Re: WHO warns of severe form of swine flu
Yes, that's the core of the problem:
how it is possible that after 4 months of calming messages to the public (without by TV/media mainly mentioning the scary part) when the clinical picture at the fields revealed seemengly the similar number levels of vents/deaths,
now suddenly, they divulged to the public a mention about the above possibility, but enveloped in a virus change by the main media?
Why they reversed the plate now?
If there is no changing in the virus, than why they left the media trumpeting about a change, instead of make an public correctional statement about?
If there is a worse change in a pandemic virus (collected by the clinical signs from the old infected fields: which they were stated are not more obligated to send them the informations!), than why the already collected samples from the cases (which drove such field conclusion) weren't already sequenced, so they can make a clean statement about?
Is it credible that WHO are going to make such important statement about media referred new viral changes, without had such samples sequenced and identificated already the change?
Hardly.
I have always been concerned with the information that was in the hands of the WHO, but was not being divulged to the public. But given this latest news article, they seemed to have turned around.
Yes, that's the core of the problem:
how it is possible that after 4 months of calming messages to the public (without by TV/media mainly mentioning the scary part) when the clinical picture at the fields revealed seemengly the similar number levels of vents/deaths,
now suddenly, they divulged to the public a mention about the above possibility, but enveloped in a virus change by the main media?
Why they reversed the plate now?
If there is no changing in the virus, than why they left the media trumpeting about a change, instead of make an public correctional statement about?
If there is a worse change in a pandemic virus (collected by the clinical signs from the old infected fields: which they were stated are not more obligated to send them the informations!), than why the already collected samples from the cases (which drove such field conclusion) weren't already sequenced, so they can make a clean statement about?
Is it credible that WHO are going to make such important statement about media referred new viral changes, without had such samples sequenced and identificated already the change?
Hardly.