WHO Not Recommending Swine Flu Travel Restrictions

[kat8585]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LS307127.htm

Here's more:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9...;show_article=1

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090428/D97REKCO0.html

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/lawmak...2009-04-25.html

[Believer1997]

WHO has raised their alert to a Stage 4....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30398682/?GT1=43001

We are a global society - Someone travelling internationally can be spreading this and someone moving about locally can do the same. We can't stop global travel - that would not necessarily contain it at this point.

[kat8585]

i guess i don't understand. why is this dumb? this flu is not a huge threat that would entail spending lots of money curtailing travel and border crossings.

Should we wait for a global epidemic? This is spreading fast, and the borders are an excellent place to start. Some have even called for it already.

[Believer1997]

i guess i don't understand. why is this dumb? this flu is not a huge threat that would entail spending lots of money curtailing travel and border crossings.

Should we wait for a global epidemic? This is spreading fast, and the borders are an excellent place to start. Some have even called for it already.

Let's see - how many people are on the planet? How many are sick? We should take precautions but certainly not panic. It's not spreading ...fast. In fact it's been contained in several places now. I think we should use reasonable care about whether travel is necessary or not to exposed areas - but alarm is not helpful.

[georgedrw81]

It will be used by goverments all over the world to draw our attention from them in handling the bailouts.Serious flu or not

Blessings

[kat8585]

the only people who have died from this are the ones in mexico, and only one person in the US has even been hospitalized for it.

All the more reason to be safe and close the border for now. But that's just me.

[MorningGlory]

i guess i don't understand. why is this dumb? this flu is not a huge threat that would entail spending lots of money curtailing travel and border crossings.

Should we wait for a global epidemic? This is spreading fast, and the borders are an excellent place to start. Some have even called for it already.

Let's see - how many people are on the planet? How many are sick? We should take precautions but certainly not panic. It's not spreading ...fast. In fact it's been contained in several places now. I think we should use reasonable care about whether travel is necessary or not to exposed areas - but alarm is not helpful.

this is kind of what i'm thinking.

worst case scenario: it becomes a global epidemic.

the only people who have died from this are the ones in mexico, and only one person in the US has even been hospitalized for it. so even if it does spread like wildfire (which it's not), i just can't see spending all the money on travel restrictions and whatnot for something this "benign".

common sense is more in order than anything else. don't go to places where it's known to be. don't travel if you're sick. use the normal precautions regarding contageous diseases--washing hands and stuff.

as atticus says, it's not time to worry yet.

There are less than 300 confirmed cases, and 158 deaths, out of the global population of 6.6 BILLION people. Closing borders and panicking, when the global economy is already shaky, could cause economies that are wobbly to totally crash and kill the recovery that's starting to be apparent. Common sense, rather than hysteria, is called for here.

[Hunterpoet]

i guess i don't understand. why is this dumb? this flu is not a huge threat that would entail spending lots of money curtailing travel and border crossings.

Should we wait for a global epidemic? This is spreading fast, and the borders are an excellent place to start. Some have even called for it already.

Let's see - how many people are on the planet? How many are sick? We should take precautions but certainly not panic. It's not spreading ...fast. In fact it's been contained in several places now. I think we should use reasonable care about whether travel is necessary or not to exposed areas - but alarm is not helpful.

this is kind of what i'm thinking.

worst case scenario: it becomes a global epidemic.

the only people who have died from this are the ones in mexico, and only one person in the US has even been hospitalized for it. so even if it does spread like wildfire (which it's not), i just can't see spending all the money on travel restrictions and whatnot for something this "benign".

common sense is more in order than anything else. don't go to places where it's known to be. don't travel if you're sick. use the normal precautions regarding contageous diseases--washing hands and stuff.

as atticus says, it's not time to worry yet.

There are less than 300 confirmed cases, and 158 deaths, out of the global population of 6.6 BILLION people. Closing borders and panicking, when the global economy is already shaky, could cause economies that are wobbly to totally crash and kill the recovery that's starting to be apparent. Common sense, rather than hysteria, is called for here.

less than 300 confirmed....158 deaths...thats more than half of the patients.....according to this you have less than a 50/50 chance of survival if you become infected. The economy will be a non-issue for the unlucky half for sure.

So I guess closing that school for a week in Ohio was a bit over the top....not in the light of these statistics.

[Believer1997]

I just think panic is unnecessary and certainly unproductive now. It's treatable. Let's just be cautious without running wild in the streets in panic.

[Hunterpoet]

less than 300 confirmed....158 deaths...thats more than half of the patients.....according to this you have less than a 50/50 chance of survival if you become infected. The economy will be a non-issue for the unlucky half for sure.

So I guess closing that school for a week in Ohio was a bit over the top....not in the light of these statistics.

i'm not sure about the 300 number. i read there are more like 2000 in mexico. but, of course, i don't know if that's true or not.

the really big part of this picture, though, is the fact that the ONLY deaths have occurred in mexico. so it's really not fair to say this flu kills half the people it infects--it has killed 0% of the people living in countries other than mexico. so these numbers do not truly tell the statistics of the mortality of this disease.

It's more than fair based on the numbers presented...I have no other numbers to comment on or compare to....unless you want me to accept your number of 2000 which you do not know to be true or not.

If someone states that they have less than 300 confirmed cases and that 158 have died...then more than half of the confirmed cases have died...whats so unfair about that....and I can draw the conclusion that I did based on those facts.

Even more so as cases occurring in other countries have been analyzed as a weaker strain or a totally different strain. The only confirmed case I know of that didn't result in a death is the child in Ohio, but they still closed his school for a week as a precaution. Even if you include the Ohio child to these numbers the conclusion won't change because it was stated that LESS than 300 had been confirmed.

If anything at all is known at this point is that we really don't know anything...so why not be cautious...wheres the harm in being overly cautious for a few days to see where this all leads. A little late to close the barn door after the horse has gone, don't ya think??