Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Bird Flu Research and the Stimulus Package

Did you also know that the stimulus package that Congress is working is about $885 billion and that we are spending $870 million on bird flu research. I know I sleep a lot sounder knowing that we are reseaching bird flu. Did you hear about the mass bird flu epedimic of 2009? According to the US government's own website on avian and pandemic flu information, China has reported its 6th case of bird flu this year. Oh, no! Last year, there were 44 cases of bird flu and 33 deaths globally. Nothing reported in the US. Do you realize that more people are killed in auto accidents on a daily basis than all of the bird flu deaths in one year?

Once again, thank your Congressman. You maybe unemployed with no medical insurance or hope for a new job, but you can rest assured that our government is throwing money at really big problems and cannot be worried about the little problems like its people.


  1. hmmm. When the Bird Flu begins being transmitted person to person it is expected to KILL 1.4 BILLION people. That helps me rest a lot easier knowing that the government is trying to find a way to escape that fate! History IS repeating and this is expected to be the most devastating pandemic EVER! Which is more important to you, keeping people employed or keeping people ALIVE? Personally I stand behind congress' decision to try and remedy both!

  2. Right now, you need to look at priorities. The biggest priority is getting the economy back online and moving forward. Spending $870 million in research for Bird Flu that MIGHT kill 1.4 billion SOMETIME in the future doesn't make much sense. I'm not putting a price tag on human life. I'm being realistic. The problem is that there are priorities that need to be addressed. If we continue to simply spend on EVERYTHING, we are doing a major disservice to the future generations. If we keep people employed, then the government has a stream of income to fund research. If unemployment continues to rise, what would you propose then? Spend more money?

  3. Imagine if our government poured $870 million into AIDS research in the early '80s? Do you have any idea how many billions, perhaps even trillions when you add in the global costs, that could have been averted? Research, in all of its forms is often a cost saving measure. Secondarily, an argument can be made that spending money on research, which funnels to laboratories, universities, scientists, their assistants, companies that manufacture test tubes . . . and on and on and on is good policy.

    A major flu pandemic will happen. Not if, merely when. The money we spend on research now will save our economy tenfold as much in the future. Or, perhaps, even prevent such a pandemic from killing one out of every 10 people you know.

  4. Let me ask this? How many trillions or billions of people would have been saved if we had spent $870 million on AIDS research. We could only guess on the numbers. I'm saying that everything including spending comes at a price. There are immediate needs. Those needs have priorities. If we continue to spend money on everything, nothing will get accomplished.

    The government cannot just spend money they do not have and hope that it everything will work out. The government has already pointed out that Medicare will be insolvent 2 years sooner than was predicted.

    Most people miss the point of the commentary. The economy must be stabilized and on the road to recovery first. Once that occurs, then the government can spend money on research. If the economy isn't on the road to recovery, they are just spending money that don't have.

    Think about the amount of debt that is being created. Are we as a nation willing to create more debt for our children and their children?

  5. Ha ha, I bet you feel like an idiot now. Still think all that flu research money is a waste, now that we're on the cusp of a pandemic?

  6. I published your comment to allow my readers to see just how petty some people can be. The comment, "I bet you feel like an idiot now," was uncalled for.

    The other thing is that this is swine flu nor bird flu. The original earmark was for swine flu. Read the article.

    Does it make you feel better that people are dying to prove your point? I bet you feel wonderful knowing that 68 people have died thus far and 1000s more ill to help you prove your position.

    I still stick by my original thoughts. Next time you make a comment, be civil. Every year, 48,000 people die from the flu. More people die in car accidents each year. I don't see the government spending huge amounts of money on research to lower the number of accidents. Take a look at the number of people who die using a ladder. I still don't see a huge sum of government money being spent on ladder safety research.

    I also expect an apology when we get passed this "pandemic". The original cases of bird flu was supposed to have been the beginning of a pandemic. It never happened. The swine flu back in the 1970s was supposed to have been the beginning of a pandemic. It never happend.
    The list of illness like SARS and many others only proves my point. We like to read about misery and not face reality. William Randolph Heart, the news magnate, said, "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." The media is just sensationalizing the flu problem. It is the favor of the day for them. SO, when we find that all of the worry was for nothing, I expect an apology to be posted here for my readers.

    Also, if you want to gloat or make a point, use your name. Anonymous makes you look really petty. Thanks for sharing.

  7. I agree with Jesse. If we do not get our economy fixed and we end up with a full economic collapse, we will not need to worry about the bird flu killing us. Instead we might have to worry more about us killing each other to survive. I'd rather take my chances with the bird flu, at least until the economy stabilizes.

  8. Will nobody worry about the poor swine? And what of the children? My God, who's going to think of the CHILDREN?