It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mkross1983
Originally posted by nydsdan
Okay, I may be on board with the whole notion of watching a virus to make sure it does not mutate into something severe - I understand this.
What I don't understand is the panic. Is the flu in 2009 like shark attacks in 2007 or so?
I mean, our best estimates in the "scary" numbers in this thread are 300 dead and about a million infected, right? So we are talking about 1 fatality in over 3,000 cases in a country with allegedly substandard healthcare facilities.
Please tell me if I am missing something. Right now it just sounds like a bad flu with a localized pneumonia outbreak which has been contained.
You are missing something. It is suspected that 6 to 7 thousand have died from this already.
Originally posted by McFlemish
Most of Europe has a socialist healthcare system in which you can only get your hands on this type of goodies with a serious perscription from your doctor. However, our doctors are controlled by the health administration, so they just won't perscribe this to you unless you are dying, very rich, or a member of their family.
Originally posted by McFlemish
Not kidding, the iodide, the antibiotics, the antivirals... all strictly on a doctor's note.
You can go in the pharmacy and ask, they'll ask you the note, and then to register with your electronic SIS card. You seem to be lucky
Originally posted by McFlemish
Does anyone have more on the Transnistria angle of this? Seems most cases are in the west of Ukraine, ant that's close to Transnistria.
It's a rebel region in between Moldova and Ukraine wich is basically an enclave with a #load of old soviet weapon factories and labs, that have been under semi independent control. I bet they don't keep level V security on what they have in their canisters there.. just a hint
[edit on 16-11-2009 by McFlemish]
Originally posted by ecoparity
We had discussed the vaccines and how the reports that all of them have squalene in them is not true. (None of the current US vaccines contain it though clinical trials are underway for more vaccines which will contain squalene and also will not).
It was mentioned that vaccines in Europe all contain squalene and I promised I would look into it.
As it turns out, there are three currently approved for use in Europe and only one of them is squalene free.
Unfortunately, it is Celvapan which is made by Baxter. It also requires two doses. (The US vaccines only require one except for children in which case the virus in the vaccine is cut in half between the two shots).
So, good news / bad news or bad / bad depending on how you feel about taking the jab, I suppose. At least the option of squalene free in EU is there.
EU Vaccine Information Page
[edit on 16-11-2009 by ecoparity]
Originally posted by ecoparity
That really bothers me that the EU would be so "stubborn". Then again, I'm assuming the dual development paths in the US clinical trials is a response to public pressure when it could very well be that they are developing the squalene free versions to reserve for the military only as Germany was reported to have done.
Originally posted by JJay55
Originally posted by ecoparity
That really bothers me that the EU would be so "stubborn". Then again, I'm assuming the dual development paths in the US clinical trials is a response to public pressure when it could very well be that they are developing the squalene free versions to reserve for the military only as Germany was reported to have done.
Stubborn? I doubt it's about stubborn. Probably an economic issue. EU is socialized medicine system. Health "Care" isn't part of that system.