|
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
I am quite familiar with walkerton, I actually did a day long case study IN walkerton on the whole crisis last year... but thanks for the link anyways
I realize the parallels are not identical. I'm simply talking about ignoring a problem that seems irrelevant at first that ends up being huge. If the public were not made aware of this, in other words, if health officials knew people were getting this when they were travelling to Mexico and neglected to inform anyone about it because they didn't want to "overreact", and then there was a massive outbreak, I bet you wouldn't be on their side then.
There is absolutely no harm in being cautious when you're talking about a global flu virus. Have you ACTUALLY been PERSONALLY affected by any of this? |
Just because you did a one day case study, does not mean you learned everything there is to know about this problem, considering how big the posted study is, and the breathe of investigation.
That is the exact problem with comparing Warlkerton with this flu. The problem in Walkerton was not irrelevant, as there were mandated steps they were supposed to take against e-coli, which they did not. The problems were so well known, that policies were implemented on how to treat the water, if there is a consciously constructed policy, that is not a 'seemingly irrelevant' problem.
We have health travel advisories already, and the gov has notified the people through the appropriate channels. The level of caution is what some of are talking about.
Since when do you have to be personally affected by an event to comment on it?
If we all die due to swine flu, I'll buy you a coffee in hell, how does that sound? Until then I am going to continue to live my life, with the safe and healthy practices that I always live my life with. If you want to continue to debate this matter, please stop appealing to authority, and saying 'well they know better than you'. Interject some fact, and analysis.
|
