Society & Culture2 mins ago
It's over here!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chinadog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yep, but we've been locked in a continual battle between our own immune system and viral evolution for hundreds of thousands of years.
It's only in the last few decades we've actually had anti-viral drugs.
Nice to have an edge for once - let's hope it's not squandered in the way that anti-biotics have been.
Let's also be grateful that the Government has had the foresight to stockpile so much. Even if this wasn't the most immediate perceived threat.
Or does anybody think having 33 million shots was a waste of money?
It's only in the last few decades we've actually had anti-viral drugs.
Nice to have an edge for once - let's hope it's not squandered in the way that anti-biotics have been.
Let's also be grateful that the Government has had the foresight to stockpile so much. Even if this wasn't the most immediate perceived threat.
Or does anybody think having 33 million shots was a waste of money?
Jake, the 30million may be useless if the virus changes it's antiigenic structure as Relenza is more expensive and hter are apparently only 1million doses stored.
Jake....help me out.....do I get the impression that you are trying to make political points here....if I am wrong then forgive me, but if I am right....then don't be so bloody daft.
Jake....help me out.....do I get the impression that you are trying to make political points here....if I am wrong then forgive me, but if I am right....then don't be so bloody daft.
A general political point, not a partisan one.
The point I'm making is that we've spent something like �300 million on stockpiling drugs like this.
From time to time there are threads that go along the line of
Sars, bird flu - what a load of hype about nothing
Now given that attitude and the cost and the current debate about public spending in difficult economic times I can quite easily see someone trying to save money in the public purse deciding to cut the program.
Had this not happened now but in a year or two's time would we still be in such a good state of preparedness?
People need to be careful when thinking about cuts in publiic spending.
The point I'm making is that we've spent something like �300 million on stockpiling drugs like this.
From time to time there are threads that go along the line of
Sars, bird flu - what a load of hype about nothing
Now given that attitude and the cost and the current debate about public spending in difficult economic times I can quite easily see someone trying to save money in the public purse deciding to cut the program.
Had this not happened now but in a year or two's time would we still be in such a good state of preparedness?
People need to be careful when thinking about cuts in publiic spending.
