malhotraraul
Galvanizer
Today, my mom felt this slight feverish with headache & thought shes probably infected with this H1N1, had to take a day off & rush to the doc, guess wat, it wasn't flu & possibly just a regular allergy when she realized that she wasn't eating properly past some days.
Wat i mean to say is that the first thing to come in mind, before hearing / reading any news coverage of swine flu, is that if you have swine flu, and then die, that doesn't necessarily mean you've died of swine flu. For example, you could be dying of cancer, then get swine flu, then die from your cancer.
The second thing to come in mind is that reporters who write / say about swine flu will know this fact. They know that one thing does not necessarily confirm the other. They will know that people who die, having caught swine flu, may not necessarily have died from swine flu.
Which makes it unforgivable that it's being happily made by newspapers / news channels up and down the country, including national newspapers / national news channels, who should know better. In fact I can't help concluding they're not stupid, they're not ignorant; that they do know better, but that they have simply decided to mislead their readers.
Swine flu deaths are a better story than people with swine flu dying from other illnesses; and a better story than people with weakened immune systems or existing health problems.
Guess we all are intelligent people; we deserve to be treated with respect, and to be told what's actually going on, and in detail, rather than just a grossly simplified version of it, inevitably the most panic-inducing version of it
Wat i mean to say is that the first thing to come in mind, before hearing / reading any news coverage of swine flu, is that if you have swine flu, and then die, that doesn't necessarily mean you've died of swine flu. For example, you could be dying of cancer, then get swine flu, then die from your cancer.
The second thing to come in mind is that reporters who write / say about swine flu will know this fact. They know that one thing does not necessarily confirm the other. They will know that people who die, having caught swine flu, may not necessarily have died from swine flu.
Which makes it unforgivable that it's being happily made by newspapers / news channels up and down the country, including national newspapers / national news channels, who should know better. In fact I can't help concluding they're not stupid, they're not ignorant; that they do know better, but that they have simply decided to mislead their readers.
Swine flu deaths are a better story than people with swine flu dying from other illnesses; and a better story than people with weakened immune systems or existing health problems.
Guess we all are intelligent people; we deserve to be treated with respect, and to be told what's actually going on, and in detail, rather than just a grossly simplified version of it, inevitably the most panic-inducing version of it
