Make your own using our Graph Builder or upload your own files, images or videos. All our charts are user-submitted.
« Previous AT&T Wireless signal | You Know the Media is Blowing Something Out of Proportion When…. Next »
» 150 TPS Reports
-
Latest Comments
LLD on And By ‘Old’ You M… shawn3k on I’m Just Testing It… JerryLooiz on Time To Break Out The Aluminum… LLM on Time To Break Out The Aluminum… HWNSNBM on And By ‘Old’ You M… Octavio on Time To Break Out The Aluminum… Dire on Science! Amazing Transit Map o… Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … Julian on Would You Like Cheese on Your … 
Cheezburger Network Blog
w00t. That is soooooooo true. Swine flu is not even close to an epidemic – it comes to about an average of 4 people per state in the U.S. who have been infected, and a 1/200 death rate for people with any kind of access to a doctor.
I think the difference is that Malaria is spread by mosquitoes and stays in Malaria-infested areas, but the flu can be spread from person to person.
However, I agree that the media attention given to swine flu FAR outweighs the risks to the average American (or anyone really). Ugh. More reasons to avoid the news.
I’s true. Mosquitos never cross state lines.
lol
LOL
if only mexicans were like that…
I lol’d so hard…
ya they do it takes a couple gens but they do
and has anyone else herd of another mosqito disease called west nile?
Not just true, it’s brilliant.
Now realize how small the part of malaria will be when we’d make a graph about all death causes. For instance: the war in the middle east, de civillian wars in central africa, cancer, car accidents, heart problems!?
Malaria is a much larger cause of death than all of those, except maybe cancer or heart problems.
No, Malaria causes more death world wide than anything else. ANYTHING.
I think that Green Slice is too big
But Malaria doesn’t turn you into a zombie for two hours, like the H1Z1 strain of the swine flu.. ‘;,,;’
TB?
Nope, malaria beat it recently.
Read an article about it off fark.com
Yeah, Malaria doesn’t kill all that many people. Shut up Nameless.
Top 10 Causes of Death in 2001
Heart disease and stroke were the leading causes of death in 2001, regardless of countries’ incomes, the study shows.
However, other leading causes of death differed depending on countries’ incomes. Here is the list for high-income countries:
1. Heart disease
2. Stroke
3. Lung cancer
4. Lower respiratory infections
5. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
6. Colon and rectum cancers
7. Alzheimer’s disease
8. Type 2 diabetes
9. Breast cancer
10. Stomach cancer
That’s in the united states. Malaria death is global.
I mean rich countries lol. Malaria in usually in poor countries.
“The war in the middle East”?
More Israelis and Palestinians die in traffic accidents.
Unless you mean the civil war in Algeria, where millions have died in a few decades without anybody noticing.
Innit
….AND IGNORE HOW I AM ESSENTIALLY DOING EXACTLY WHAT I AM TELLING YOU NOT TO DO YOU STOOPID
Haha
Well looking at all global deaths put together has less conceptual meaning as everyone who is born will die of something eventually.
However malaria deaths are almost always children and pregnant women.
UNICEF estimates 25,000 children die every day.
And, the WHO estimates 3,000 children die of malaria each day.
So if you imagine the graph, the malaria part is in no way small.
The emergency anti-flu medicine that has been stockpiled as of late in many developed countries, especially in Russia (per capita they have some of the most) is rather ineffective, expires quickly, sometimes creates symptoms mimicing flu infection (making treatment and containment absolute hell), and when used quickly generates residue in local water supplies, exposing wildlife. This exposure quickly and consistently generates resistance in the disease.
Further and clearer information on Flu is available at the speaker website TED.com, specifically in a presentation on the Spanish Flu epidemic.
Nah man malaria kills way more than all of those.
I heard somewhere that malaria+ other diseases carried by mosquitoes is the cause of more deaths than all the other causes combined.
There have only been 2 deaths in ALL of America. Check your facts, buddy.
He’s including Mexico, and Mexico is part of America. ;p
America = North America + Central America + South America + Some isles like cuba, so when an Northamerican say God Bless America thats include all of us
He said average of 4 people per state who have been INFECTED not who have died. Reading comprehension fail.
epidemic Noun
A widespread outbreak of an infectious disease; many people are infected at the same time
Pandimic; Noun
An epidemic that is geographically widespread; occurring throughout a region or even throughout the world
Its called a dictionary, use it.
It’s “pandemic”.
It’s called a dictionary, use it.
Its a typo. Get over it.
its a joke, im hungry
It’s a win, you earned it.
I’m lost, what happened?
30,000 people die of the normal flu each year
and one American so far has died from swine flu
right, but it has been around for all of a month? it’s a roughly 4% mortality rate whereas standard flu tends to have a 1-2% mortality rate. granted, the US tends to have much better health care and supportive therapy, but that doesn’t change the fact that the demographic of those catching it is typically unusual for flu.
In the US the percentage is more like 0.2% for swine flu deaths…
hhahaahahaha that si so true!!1!:mrgreen:
OH NO SWINE FLU
People only died of malaria and swine flu this month? Sweet! We cured AIDS, cancer, and everything else while I wasn’t looking.
Yeah the title really should be changed. Because it also makes it sound like swine flu’s claimed a lot more people than it has. Even if the sliver’s only like .25%, it’s still way high.
Don’t forget disgruntled employees.
to the Geez guy:f**k you you for being so funny
So true.. It was a huge unneeded hype like this with SARS, mad cow disease and bird flu. When bird flu was all the rage I said that it’ll be forgotten in a month, and it was. This will be exactly the same.
Uhm, so we should have done nothing and maybe let it grow until it IS a problem? When is it serious enough to act? After a couple of dozen people die? A hundred? A thousand maybe? Long after it’s to late to do anything?
That’s what I don’t get about people. As soon as you prevent a problem, they go and claim that the problem wasn’t serious, because nothing bad ever happened. What the heck did you think all the work was for?
Also, the difference between this and birdflu or mad cow’s, is that neither of those could pass from human to human.
To see how bad it could have been, look up the 1918 Spanish flu.
A strain of the same subtype, killed 80 million people. Now, imagine how that looks with fast airtravel for everyone.
Still think we shouldn’t have bothered?
Yeah, but the difference is the Spanish Flu specifically attacked those with strong immune systems causing cytokine storms. Swine Flu, like most seasonal influenza viruses attacks those with suppressed or otherwise compromised immune systems.
Same strain does not mean same disease. Please try researching before spitting out groundless facts and propogating paranoia.
Alcar, I don’t think anyone’s saying we shouldn’t do anything. I think most people agree, however, that the amount of attention the media is giving to this is causing undue panic and that the cost/benefit ratio is way low compared to other health risks (e.g. Malaria).
they didnt have antibiotics in 1918. millions of people would have died from regular flu, not to mention tuberculosis, diptheria, etc…….
Antibiotics don’t help viruses…flu and H1N1 being viruses.
There’s a HUGE difference between reacting intelligently, and OVERREACTING.
Now, granted, some people view the Mexican government’s reaction (essentially closing most public venues) an overreaction, but I think THAT was an appropriate reaction.
Wearing face masks that do nothing to prevent transmission? Rushing out and stocking up on supplies like it’s doomsday? Over reaction.
Exactly.
If Bird Flu had mutated and evolved the ability to pass from person to person (which is could have but we got lucky this time) it could have spread around the world and killed hundreds of millions.
Bird flu has never affected people. It is a predicted flu mutation. SARS was a much bigger deal (in reality) than swine flu.
My boss calls it he heenee flu, cause he saw it written “H1N1″. It was hard not to lol in his face…
Sorry… no. Bird flu USUALLY does not infect people. It can, and has, however. (link, para 1).
And compared to this, SARS was a big deal, but in reality, it too wasn’t much of a deal
That graph has Swine Flu way too big, malaria should take up all but an invisible portion. AIDS and cancer kill way less people then malaria by the way.
Aren’t these supposed to be funny?
Yes, but truth and irony have their place too.
not necessarily. i think poignancy and social commentary are equally valid characteristics for these graphs.
Second – it’s a humor site but a wake-up call is okay occasionally.
You can thank all of the environmentalist wackos who pushed for a global ban on DDT with no real evidence of any damaging effects it has on anyone or anything for the deaths from malaria. It’s tragic when liberal elites think they know what is best for those in third world countries, and the medicine ends up being worse than the disease, as so often happens with well-intentioned but ill-informed liberals.
LIBERALS LIBERALS SHRIEK SHRIEK SHRIEK Oh give it a rest.
So when liberals complain on an hourly basis no one says anything, but when a conservative says anything they’re apparently obsessed?
*shoots the whole lot of you*
There, problem solved. Who wants some ice cream?
No. When someone disagrees with a liberal it starts a discussion that furthers mutual understanding.
When someone disagrees with a conservative the conservative gets all whiny and butt-hurt and tries to act like they’re the victim of some huge conspiracy.
“DDT with no real evidence of any damaging effects it has on anyone or anything”
Holy sh*t. You need to pull your head out of the sand. Are you actually saying that there is no scientific evidence for the harmful effects of DDT on the environment? Wow…
Ask someone with malaria or in a malarial area whether they’d like to die of the possible risks of DDT, such as the possibility of cancer, etc. down the road or die a hideous death from malaria now.
Seems like your concern is more about the environment than human lives.
Heavens to Betsy…
Great graph, now onto the comments:
I’m no expert (but then again, none of us are so we’re here rather than working for the World Health Organisation) but wouldn’t wiping out a species of insect with DDT have some kind of detrimental effect on the ecosystem as a whole? Anyone remember when Mao wiped out all the sparrows in China because he thought they were eating all the crop seeds? Turned out they were eating the worms that were eating all the seeds, so the worms destroyed the crops and 7 million people died.
But, no, I’m sure entirely removing a species from an ecosystem will be fine. Good luck with that.
Come to think of it, why don’t all those people in Africa and stuff just use, like, insect repellant. I mean, it’s widely available, right.
(Author’s note: That last bit was ironic. But it’s no less ridiculous than wiping out all mosquitoes)
DDT was a problem because people were over using it. There was tons of bioaccumulation. But there are practical and environmentally safe uses for it. For instance, spraying it on the inside walls of huts (where it will kill mosquitoes generally land after a blood meal) will have a huge impact on decreasing the spread of malaria, while have virtually no potential for massive bioaccumulation.
The problem with DDT before was it was being heavily used for agricultural purposes, and after insects developed massive resistance, people just kept using more and more as opposed to changing pesticides (which you should do BEFORE resistance ever becomes a problem)
/pesticide and entomology lecture.
Also, the environment is kind of…where people live. Get rid of it and we’re all screwed.
Good point.
since when is man more important than the planet?
It’s not us or the planet. You are buying into a false dichotomy that your liberal cohorts have used to justify the deaths of millions of human beings. Obviously we can’t yet survive without this planet. If we could and it came down to us vs. the planet, I would say see you later planet earth. As it stands in some cases, it may be us vs. another species. I choose us every time.
What I’m saying is that the human costs of not using it to fight malaria far outweigh any possible eggshell thinnning or obscure bird species losses that we have avoided by not using it to fight malaria. I don’t think it should be used in the amounts that were used on crops. Its agricultural application required much much more to be effective on insects that effect crops, but very little in comparison is needed to kill mosquitoes. Millions and millions of human lives are worth more to me than the possibility of losing a few bird species. You are the one who needs to get his head out of the sand and do a little homework.
g_dogg
The WHO (not the band) now endorses the limited use of DDT.
No, we shouldn’t wipe out the entire mosquito species, but giving humans a bed netting and telling them to ‘deal with it’ instead of using a known deterrent is ridiculous. How would you feel if they gave you a bed net?
I’d be there like WTF? Kill these bugs, dammit. (not being flip-I’m on the side of humans)
I agree with u-no-it and SiHazit.
Watch out- they’ll be sucking your brains out with their Commie goodie-two-shoes vampire fangs. *rolls eyes*
Indeed – overpopulation and other human factors had nothing to do with the spread of malaria. As a licensed pesticide applicator I’m intimately familiar with the loss of safe and effective pesticides because of reckless, short-sighted over-use. DDT is a fine example. It was a crutch that allowed mankind to avoid developing more sustainable strategies for dealing with malaria and when it was banned because of REAL problems it caused we were unprepared for the resulting spike in the disease.
absolutely brilliant. well done. best graph in a while.
I’ve always wondered.. I’ve read the articles, sifted through the documents, and I’m still stumped..
How is swine flu any different from the usual influenza? Seems to be the exact same.. except pigs catch it too. Then again, I’m not all sure that’s any different either. XD
It’s different in taht nobody is immune to it, unlike seasonal flu.
So, with normal flu, maybe 1 in 10 people who are exposed get infected, meaning that after 6 generations, 5 people are infected.
With swine flu, nobody is immune. You get exposed and you become infected. 10 out of 10 people are infected, so after 6 generations that’s potentially the whole world.
Now, I’m sure you can see the potential problem there?
What you just said makes it as harmless as the common cold.
‘Infected’. Great, good. You’re infected with at least three different diseases as you read this. They’re running through your system, right now. But guess what? They can’t override your immune system. Hence, you are not sick.
Infected means nothing.
My theory is that is has been around before, but no one noticed it. When you get the flu, have you ever gotten it typed out before? Not likely. No people were typing it out. But it happened to hit a poor part of Mexico where it killed many people who were unable to get health care. Since a lot of people with similar symptoms died suddenly, they stated testing them. All of a sudden, everyone who is a little sick is getting tested. Sure, the people who passed away probably had no immunity to it…but the “normal” strains of influenza kill many people every year.
I’m no epidemiologist…. it is just a thought I’ve had
It’s basiclly the same exact symtoms but a smige worse cause of a slight diffrence from the flu usual
Except the regular flu kills 32,000 people every flu season and swine flu has killed a few hundred total.
It’s also a little unusual in that this is happening in the spring/summer months instead of the more usual winter months. But yeah, it’s basically the same thing (Both are H1N1 strains.)
Awww. I still don’t give a crap about either. . . . .
Yes, yes, yes, but what did people die of in countries that actually matter?
Getting hit by cars, mostly.
Cancer? Coronary failures? Cars?
Wow…. we better stay away from things starting with a C huh?
Coca-Cola, Cheeseburgers, Chips… oh it just keeps on going!
=P
Cocaine! Calories! Cricket!
Cats,crayons,cheese,chalks,Colgate,cherries,children and clocks! They’re all dangerous!
What’s swine flu?
never mind the death rate compared to malaria. 21000 people die of normal flu a month. 31 is nothing in comparison. more people probably die from washing machine related incidents.
If I read a graph about swine flu, does that infect me? I’m scared![/sarcasm]
There should be a graph about how much the media covered it compared to how much people point out that they covered it too much.
Woot! (I was going to say that even before I saw the last comment)
I mean first comment
just dont listen to Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montana music. it already causes brain tumors and brain cancer so swine flu cant be THAT far off…
swine flu is no worse than regular flu. Good job CDC & WHO.
Conspiracy theory time…Americans making big deal out of little bug because it’s coming from Mexico.
Probably due to some right wing nut hoping to drum up support for anti-immigration laws.
“Probably due to some right wing nut hoping to drum up support for anti-immigration laws.”
I hope you are joking. If not, you need to lay off the koolaid. It’s damaging your ability to think clearly. The hyping of this is coming from your liberal pals in the media. And as usual, they are just following the lead of the administration of our dear supreme leader, his lordship Obama. He is using it as cover for all of the other things he is trying to get by us without us noticing.
like warantless wiretapping, erosion of constitutional rights, starting wars under false pretenses, sidelining of science, supremacy of ideology over ability, and appointments of the criminally incompetent? oh wait…
warrantless wiretapping – I almost agree with you there, but don’t throw stones, Obama voted for it
erosion of constitutional rights – Not that I am at all a fan of George Bush, but what constitutional rights did you lose?
starting wars under false pretenses – You mean the false pretenses of the entire civilized world including the vast majority of Democrats who voted for it?
sidelining of science – I assume you mean global warming. The only problem is that over the last decade the earth has been cooling. Interesting how they have changed to calling it climate change. And the list of experts and scientists who think it is junk science continues to grow.
supremacy of ideology over ability – Aren’t ideals bigger than ability by nature? If yours aren’t, maybe you should aim a little higher. There is always room for improvement.
appointments of the criminally incompetent – Just because you disagree with them doesn’t mean they are incompetent. Besides, being incompetent is not criminal. If it were, Jimmy Carter would have spent the last 30 years in jail.
“Half of the world’s population is at risk of malaria, and an estimated 247 million cases led to nearly 881 000 deaths in 2006.”
http://apps.who.int/malaria/wmr2008/
Almost all of those who die are children under the age of 12 and pregnant women.
DDT? Personally, I’d rather beat a bird (ANY bird) to death with a blunt object, feed its carcass to my house cat, and use its feathers to stuff my personal pillow before I’d let one (1) child die.
But then, for those environmentalists who consciously desire the deaths of about half the world populace, this really isn’t a problem.
huge sigh
Mmm, second only to TB, which kills 2 million per year in recent times.
I don’t understand. How can anyone value a human life over an animal life or even vegetable life, for that matter? I’d guess that you’re a religious fanatic. I assume this because no other social repression tool can help someone assert their ignorance in such a proud manner as religion does. No, wait, there’s also room in there for nationalism.
The moment you stop thinking that man has a purpose and is the center of the universe, maybe you will realize the plain truth: in order for man to exist there needs to be a balance in Nature.
And of course, our civilization’s (i.e., industrialized countries) increasingly excessive needs mess up this balance. The fact that Man has “advanced” and has been able to “surpass” Nature in aspects such as mortality, which is the key instrument in maintaining proportion, is a great indicator of this imbalance. And therefore a great concern.
Doesn’t our own progress bear upon us?
So if you value your own species above others you are a religious fanatic? Wow, iblis, you are way out there. If you are dumb enough to believe that then there is no way you are intelligent enough to understand any argument that could convince you otherwise. I wouldn’t even know where to start.
“There is no way you are intelligent enough to understand any argument that could convince you otherwise.” Orly?
The fact I don’t share your same views on this “value my own species” supremacy ideology is because of the cruelty and unknowingness it constructs itself upon. But if you weren’t as biased, you’d know that I’m merely pointing out logical conclusions drawn from the observation of history, sociology or science. I suppose that’s the product of my liberal cohorts’ false dichotomies (or whatever), commie brainwashed mentality or some other differentiation that you will ultimately bring around.
This is what actually what perplexes me the most. The fundamental belief that our species must reign really just fades past the borders of political correctness (obviously seen in Swine Flu vs. Malaria). It’s a fact that throughout human history, man has needed to take advantage of others in order to progress (if you can call it that). So we create this mentality where we focus on the things that makes us different instead of what we have in common. This way we can do horrendous things -like eliminate an entire species just to keep another overpopulated one growing- and be OK with it. Yet at the same time, you’re perfectly comfortable with the lifestyle you follow without giving a second thought to slavery, just to name an example. That, sir, is the definition of dichotomy. And that’s your progress.
Now explain to me, how is it that I’m “justifying the deaths of millions of human beings” by simply affirming something that is true? Oh, that’s right, you “wouldn’t even know where to start.”
Oddly enough, I happen to be an atheist-not that it matters.
And, yes-I do value my species over others. I also value my family over others, my country over others, and my IQ over yours.
Now listen closely….this is called HUMAN NATURE. It’s also called the survival instinct, which is the most basic instinct there is-every living thing on this planet has it.
The problem with idealists is that you don’t recognize and deal with human nature as it is-instead you try to coerce everyone into behaving the way you think they should.
This breathtakingly idiotic way of thinking is precisely what is responsible for 35 million dead from malaria, more than 100 million dead from communism, etc, etc, etc.
Learn to deal with the world of the real. You’ll get a lot more accomplished. And maybe, just maybe, not so many children, pregnant women, and just plain people won’t have to suffer and die because of your asinine “idealism”.
sheesh
- “Oddly enough, I happen to be an atheist-not that it matters.
And, yes-I do value my country over others” …
“No, wait, there’s also room in there for nationalism.”
- “Now listen closely….this is called HUMAN NATURE.” …
“It’s a fact that throughout human history, man has needed to take advantage of others in order to progress”
-”The problem with idealists is that you don’t recognize and deal with human nature as it is-instead you try to coerce everyone into behaving the way you think they should.”…
“I’m not saying one or the other is right. I’m just saying it’s wrong not to think about it.”
- “This breathtakingly idiotic way of thinking is precisely what is responsible for 35 million dead from malaria, more than 100 million dead from communism, etc, etc, etc.” …
“When you look at the facts past the sensationalism, it’s hard to not take an analytical posture.” (how idiotic!)
- “Learn to deal with the world of the real. You’ll get a lot more accomplished. And maybe, just maybe, not so many children, pregnant women, and just plain people won’t have to suffer and die because of your asinine “idealism”.”
“If those in charge of our society – politicians, corporate executives, and owners of press and television – can dominate our ideas, they will be secure in their power. They will not need soldiers patrolling the streets. We will control ourselves. ” – Howard Zinn
Howard Zinn.
Lordie help us all.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I think I’ll just get back to reading ibn Warraq’s “In Defense of the West”-it’s a scholarly critique of Edward Said’s “Orientalism”, and a devastating indictment of self-hating Western pseudointellectuals. Although, unfortunately, dear ibn Warraq seems to have appropriated not a few of MY ideas. Dammit.
Gawd, I love this stuff….
“Millions of people have died from malaria as a result of the banning of DDT.”
Right wing claptrap. There IS NO BAN on DDT for disease control. However DDT is only effective in certain environments AND the mosquito’s develop immunity to it on average in 7 years. However, it still used extensively in malarial areas, so blaming deaths on a non-existent ban is purely irrational.
Get your facts straight before you post.
*Clap clap clap* Go bob!
“I’d guess that you’re a religious fanatic.”
religious fanatic, right-wing nutjob, whats the difference?
Powerful. Very nice.
SHUT UP ABOUT THE DAM FLU
Swine flu, not dam flu
Damn.
This pie chart says that all people who died this month died of either malaria or swine flu.
So yeah, way to make fun of people who don’t have a good grasp of statistics.
Get the real facts on swine flu – http://tinyurl.com/dyc5bl
So Iblis, if I get you correctly (in that Man does not reign supreme over animals) would you then be willing to lay down and die to feed a hungry tiger? Would you be willing to go to Africa and use your own blood to feed hungry mosquitos (thereby get infected with malaria and, again, die)? Would you be willing to give your children to a pack of lions who had not been able to hunt sufficiently to survive? Do you go swimming in the deep ocean with cuts on your legs to attract and feed hungry sharks?
At what point do you draw the line and say “My own survival (and that of my family) is more important to me than the survival of XXX.” And why is it that you are allowed to say that and the people who are currently dying are not?
And, seriously, what do you eat? As far as I know there has yet to be invented a man-made compound that will satisfy the nutritional demands of your body. Which means, your killing SOMETHING in order to live (be it animal or plant matter) – and why is your survival more important that the survival of what you consider food?
I don’t know what part of what I said has anything to do with survival. Let me give you an example of what I meant.
I once saw a documentary of a little girl who was born without the frontal part of her skull. In another time, this child would have died because of this defect. Today, with the advances in science, this girl underwent numerous surgeries and now has somewhat of a face. But at what cost? The amount of resources employed in this treatment could have easily covered medical expenses for dozens of other children in less privileged countries, not to mention the countless children who are waiting to be adopted. When you look at the facts past the sensationalism, it’s hard to not take an analytical posture. Morally, the family will obviously do whatever it takes to keep their daughter alive. But if you look at nature, animals will mainly reject their offspring if they are defective in any way. I’m not saying one or the other is right. I’m just saying it’s wrong not to think about it.
I’m talking about excess, about waste. It’s one thing to harvest, it’s another to ravage. If they didn’t teach you this in second grade, there is such a thing as the food chain (remember, the little chart with all the animals and the plants, and then a man on top?), which means that obviously, everyone needs to kill something in order to live. However, I hardly think that throwing away tons of food (to maintain production standards), exploiting the land, contaminating water supplies, etc., constitutes as a basic need for survival. In fact, it only leads to what we are living at the time: pandemics, war over resources, poverty, and so on. Wake up.
Just because man has the means doesn’t mean he need to abuse them. Because as much as people love to think that in “man vs. nature”, man always wins, the reality is that after we blow ourselves off the face of the planet, it will eventually go on without is.
The ironic part is living with the doubt if our self-destructive nature is the way we unconsciously regulate ourselves.
So I guess that if you get into a horrible wreck you are going to pass on all of the life-saving surgeries and medical advances that will keep you alive and help you recover. Or what if it was your child? The amount of resources employed in this treatment could easily cover medical expenses for dozens of children in less privileged countries. No, my bet is that you would take the treatment for yourself and your child. And I don’t blame you.
dear iblis,
i dont think anyone here will ever understand your point bc theyre too focused on pointing out wether you are lib or conservative, or pretty much just relying on lolurdumb arguments. so far, even though your point might seem inhuman to most, i totally understand what youre saying. especially when you said “Doesn’t our own progress bear upon us?”, it reminded me of a part in Flaubert’s Madame Bovary that said (sorry that this is in spanish):
“El orador, remontándose al origen de las sociedades, pintó las épocas bárbaras, cuando los hombres vivían en el fondo de los bosques y se alimentaban de las bellotas; después arrancaron las pieles de las fieras, vistieron telas, trazaron zurcos, plantaron cepas. ¿Fue aquello un bien, no había en esos descubrimientos más inconvenientes que ventajas? El señor Derozerays se planteaba este problema.”
(this roughly translates to: “the orator, looking back to the origins of society, spoke of the barbaric ages when man lived deep in the forest and fed on nuts; then they tore the skins off of beasts, digged furrows, planted stocks. was that a great good, or werent there more inconveniences than advantages in these discoveries?”) this book was written mid-ninteenth century, and it still applies today.
u-no-it, i think you missed the point completely. he said, “I hardly think that throwing away tons of food (to maintain production standards), exploiting the land, contaminating water supplies, etc., constitutes as a basic need for survival. In fact, it only leads to what we are living at the time: pandemics, war over resources, poverty, and so on”, i hardly think he is taking a posture of saying that anyone that is in an accident is wrong for getting treatment… or for eating food, like aaron says (completely absurd argument if you ask me)
if you dont think there is something wrong with the world that we live in, then youre both pretty naive and in a complete state of denial. but hey, thats what you were brought up to believe, and there is a reason for that too.
roxie, I didn’t miss his point at all. What he said was that man is no better and of no more value than any other species, whether it be animal or plant. His point is that our advancement as a species has had a deleterious effect on the planet and other species and we should somehow be ashamed and rethink whether we should ourselves take advantage of those advances. The problem with that philosophy is that when you take it to its logical conclusion, it leads those in the developed world to impose those beliefs on the third world. Its practical application in the real world leads to cases like you have with malaria where millions suffer because they are denied access to advancements the rest of us enjoy in the name of “saving the parts of the planet that we still can.” It ends up leaving the third world in the third century because those of us in developed parts of the world feel guilty for the damage we have already done. What those parts of the world need is development and growth. But because “we know what is best for them” we try to keep them in the Stone Age. And I am not naive. I know we have problems, but stopping scientific advancement or denying those advancements to those in the third world is not the answer. In fact, scientific advancement is the answer. I agree that resources are badly mismanaged. There is enough food produced in California alone every year to feed the entire world if it were only managed correctly. If we taught the third world how to “exploit the land” they would be able to take care of themselves. As for the war over resources, man has been doing that since the dawn of time. That is no modern phenomenon. Man has a knack for creating problems. But we also have a great ability to fix and correct those problems in creative and effective ways. The problem with liberals is that they have an emotional reaction to problems and allow that emotion, rather than reason, to guide their actions. They end up working under a paradigm that is largely bereft of facts and realistic options and that often leads to their solutions being worse than the original problem.
and the problem with conservatives is that they bash liberals WAY too much.
btw, im liberal. does that make you any smarter than me or make you better? no, it only means we have different viewpoints. no need to bash liberals just cause you arent one.
ahreagre fgefsaedfaedadad wd awdad wdaw daw dr
I think people need to realise that DDT does have an affect on us.
You see, DDT does not only cause cancer and the thinning of egg shells- but it also a teratogen (mutant forming). DDT is scary stuff; it does not only cause death (like malaria), but also causes HERITABLE GENETIC DAMAGE. This means that the effects of this particular chemical effects not only the first generation- but the multitudes following.
Secondly, there is also the presence of DDT resistant mosquitoes. What then? Do we use an even more harmful chemical to kill them which in turn can affect us?
The thing is, that we need to start investing our money into anti-malarial drugs that wont be rendered useles within a few years due to resistance. One of my lecturers in Biotech is doing just this.
However, funding can be hard to find as anti-malarial drugs are generally used by poor countries and it is the rich drug companies which make them (need to recover costs).
This is hardly suprising as one drug can take over 100 billion dollars and 10-20 to make.
Hopefully, one day we will be able to successfully erradicate this nasty disease and end the suffering caused by it.
and the HIV stats????
add them in and see what you come up with….
Ok, but… uhh…
Do we see the Malaria in rich countries?
…
A little (notably in the US along the gulf coast, and [I may be incorrect, now] northern Queensland, Australia)
The “richer” countries have several advantages with regard to malaria.
They tend to have Temperate or Continental climates. Most malaria carrier mosquitoes cannot thrive where frosts occur.
Developed countries have widespread drainage and water distribution systems, which, though generally considered as “damaging nature”, destroy much of the preferred mosquito habitat.
Outside Africa, Malaria is usually in a milder form called Plasmodium Vivax, which does not bring anywhere near the death toll than “malignant” malaria.
Maybe we should send them all fly-swatters.
Denial is a very basic self defending system. It is not working though. Those people who worry about pandemy make your life safe.
This diagramm is loosing the focus. At the first month of the first infection of Malaria, how many people died in it? Of course we have no record, but probably a very few. Malaria spread in areas where there is aserious problem with healthcare. But H1N1 could possibly kill in Afrika, Asia, Australia, Europe, and America too. And believe me, it will make the bigest kill in Afrika.
Statistics shows, every 30 years a big flu pandemic is coming, thats why the scientists, WHO, and the governments are worried.
the should be worried. but then again, they can make a profit out of it.
This graphic critizices that the importance the world gives to a disease is direct related to whom this disease is affecting: devolped or poor countries. If 1 US citizen is killed by the Swine Flu the media just go crazy, despite the 1,000,000 annual death caused by Malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa. But nevermind, go to bed…
LMAO, so true
Don’t forget about heart attacks, cancer, hunger,TB, hydrophobia, hepatitis B, AIDS, menengitis, rabies, Ebola, and all other common ilnesses. Don’t forget about animals and some endangered plants, they have a right to live.
i find it hilarious that this graph was about diseases, yet all the people posting comments suck politics into the matter. a notable example was when someone (either iblis or u-no-it) started bashing obama. since when was this graph about obama?
anyway, on the actual graph, i totally agree that the media blew this whole swine flu thing out of proportion. although even though malaria is a huge killer, it does seem like its the only other thing. the creator shouldve put cancer, heart attack, stroke, accidents, etc on the graph also.
P.S. i know that im gonna get bashed on the first paragraph of this post. and i couldnt care less about the idiots who do.
after looking through some other posts, ive concluded that it was u-no-it, and not iblis, who randomly started bashing obama. i could be wrong, but this is an educated guess.
Back to the whole swine flu hype. I remember seeing a news story about it that warned people to “Avoid people who are coughing.” I was like, “yea cuz that wont start a panic or anything.” And despite thinking myself smarter than that I now flinch whenever someone near me coughs! :/
Malaria had nearly been eradicated until DDT was banned.
If we all work together, we can be a greater cause of death than malaria and H1N1 COMBINED!
This is ridiculous! Swine flu has been talked about way too much. Malaria kills 1 to 2 million people yearly. There are other things too. What about cancer ar cardiac arrest? You can’t have a graph with just 2 things that kill people. What about the regualr flu? If you were to really research the leading causes of death worldwide you would see that war and cancer and malnutrition are way more descructive than the freakin’ swine flu. I don’t really care about the dumb swine flu. It’s treatable! Calm down already!!!
Hey, um moron, graphjam’s graphs are supposed to be funny. In no way are they grounded in reality. Don’t ask him why he didn’t include other stuff.
What is malaria? I know what the H1N1 Flu is, but I don’t know what malaria is. Would somebody explain?
the by-product of your birth, thanks.
Obama made swine flu an national crisis. Now, he has the power to make everyone get a flu shot whether they want to or not. (And no, I’m not attacking anyone).
Kelly your an idiot, he cannot force anyone, he is just a figurehead and didn’t CHOOSE to make this a “crisis” which is it not.
The death rate is low because we live in a rich and technology advanced enough nation who were capable of preventing this disease. If it was Africa with H1N1, it would be a different story. It is a serious matter and people have become numb to the issue of H1N1, which is making them make such ignorant comments about how it really isn’t dangerous. I guess the media is easy to blame.