According to recent reports by the World Health Organization (WHO), up to 2 billion of the world’s 6 billion human beings could contract the virus known as H1N1, more commonly known as “Swine Flu.” It is the default assumption by many people that if the World Health Organization has issued such a declaration there may be a substantial amount of proof that the declaration has scientific credibility.
Disturbing questions undermine this belief. What scientific evidence was used to obtain enough data to make such a declaration? Were there any missteps in data collection that could contradict the data being shown? Finally, what is the real world impact to people whom this warning is directed at?
Furthermore, could anyone stand to gain either from an exaggerated response to Swine Flu or even a correct response to this situation? Does the threat, whether real or exaggerated, even matter in such a case?
Swine Flu exploded into public consciousness when newly elected President Barack Obama traveled to Mexico in late April. The national media had a bonanza over the near miss that Obama faced with this “deadly” virus. Over the following weeks the Swine Flu threat was given round-the-clock priority focus. What this media coverage served to do was create a panic among people who would otherwise have no reason not to believe government health warnings.
It was during this time, that the questions posed earlier became more relevant. The assumption is that those possibly infected with Swine Flu were tested against the listed symptoms of Swine Flu. This assumption is thrown out with the bathwater, so to speak, when the Center for Disease Control stopped compiling statistics shortly after the first reported outbreak took place.
By stopping the collection of data, there is no way to know exactly how many people contracted Swine Flu. When phrases such as pandemic are being used and the basic fundamental building block of the argument to justify the term is knocked astray, what is it that we have? We are forced to conclude that the WHO has veered from their mission statement and is acting as a tool of propaganda.
Who stands to gain from the imminent threat of Swine Flu?
In hand we have evidence that the science to determine the presence of Swine Flu has been iffy at best. We must, however, delve a bit deeper and ask why? It is important to remember that we are in a time of economic devastation while social upheaval is beginning to build.
Banks and their incestuous relationship with the politicians have been at the forefront of the consciousness of many workers, not to mention the two wars that are being fought at great expense in terms of human life. The cherry on top of this sundae is the financial misappropriation of maintaining two neo-colonial wars. It is in this light that we must ask: could a global pandemic actually benefit anyone? Such a global event or even the mere threat of one benefits the stock market; especially Big Pharmacy, which has the vaccines that everyone may be forced to take, either through government decree or in response to sensationalized media coverage. In addition hysteria over such a pandemic benefits politicians and bankers who will have the glare of public outrage removed from them. Sure to follow will be a coordinated political campaign much like the one we saw after 9/11.
Swine Flu, despite the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and WHO’s dereliction, could very well become a health crisis. If so, this underlines how for-profit health care will be unable to respond in the event that it is. For-profit health care functions above all to make money, not to cure people, and as the War on Drugs has continually shown us the rarer a drug is the more valuable it becomes.
Swine Flu is a legitimate concern for the working class but not necessarily just the health issues. The lessons and sacrifices that the working class made in response to 9/11 – in the form of warrantless wiretaps, increased “security” at the airport, and the Patriot Act — must be remembered vividly. This crisis, regardless of its actual threat, could and likely will be used to extract more concessions from an already battered working class.