Deadly New Mexican Flu Virus Sparks Global Pandemic Fear

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=Enorah]LOL me too

Urban

Oh and Allan, that sounds like heaven, that thing you and Russ got going on

lol[/quote]

Enorah: You and Jp scare me. And, no, not in that good plaid skirt, pigtails, knee socks and an ax kind of way, either.
[/quote]

That is my favorite outfit for open houses.

[jpinpb]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
That is my favorite outfit for open houses.
[/quote]

LOL. Are you people trying to drown me? Just snorted some more water.

So UR, is that your secret strategy for selling. I can see that being quite effective. If I were a guy, I could easily be persuaded 😉

[jpinpb]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
That is my favorite outfit for open houses.
[/quote]

LOL. Are you people trying to drown me? Just snorted some more water.

So UR, is that your secret strategy for selling. I can see that being quite effective. If I were a guy, I could easily be persuaded 😉

[jpinpb]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
That is my favorite outfit for open houses.
[/quote]

LOL. Are you people trying to drown me? Just snorted some more water.

So UR, is that your secret strategy for selling. I can see that being quite effective. If I were a guy, I could easily be persuaded 😉

[jpinpb]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
That is my favorite outfit for open houses.
[/quote]

LOL. Are you people trying to drown me? Just snorted some more water.

So UR, is that your secret strategy for selling. I can see that being quite effective. If I were a guy, I could easily be persuaded 😉

[jpinpb]

[quote=urbanrealtor]
That is my favorite outfit for open houses.
[/quote]

LOL. Are you people trying to drown me? Just snorted some more water.

So UR, is that your secret strategy for selling. I can see that being quite effective. If I were a guy, I could easily be persuaded 😉

[partypup]

[quote=afx114]

[quote=partypup]I presented a scenario (economic dislocation) that is much, much more likely than any of the outlandish scenarios you presented above.[/quote]

You’re forgetting the other part of your scenario where some disaster situation worsens the economic downturn. Is a global apocalyptic flu outbreak any more likely to happen than an earthquake or another Katrina? You must know something we don’t about this whole flu thing.[/quote]

I’m sure I don’t know anything about this pandemic that you don’t. But I think there are two (2) factors to keep in mind when debating the merits of my original statement: the potential for global impact and the likelihood of occurrence. You seem to be focusing only on likelihood without any regard to global impact.

Comparing a global pandemic to a hurricane or earthquake is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Certainly an earthquake or a hurricane is more likely to occur than a global pandemic because they occur EVERY year (and in the case of earthquakes, they occur every day – major quakes hitting perhaps every few years or less). However, an earthquake or a hurricane is a localized event, thereby limiting its global impact. Have you ever heard of an earthquake or hurricane going global?

By contrast, a global pandemic is not only (a) more likely to occur (we’ve experienced them several times in the past – from Bubonic plague to the Spanish flue of 1918), but it’s also (b) much more likely to affect the entire human population, and therefore the global economy, than an earthquake, hurricane or some other localized event. So in answer to your question, a global flu pandemic is much more likely to exacerbate a downturn in the global economy than another Katrina or another huge quake.

You also mentioned the possibility of the sun exploding. While this would be a mind-blowingly scary event with certain impact upon the global economy, I think you will be hard-pressed to find any credible scientific evidence that points to the likelihood of this event occurring in the next several billion years.

[quote=afx114][quote=partypup]And yes, your Messiah – despite all the trappings – is still a politician like all the other hacks who have preceded him.[/quote]

If you get to call Obama my Messiah, I get to call him your Anti Christ. It’s only fair.[/quote]

LOL. OK, fair enough. We’ll see which label fits better by the end of his term 😉

[partypup]

[quote=afx114]

[quote=partypup]I presented a scenario (economic dislocation) that is much, much more likely than any of the outlandish scenarios you presented above.[/quote]

You’re forgetting the other part of your scenario where some disaster situation worsens the economic downturn. Is a global apocalyptic flu outbreak any more likely to happen than an earthquake or another Katrina? You must know something we don’t about this whole flu thing.[/quote]

I’m sure I don’t know anything about this pandemic that you don’t. But I think there are two (2) factors to keep in mind when debating the merits of my original statement: the potential for global impact and the likelihood of occurrence. You seem to be focusing only on likelihood without any regard to global impact.

Comparing a global pandemic to a hurricane or earthquake is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Certainly an earthquake or a hurricane is more likely to occur than a global pandemic because they occur EVERY year (and in the case of earthquakes, they occur every day – major quakes hitting perhaps every few years or less). However, an earthquake or a hurricane is a localized event, thereby limiting its global impact. Have you ever heard of an earthquake or hurricane going global?

By contrast, a global pandemic is not only (a) more likely to occur (we’ve experienced them several times in the past – from Bubonic plague to the Spanish flue of 1918), but it’s also (b) much more likely to affect the entire human population, and therefore the global economy, than an earthquake, hurricane or some other localized event. So in answer to your question, a global flu pandemic is much more likely to exacerbate a downturn in the global economy than another Katrina or another huge quake.

You also mentioned the possibility of the sun exploding. While this would be a mind-blowingly scary event with certain impact upon the global economy, I think you will be hard-pressed to find any credible scientific evidence that points to the likelihood of this event occurring in the next several billion years.

[quote=afx114][quote=partypup]And yes, your Messiah – despite all the trappings – is still a politician like all the other hacks who have preceded him.[/quote]

If you get to call Obama my Messiah, I get to call him your Anti Christ. It’s only fair.[/quote]

LOL. OK, fair enough. We’ll see which label fits better by the end of his term 😉

[partypup]

[quote=afx114]

[quote=partypup]I presented a scenario (economic dislocation) that is much, much more likely than any of the outlandish scenarios you presented above.[/quote]

You’re forgetting the other part of your scenario where some disaster situation worsens the economic downturn. Is a global apocalyptic flu outbreak any more likely to happen than an earthquake or another Katrina? You must know something we don’t about this whole flu thing.[/quote]

I’m sure I don’t know anything about this pandemic that you don’t. But I think there are two (2) factors to keep in mind when debating the merits of my original statement: the potential for global impact and the likelihood of occurrence. You seem to be focusing only on likelihood without any regard to global impact.

Comparing a global pandemic to a hurricane or earthquake is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Certainly an earthquake or a hurricane is more likely to occur than a global pandemic because they occur EVERY year (and in the case of earthquakes, they occur every day – major quakes hitting perhaps every few years or less). However, an earthquake or a hurricane is a localized event, thereby limiting its global impact. Have you ever heard of an earthquake or hurricane going global?

By contrast, a global pandemic is not only (a) more likely to occur (we’ve experienced them several times in the past – from Bubonic plague to the Spanish flue of 1918), but it’s also (b) much more likely to affect the entire human population, and therefore the global economy, than an earthquake, hurricane or some other localized event. So in answer to your question, a global flu pandemic is much more likely to exacerbate a downturn in the global economy than another Katrina or another huge quake.

You also mentioned the possibility of the sun exploding. While this would be a mind-blowingly scary event with certain impact upon the global economy, I think you will be hard-pressed to find any credible scientific evidence that points to the likelihood of this event occurring in the next several billion years.

[quote=afx114][quote=partypup]And yes, your Messiah – despite all the trappings – is still a politician like all the other hacks who have preceded him.[/quote]

If you get to call Obama my Messiah, I get to call him your Anti Christ. It’s only fair.[/quote]

LOL. OK, fair enough. We’ll see which label fits better by the end of his term 😉

[partypup]

[quote=afx114]

[quote=partypup]I presented a scenario (economic dislocation) that is much, much more likely than any of the outlandish scenarios you presented above.[/quote]

You’re forgetting the other part of your scenario where some disaster situation worsens the economic downturn. Is a global apocalyptic flu outbreak any more likely to happen than an earthquake or another Katrina? You must know something we don’t about this whole flu thing.[/quote]

I’m sure I don’t know anything about this pandemic that you don’t. But I think there are two (2) factors to keep in mind when debating the merits of my original statement: the potential for global impact and the likelihood of occurrence. You seem to be focusing only on likelihood without any regard to global impact.

Comparing a global pandemic to a hurricane or earthquake is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Certainly an earthquake or a hurricane is more likely to occur than a global pandemic because they occur EVERY year (and in the case of earthquakes, they occur every day – major quakes hitting perhaps every few years or less). However, an earthquake or a hurricane is a localized event, thereby limiting its global impact. Have you ever heard of an earthquake or hurricane going global?

By contrast, a global pandemic is not only (a) more likely to occur (we’ve experienced them several times in the past – from Bubonic plague to the Spanish flue of 1918), but it’s also (b) much more likely to affect the entire human population, and therefore the global economy, than an earthquake, hurricane or some other localized event. So in answer to your question, a global flu pandemic is much more likely to exacerbate a downturn in the global economy than another Katrina or another huge quake.

You also mentioned the possibility of the sun exploding. While this would be a mind-blowingly scary event with certain impact upon the global economy, I think you will be hard-pressed to find any credible scientific evidence that points to the likelihood of this event occurring in the next several billion years.

[quote=afx114][quote=partypup]And yes, your Messiah – despite all the trappings – is still a politician like all the other hacks who have preceded him.[/quote]

If you get to call Obama my Messiah, I get to call him your Anti Christ. It’s only fair.[/quote]

LOL. OK, fair enough. We’ll see which label fits better by the end of his term 😉

[partypup]

[quote=afx114]

[quote=partypup]I presented a scenario (economic dislocation) that is much, much more likely than any of the outlandish scenarios you presented above.[/quote]

You’re forgetting the other part of your scenario where some disaster situation worsens the economic downturn. Is a global apocalyptic flu outbreak any more likely to happen than an earthquake or another Katrina? You must know something we don’t about this whole flu thing.[/quote]

I’m sure I don’t know anything about this pandemic that you don’t. But I think there are two (2) factors to keep in mind when debating the merits of my original statement: the potential for global impact and the likelihood of occurrence. You seem to be focusing only on likelihood without any regard to global impact.

Comparing a global pandemic to a hurricane or earthquake is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Certainly an earthquake or a hurricane is more likely to occur than a global pandemic because they occur EVERY year (and in the case of earthquakes, they occur every day – major quakes hitting perhaps every few years or less). However, an earthquake or a hurricane is a localized event, thereby limiting its global impact. Have you ever heard of an earthquake or hurricane going global?

By contrast, a global pandemic is not only (a) more likely to occur (we’ve experienced them several times in the past – from Bubonic plague to the Spanish flue of 1918), but it’s also (b) much more likely to affect the entire human population, and therefore the global economy, than an earthquake, hurricane or some other localized event. So in answer to your question, a global flu pandemic is much more likely to exacerbate a downturn in the global economy than another Katrina or another huge quake.

You also mentioned the possibility of the sun exploding. While this would be a mind-blowingly scary event with certain impact upon the global economy, I think you will be hard-pressed to find any credible scientific evidence that points to the likelihood of this event occurring in the next several billion years.

[quote=afx114][quote=partypup]And yes, your Messiah – despite all the trappings – is still a politician like all the other hacks who have preceded him.[/quote]

If you get to call Obama my Messiah, I get to call him your Anti Christ. It’s only fair.[/quote]

LOL. OK, fair enough. We’ll see which label fits better by the end of his term 😉

[partypup]

Open question to everyone, here. I don’t think this virus will end up being particularly deadly. I would be surprised if it ended up exceeding a 5% mortality rate in the U.S. However, as the parent of a newborn I am not inviting ANY illness into my household, and that’s the only reason for my concern. If I get this bug, I’m pretty confident that I have the accumulated resistance to fight it without dying, but I can’t say the same for my son.

That said, the media and the WHO seem to be creating a frenzy so that people will think this is a deadly threat. This can’t be blamed solely on the media because world health organizations and central governments are adding to the hysteria and raising threat levels.

So I’ve been trying to figure out what the goal is, because there is always an agenda. And this morning I began to hear murmurs of a mass vaccine similar to the one that was instituted by President Ford in response to the ’76 outbreak. You may recall that particular “vaccine” ended up killing several hundred people, while the actual swine flu virus only killed one serviceman at Fort Dix.

BigPharma is now lining up to quickly throw together a vaccine, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Feds begin to push people to take it.

Here’s the question: given everything that’s going on around us, the clear pattern of incompetence and neglect occurring at all levels of business and government now, and given that it hasn’t escaped the attention of world governments that this planet is carrying about 2 billion more people than it can reasonably sustain, would YOU take a vaccine that was distributed to combat this virus? Or would you instead rely on good, old-fashioned protocols like hand washing, homeopathic remedies (colloidal silver, vitamin D, etc) and use common sense in limiting your exposure to public venues? Just curious where you all see this going.

[partypup]

Open question to everyone, here. I don’t think this virus will end up being particularly deadly. I would be surprised if it ended up exceeding a 5% mortality rate in the U.S. However, as the parent of a newborn I am not inviting ANY illness into my household, and that’s the only reason for my concern. If I get this bug, I’m pretty confident that I have the accumulated resistance to fight it without dying, but I can’t say the same for my son.

That said, the media and the WHO seem to be creating a frenzy so that people will think this is a deadly threat. This can’t be blamed solely on the media because world health organizations and central governments are adding to the hysteria and raising threat levels.

So I’ve been trying to figure out what the goal is, because there is always an agenda. And this morning I began to hear murmurs of a mass vaccine similar to the one that was instituted by President Ford in response to the ’76 outbreak. You may recall that particular “vaccine” ended up killing several hundred people, while the actual swine flu virus only killed one serviceman at Fort Dix.

BigPharma is now lining up to quickly throw together a vaccine, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Feds begin to push people to take it.

Here’s the question: given everything that’s going on around us, the clear pattern of incompetence and neglect occurring at all levels of business and government now, and given that it hasn’t escaped the attention of world governments that this planet is carrying about 2 billion more people than it can reasonably sustain, would YOU take a vaccine that was distributed to combat this virus? Or would you instead rely on good, old-fashioned protocols like hand washing, homeopathic remedies (colloidal silver, vitamin D, etc) and use common sense in limiting your exposure to public venues? Just curious where you all see this going.

[partypup]

Open question to everyone, here. I don’t think this virus will end up being particularly deadly. I would be surprised if it ended up exceeding a 5% mortality rate in the U.S. However, as the parent of a newborn I am not inviting ANY illness into my household, and that’s the only reason for my concern. If I get this bug, I’m pretty confident that I have the accumulated resistance to fight it without dying, but I can’t say the same for my son.

That said, the media and the WHO seem to be creating a frenzy so that people will think this is a deadly threat. This can’t be blamed solely on the media because world health organizations and central governments are adding to the hysteria and raising threat levels.

So I’ve been trying to figure out what the goal is, because there is always an agenda. And this morning I began to hear murmurs of a mass vaccine similar to the one that was instituted by President Ford in response to the ’76 outbreak. You may recall that particular “vaccine” ended up killing several hundred people, while the actual swine flu virus only killed one serviceman at Fort Dix.

BigPharma is now lining up to quickly throw together a vaccine, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Feds begin to push people to take it.

Here’s the question: given everything that’s going on around us, the clear pattern of incompetence and neglect occurring at all levels of business and government now, and given that it hasn’t escaped the attention of world governments that this planet is carrying about 2 billion more people than it can reasonably sustain, would YOU take a vaccine that was distributed to combat this virus? Or would you instead rely on good, old-fashioned protocols like hand washing, homeopathic remedies (colloidal silver, vitamin D, etc) and use common sense in limiting your exposure to public venues? Just curious where you all see this going.

[partypup]

Open question to everyone, here. I don’t think this virus will end up being particularly deadly. I would be surprised if it ended up exceeding a 5% mortality rate in the U.S. However, as the parent of a newborn I am not inviting ANY illness into my household, and that’s the only reason for my concern. If I get this bug, I’m pretty confident that I have the accumulated resistance to fight it without dying, but I can’t say the same for my son.

That said, the media and the WHO seem to be creating a frenzy so that people will think this is a deadly threat. This can’t be blamed solely on the media because world health organizations and central governments are adding to the hysteria and raising threat levels.

So I’ve been trying to figure out what the goal is, because there is always an agenda. And this morning I began to hear murmurs of a mass vaccine similar to the one that was instituted by President Ford in response to the ’76 outbreak. You may recall that particular “vaccine” ended up killing several hundred people, while the actual swine flu virus only killed one serviceman at Fort Dix.

BigPharma is now lining up to quickly throw together a vaccine, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Feds begin to push people to take it.

Here’s the question: given everything that’s going on around us, the clear pattern of incompetence and neglect occurring at all levels of business and government now, and given that it hasn’t escaped the attention of world governments that this planet is carrying about 2 billion more people than it can reasonably sustain, would YOU take a vaccine that was distributed to combat this virus? Or would you instead rely on good, old-fashioned protocols like hand washing, homeopathic remedies (colloidal silver, vitamin D, etc) and use common sense in limiting your exposure to public venues? Just curious where you all see this going.

[Author]

Posts