Originally posted by: EngineNr9
tcsenter and Millennium, are you saying that this Don't forget that the drug companies are huge Republican campaign contributers is not true?
Originally posted by: EngineNr9
What do Democrats have to do with anything?
Yep, this is all part of a vast right wing conspiracy to make more money for the vaccine companies. You caught them Moonbeam. Damn your good.Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Democratic apologists? And to think just the other day I as being asked what 'republican apologists' are.
Rule one. Follow the money. Vaccine=dollars-law suites=-dollars+republicans=special interest legislation=no more law suits=profit. It's really simple. The only thing that gets in the way of full comprehension is just the small matter of being blinded by that old training=authority is never wrong. Tip: The wise men are all fools.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The important thing is that your mind keep roiling in fear. Today smallpox tomorrow ebola and anthrax and hemoragic fever and on and on and on. We have to keep ourselves jacked up every minute because there must be no questions about war. War is good. War is pease. Danger is safety. Enjoy your new world order. Remember, the government knows mor than you possibly ever can. Trust is freedom.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Republican motto: Look busy, save the voter from his worst nightmare. And don't forget to create it first.
He's making a list, he's checking it twice, the Mullah's going to find out who's naughty and nice.
I have seen the contrails in the sky,
and all I can say is my oh my.
You people and your tinfoil hats must be conservatives. Events have moved way past you, probably still wondering what's boradcast on channel 1.
Hmmm....curious then that the contract to produce the vaccine was awarded in to Acambis PLC in September of 2000 BEFORE President Bush became President.Originally posted by: EngineNr9
Sleestak, what does that do with the fact that the Republicans recieve lots of money from sources that would stand to gain from a serious implementation of small pox vaccination? Whether or not that is what is actually happening, because I'm sure these super rich politicians and business people, so unbelievably far removed from the ordinary guy, are acting out of some Godlike altruism, the money connections are there.
Originally posted by: Sleestak
Hmmm....curious then that the contract to produce the vaccine was awarded in to Acambis PLC in September of 2000 BEFORE President Bush became President.Originally posted by: EngineNr9
Sleestak, what does that do with the fact that the Republicans recieve lots of money from sources that would stand to gain from a serious implementation of small pox vaccination? Whether or not that is what is actually happening, because I'm sure these super rich politicians and business people, so unbelievably far removed from the ordinary guy, are acting out of some Godlike altruism, the money connections are there.
"Acambis Inc., the US subsidiary of British firm Acambis plc, will produce the vaccine in partnership with Baxter BioScience, part of Baxter Healthcare Corp., according to an Acambis press release. Acambis originally won a $343 million contract from the CDC in September 2000 to produce 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine by 2004. After the terrorist attacks of last Sept 11, the CDC renegotiated the contract to change the delivery date to the end of 2002 and increase the doses to 54 million. The new contract means the company will be producing a total of 209 million doses for HHS. Acambis Inc. is based in Cambridge, Mass."
All that has happened under a Repblican administration is that 14 million more doses were ordered and the delivery date was moved up. Yep, it just reaks of a Republican conspiracy.
You can't read can you? The Bush Administration increased the order to 54 million. The total amount stockpiled that was produced by Acambis will be 209 million. The total amount of the vaccine on hand is 286 million, 209 million of those doses being produced by Acambis.Originally posted by: Thera
Originally posted by: Sleestak
Hmmm....curious then that the contract to produce the vaccine was awarded in to Acambis PLC in September of 2000 BEFORE President Bush became President.Originally posted by: EngineNr9
Sleestak, what does that do with the fact that the Republicans recieve lots of money from sources that would stand to gain from a serious implementation of small pox vaccination? Whether or not that is what is actually happening, because I'm sure these super rich politicians and business people, so unbelievably far removed from the ordinary guy, are acting out of some Godlike altruism, the money connections are there.
"Acambis Inc., the US subsidiary of British firm Acambis plc, will produce the vaccine in partnership with Baxter BioScience, part of Baxter Healthcare Corp., according to an Acambis press release. Acambis originally won a $343 million contract from the CDC in September 2000 to produce 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine by 2004. After the terrorist attacks of last Sept 11, the CDC renegotiated the contract to change the delivery date to the end of 2002 and increase the doses to 54 million. The new contract means the company will be producing a total of 209 million doses for HHS. Acambis Inc. is based in Cambridge, Mass."
All that has happened under a Repblican administration is that 14 million more doses were ordered and the delivery date was moved up. Yep, it just reaks of a Republican conspiracy.
Ok... original order was 40 million units due in 2004. President Bush Super sizes it and it becomes total of 209 million. I fail to see how this is a "free" upgrade. And I also fail to see how 209 million doses will cover the citizenry.
I honestly don't think it's 100% about money. I think it's about maintaining a certain amount of public fear. The more fear the voters have come election day the more Republicans will win. Remember kiddies... Vote for patriotism!
30% mortality rate? Where did you get those numbers? From what I've been reading the mortality rate is well over 60% even when recieving the best of medical treatment. A poor weapon? Yeah that's why the Soviet Union spent so much time and money creating a super strain of Small Pox to use in warfare.Originally posted by: Vic
Sorry, folks, but Moonie is right.
In much the same way the Dems like giving out hard-earned taxpayer dollars to bums and lazy welfare moms, the Pubs like give out your money to corporations that have done nothing to earn it except make campaign contributions. I don't have exact figures, but those 300 million smallpox shots run up at several bucks a piece plus administrative costs, all paid for by Uncle Sam. Tidy business for some of the pharmaceuticals. Otherwise, there is no threat of smallpox. It's a poor terrorist weapon, with a relatively low mortality rate (it only kills 30% of its victims), relatively slow acting, and nearly impossible to control (the biggest problem with biologicals).
God, the Republican party is not what it used to be... if GW told everyone that jumping off a cliff was a good idea, the world would be run by liberals within a day. :Q :disgust:![]()
CDC Smallpox HomeOriginally posted by: Sleestak
30% mortality rate? Where did you get those numbers? From what I've been reading the mortality rate is well over 60% even when recieving the best of medical treatment. A poor weapon? Yeah that's why the Soviet Union spent so much time and money creating a super strain of Small Pox to use in warfare.
It may be hard to acquire, but the Russians were making tons of the stuff at one time, so it can't be terribly hard to mass-produce, if needed.Originally posted by: Vic
And yes, a poor terrorist weapon... for exactly the reasons I gave and more. Difficult and expensive to acquire, relatively low mortality rate, slow-acting (average incubation period of 12-14 days before any symptoms appear!), and virtually uncontrollable (could easily turn attacker into victim).
Which is why some have been working on making it travel well through the air. What prevents terrorists from using the flat or hemorrhagic variations of Variola major, anyway?Further edit: smallpox is also not very contagious either, further decreasing its value as a terrorist weapon. From CDC website:
"Generally, direct and fairly prolonged face-to-face contact is required to spread smallpox from one person to another. Smallpox also can be spread through direct contact with infected bodily fluids or contaminated objects such as bedding or clothing. Rarely, smallpox has been spread by virus carried in the air in enclosed settings such as buildings, buses, and trains. Humans are the only natural hosts of variola. Smallpox is not known to be transmitted by insects or animals."
Now why would airborne "enhanced" smallpox be better for terrorists than a more dangerous virus such as Ebola? Ebola can only be spread from direct contact, unlike smallpox. From the CDC site linked above:Historically, variola major has an overall fatality rate of about 30%; however, flat and hemorrhagic smallpox usually are fatal.
After the first case-patient in an outbreak setting is infected, the virus can be transmitted in several ways. People can be exposed to Ebola virus from direct contact with the blood and/or secretions of an infected person. Thus, the virus is often spread through families and friends because they come in close contact with such secretions when caring for infected persons. People can also be exposed to Ebola virus through contact with objects, such as needles, that have been contaminated with infected secretions.
For the same reasons shown in your link. Ebola is extremely fast-acting (onset of symptoms is almost immediate after infection) and has a mortality rate. It also has the benefit of being highly contagious despite the lack of airborne infection. For these reasons, it is ideal as a terrorist weapon because it is fast and controllable. Victims are known immediately AND likely to die, factors which intensify impact while at the same time reducing spread.Originally posted by: jliechty
Now why would airborne "enhanced" smallpox be better for terrorists than a more dangerous virus such as Ebola? Ebola can only be spread from direct contact, unlike smallpox.
The info about the Russian smallpox (and other things) is in this book. You may choose to throw out anything stated in that book that does not fit with your preconceived ideas, but that's your choice, not mine.Originally posted by: Vic
For the same reasons shown in your link. Ebola is extremely fast-acting (onset of symptoms is almost immediate after infection) and has a mortality rate. It also has the benefit of being highly contagious despite the lack of airborne infection. For these reasons, it is ideal as a terrorist weapon because it is fast and controllable. Victims are known immediately AND likely to die, factors which intensify impact while at the same time reducing spread.Originally posted by: jliechty
Now why would airborne "enhanced" smallpox be better for terrorists than a more dangerous virus such as Ebola? Ebola can only be spread from direct contact, unlike smallpox.
With smallpox, OTOH, circumstances are much different.
BTW, anyone got a credible medical link to this "Russian-made airborne enhanced" smallpox? I've heard a lot about it, and God forbid I go against conventional wisdom here, but right now it sounds a lot to me like that "Red Mercury" backpack nuke they supposedly made as well.
