Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (6223)	1/26/2004 10:59:06 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 20773

cbsnews.com Flu deaths AVERAGE 36k a year Think about that, when you quake in your boots during our fearless leaders speeches. If you really want homeland security, pray to whatever God you believe in, that your fearless leader increases the budget of the CDC.

To: epicure who wrote (6223)	1/26/2004 10:59:44 AM
From: redfish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

"Do your due diligence- and add up all the victims of the flu- just for a start (no need to include 1918), compare to the victims of terrorism- no comparison." I agree, I did my dd when the SARS scare hit, and realized SARs was nothing compared to the 20,000 people who die each year in the U.S. of the common flu. Worldwide the death toll of the common flu is enormous. Now we have this chicken flu scaring everyone ... what are 10 deaths around the world compared to 20,000 each year in the U.S. alone? Re terrorism, the real threat imo is weaponized smallpox, that could kill 50m easy.

To: epicure who wrote (6223)	1/26/2004 11:41:26 AM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 20773

Terrorism is a non-starter compared to viral threats. We don't even need to go as far as viral threats. Just compare terrorism death numbers with death numbers from drunk driving. According to the US Dept. of Transportation, in 2001 there were 17,448 alcohol-related traffic fatalities. Fewer than 3,000 died in NYC, and fewer than 1,000 in Oklahoma City. So you are in MUCH more danger from a drunk driver than you are from a terrorist. But we are allowed to screen every passenger that plans to board a plane with invasive screening, but can't run random checkpoints to look for drunk drivers. Can anybody say screwy priorities?