I think you have the answer in your reference piece. Think what this action will purposely do to the Christians.
The Eeygptian Koptic cummunity about 10% of the population are Christians (probably can claim to be the oldest Christian community) and of course may eat Pork. FYI there are even pigs in Israel as some older Russian Jewish emigrants, brought up in the Soviet Union where at one time it was government policy to only offer pig meat to Jewish communities, have found it difficult to change habits. ~Steve
Surely no hot dogs were sold at the collosium...only peanuts to my memory...Some hinds of lion on occasion but never pork nibbles.
Urgh great time for a spot of looting and just for you we can burn down...Cough cough cough splutter Relax I'm alright.
Steve and Jeff, of course you are both correct about the pigs in Egypt. I foolishly meant the comment to be facetious. I still stand by my feeling that the Egyptian government was foolish and over-reacting with the pig kill. Evidence is that the virus is transmitted person-to-person. They would all be better off carrying handkerchiefs to sneeze into, and washing their hands frequently. (I know it's hard if you are a pig farmer)
Steve, I too write bollocks so I always read other peoples bollocks ... If you'd have read my bollocks You would see that I never said you did say that... Oh bollocks ... What were we talking about???? Oh yeah ... Kermit the frog fears infection after having unprotected sex with miss Piggy ... The Muppet!
If I was a tarot card reader I'd pack it in and read bollocks instead it seems to be much more popular....How do you do that then?
Well, guys... I must tell you that this flu paranoia isn't exactly too bad... I mean, this caothic 30-million-inhabitants city (Mexico City, that is) is very quiet. Car rides that normally take an hour or an hour and a half, now take 20 minutes. I'm not complaining about that! Though... there are no cinemas, theatres, museums, soccer matches or even religious services... So, despite everyone is having a whole week of vacation, people are staying home, which means Blockbuster is having its best sales ever. Whilst I agree that it may be blown out of proportion by the media (the authorities have already confirmed less than 100 cases and less than 10 fatalities, which is the exact 10% fatality rate scientists spoke about), and I think it will be over in a matter of a week or two, my guess is that it is going to have serious indirect effects in Mexico. I doubt it will be forgotten soon. Given international paranoia and the travel prohibition, the 'Mexican flu' issue will scare away tourists for the next summer and, possibly (if the flue attacks again in winter, as it'll certainly do) winter holidays, thus hurting Mexico's second largest industry (already hurt by the economic crisis). Of course, if borders close and economic activity is brought to a halt: catastrophee... _________________________________________________________________________ But... the thing that really drives me mad me about this whole matter is that it confirms the world's double standards and cynnicism. How is it possible that the swine flu provokes so disproportionate reactions and immidiate mobilisation in all fronts when it has barely killed ten people, whilst HIV/AIDS has killed 25 million since 1981, and 2.1 million people (including 330,000 children) in 2007 alone and is neglected in a daily basis?! All Western governments and the WHO brag about vaccines and medicines for its citizens; a swift, instantaneous response, whilst, to this date, less than 10% of the 22.5 million people infected with HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa have acces to retrovirals... Everyone talks about the flu, because it is all over the media, whilst no one bothers to even inquire about HIV/AIDS, let alone contribute to relief the people suffering from it, specially those living below misery levels in Africa.
I figured that you did, I just wanted to make sure that others understood it too. I reckon I could have worded it differently.
I see no double standard; Influenza is quite different from HIV/AIDS. Flu is spread by casual contact, HIV is not, influenza is extremely uncontrollable through standard medical methodologies, while HIV is at least predictable. Influenza virus mutates rapidly, unlike the HIV virus, and a more or less mild strain of influenza can suddenly become a deadly lethal strain. It is no surprise therefore, that flu and HIV/AIDS provoke completely dissimilar responses from medical authorities. You seem to blame the developed countries for the scourge of HIV/AIDS in Africa when it is mostly the African governments who have steadfastly refused to take the measures necessary to mount a serious campaign against HIV/AIDS in African populations. In fact, African governments have squandered much of the $1.6 billion donated by the US (the largest such donor in the world) between 1996 and 2001 specifically to address HIV/AIDS infections in sub-Saharan Africa. The African states, on an average, spend on military expenditures, six times what they spend on ALL public health programs. This is very troubling to the US government, but at the same time, African governments are sovereign entities and cannot be forced to change their priorities. "The countries of Sub-Saharan Africa have been most adversely affected by the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Nearly all but Uganda and Senegal have lacked the political will or commitment of resources to halt the spread of HIV in their population and to address the epidemic’s many negative impacts. African political leaders’ lack of engagement with the epidemic confronting their countries is worrisome. The commitment of resources by sub-Saharan countries to fight the epidemic is small, especially in the face of dramatically rising military spending. The international community and in particular Western countries have committed many more resources to the epidemic than the sub-Saharan countries have themselves." See; The HIV/AIDS Epidemic In Africa: Implications For U.S. Policy -- Gow 21 (3): 57 -- Health Affairs
Yes, I can see the very different nature between the too. What I do not see is a proportional response to what is, as an undeniable fact, a much deadlier health issue. And though I won't at all excuse the African governments for their corruption and inefficiency, yes, I do blame the developed countries, specially the European (which can be blamed pretty much for shame Africa is). Good you brought in military expenditures (and arms sales trade), since it is one of the most serious issues treathening human rights, according to Amnesty International (and 92% of those sales, most of it in obscure negotiations, come from developed countries and go to developing nations...). Between 60 and 70 billion dollars a year, whilst the total funding to fight AIDS worldwide is 10 billion, according to UNAIDS. And I am glad to hear the US is at the top of the contributing list, but I can't understand how this, despite the own blame of the African governments, can be a valid argument: 'The international community and in particular Western countries have committed many more resources to the epidemic than the sub-Saharan countries have themselves'? What is the GDP of the Western countries compared to Sub-Saharan countries, for God's sake? Besides, not all comes down to money, as UNAIDS said last year, when religious organisations were acknowledged as responsible for almost 45% of the worldwide effort for fighting AIDS... with 2% of those 10 billion. It's a shame from any point of view if you ask me.
You've also got to look at the treatment too. In the case of the Flu, you only need 1-shot of a vaccine - a one time thing. With HIV/AIDs, you require medicine on a much more frequent basis for a disease that is so far incurable. There is constant ongoing research into a cure for AIDs, which doesn't kill overnight, while things like the Flu can mutate into a deadly disease overnight and kill 35,000 people a year in the United States alone.
Consider also that one of the groups most likely to be seriously effected by the flu is those with HIV/AIDS. What is a mild flu to most people can be leathal to them. In this case the thought may well have been "here is a pontential problem that an immediate energetic response may if not fix at least moderate". HIV/AIDS is well past that point.
Its amazing how those "150 deaths in mexico due to the Swine Flu" is now suddenly "only 12 deaths" with maybe 200 infections. Like has been said before, the Media has blown it well out of proportion and you'll forget its even around in a few weeks.
Which doesn't work particularly well. Just to put that in perspective, AIDS/HIV kills an estimated 25 million people a year.
Actually that's not quite right. Flu vaccines work quite well. They usually give very good protection vs the 3 strains they are tailored for and provide some protection from other starins and colds as well. There was some mention recently of a flu vacine that would require two shots. As for fatalities due to aids another point is that it acutally kills very few people. What is usually fatal are other opertunistic infections. Also the aids virus does mutate quickly at least from what I've read which is in contradiction to someones earlier statement.
