Whilst this is not a Global warming thread per se, I just wonder if the worlds governments had the threat of being sued like the UK government was yesterday by the airlines - would we see a more committed and transparent scientific approach to the whole global warming issue.
It may be my age but I am just overwhelmed with cynicism at the moment. I can't say I even think it is a conspiracy theory - I think it is total ineptness and by abiding to the "Precautionary Principle" it seems better to allow the worlds population to suffer one major panic after another and seemingly with no end in sight.
Anyone got any comments other than to have a valium sandwich?

always start from the premis....in who's interests does it serve ? follow the money... in the fraudulent case of global warming...goldman sachs...carbon cedits/offsets carbon tax.
global warming in the last 2 years has changed to "climate change" because the earth has actually been cooling for the last 8 to 9 years. solar activity has always been avoided because it has a far greater effect on the earths temperature (hot or cold) than the sum total of mans activity throughout history.
this is not an anti clean enviromental argument, on the contrary, we should always look after our surroundings micro or macro.
when considering a supposed pandemic and its declaration, if you research it carefully enough. you will find many clue's as to its integrity. never trust politicians or big financial interests and always follow the money.
other examples to be sceptical about on the same basis are 9/11 7/7 dr david kelly robin cook war in iraq war in afghanistan war on terror al qeader osama bin laden threats against iran nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists etc. questioning and reasoning official explanations does not make you a conspiracy theorist. it means you are critical thinking being and not a mushroom. you will very quickly realise that the media's purpose as well as profit is more importantly, thought control.
information comes to us through the media as a series of unconnected dots or flashes/pictures and not interconnected, living, continueous, like a movie. history, present and future. example :- very few of us can explain what we are doing in afghanistan other than repeating the politicians line that its to overcome some kind of percieved terrorist plot/organisation.
total nonesense and laughable. billions are being spent (profit for someone) and millions killed in an unending war to protect us from some percieved fear (created by politicians and their lapdog media).
kagikistan, uzbekistan, afghanistan and the caspian sea area, generally central eurasia contain more of the worlds known oil and gas than the rest of the world put together. now with pakistan holding the ground to a deep sea port in the south, it is now being destabilised by guess who ? cia qaeder of course.
now if you join up the snap shots (dots), it becomes clearer and explanable as to why we and america are in iraq, afghanistan etc and threaten iran over nuclear activty.
always question information that comes your way. always look beyond the appearance and penetrate to its essence. this makes you a thinking human being and not a sheep. it also warns and forarms you to be able to take evasive action if something untoward comes your way.
Sweet baby jesus....

23 Apr 2010

The Swine flu pandemic... was it rubbish or not? I'm still undecided but let's not forget that people with severe respiratory problems were indeed at risk of the flu and some died.
I think panic was created not by the Government but by the media/tabloids scaremongering (which of course helps them to sell more papers). The Government are culpable for not being tough enough to say if you get it, well, you just have to tough it out like the previous generation did.
If the Government hadn't reacted the way they did the tabloids would be crying out for blood. So the government bows to public pressure (created by the tabloids) and then gets lambasted for "panicking" people for nothing. So the buggers can't win either way.
People complain about the death of common sense etc. etc. if they were to apply a bit of real common sense themselves they would see through all that BS that the media blurts out.

23 Apr 2010

Fair points well made awol.
I would add that societies tend to get the media they deserve.

23 Apr 2010

Quote by Ben_welshminx
Fair points well made awol.
I would add that societies tend to get the media they deserve.

I like that point Ben

25 Apr 2010

Quote by awayman
From the Oxford English dictionary it appears that it was a pandemic ...

I haven`t seen an ounce of "proof" that contradicts this.

I know. All those ''so called'' experts who say it was a pandemic, but it can't have been because Kenty didn't die of it.
Incidentally, I had swine flu, and I didn't die. So it probably wasn't worth the NHS giving me tamiflu, and treating me as a swine flu victim, with all the extra advice and interventions they put into caring for people like me, because I didn't die. Bloody so called health care professionals. Why did they bother eh? I mean, it's not as if I died. Coming next week, my seminal peer reviewed paper on why the police shouldn't bother having a murder squad because I haven't been slaughtered in my bed this week, a successor to my ground breaking paper 'Virgins shouldn't use condoms because they haven't got anyone pregnant yet.'
If I could ban two words it would be 'so called'. When deployed in debate they usually indicate that someone who's not an expert is about to display their ignorance of expert knowledge in order to make ill informed assertions about a topic on which they know the square root of sod all.
was you clinically tested for swine flu ?????
or just told you had it ???

25 Apr 2010

Quote by Lizaleanrob
From the Oxford English dictionary it appears that it was a pandemic ...

I haven`t seen an ounce of "proof" that contradicts this.

I know. All those ''so called'' experts who say it was a pandemic, but it can't have been because Kenty didn't die of it.
Incidentally, I had swine flu, and I didn't die. So it probably wasn't worth the NHS giving me tamiflu, and treating me as a swine flu victim, with all the extra advice and interventions they put into caring for people like me, because I didn't die. Bloody so called health care professionals. Why did they bother eh? I mean, it's not as if I died. Coming next week, my seminal peer reviewed paper on why the police shouldn't bother having a murder squad because I haven't been slaughtered in my bed this week, a successor to my ground breaking paper 'Virgins shouldn't use condoms because they haven't got anyone pregnant yet.'
If I could ban two words it would be 'so called'. When deployed in debate they usually indicate that someone who's not an expert is about to display their ignorance of expert knowledge in order to make ill informed assertions about a topic on which they know the square root of sod all.
was you clinically tested for swine flu ?????
or just told you had it ???
Clinically tested. I am in a risk group for chest infections, and a family member was ultra high risk.
Next?

25 Apr 2010

only wondered as daughter was told over the phone dunno

and had no different a symptom than normal flu she was also a high risk :asthma

25 Apr 2010

Quote by Lizaleanrob
only wondered as daughter was told over the phone
and had no different a symptom than normal flu she was also a high risk :asthma

And? Expert on remote diagnostics are you? Or epidemiology? It was a pandemic. The worst consequences were prevented by careful planning and hard work by lots of experienced medical professionals. But along the way, some people died, and lots of people were affected.

Are you sure?