Thank WHO for no pandemic, instead of criticising them

Humanity's biggest enemy is not a virus --
it's our short attention span.

This is being demonstrated today in a news
story from Reuters that had the World
Health Organization (WHO) reacting to
criticism that it had exagerated the
danger of a bird flu pandemic.

If an expert predicts some kind of
disaster, then by God, that disaster
better happen -- STAT!

Or that expert's in trouble for
"exagerating" the threat.

Of course, if an expert does NOT
predict a disaster that does
occur, then that shows how
unreliable they are, too. If you
don't have a 100% crystal ball to
predict the future, the press and
unnamed critics will sharpen
their knifes to have you and your
reputation for lunch.

The news story from Reuters does
not even bother to tell its
readers exactly who has been
criticising WHO -- or why. Or why
we should even care what they
think. For all we know, it was
some bums hanging around on a
streetcorner.

Yes, there has been no bird flu
pandemic -- so far. Thank goodness.
But instead of being grateful,
somebody has criticised WHO for
this. Probably somebody in the
media who wouldn't know a flu
vaccine from an anthrax spore but
who thinks their opinion is
automatically news just because
they're so important because
they're in the media.

And this despite the spread of
human cases and deaths to China
and just very recently to Turkey.
(4 children dead there -- I guess
they don't count to these unnamed
critics of WHO.)

But because we don't (yet) have
thousands or millions of people
dead, somebody must be to blame.

After all, these predictions have
been in the mass media for all
of 2 or 3 months. If a disaster
can't kill lots of people in that
time, what good is it?

So what if H5N1 is a virus with
its own timetable? So what if
its mutations and recombinations
are random and therefore inherently
unpredictable, especially if you
want a time table?

WHO is supposed to be in charge so
if H5N1 doesn't mutate to a highly
contagious form before the media
moves on to another show, then
too bad for bird flu.

And it's just remotely possible
that WHO's efforts to publicize
the danger of bird flu and to
combat its spread have actually
been somewhat effective in
preventing more deaths.

Why not give the experts some
credit for that?

And of course, the mass media
never makes mistakes. It's obvious
they are totally fair and
balanced. It's not like the most
respected newspaper in the US and
one of the best in the world -- THE
NEW YORK TIMES -- has been caught
making numerous mistakes and even
making up stories. It's not like
the former CBS news anchor was
caught using a forged document in
a major news story -- and then
defended himself for doing so even after
caught by Internet bloggers.

Oh no, those things haven't happened
in the past few years.

Of course, the danger is NOT over
yet -- by a long shot.

H5N1 is still out there in ducks,
geese, chickens and who know in
how many other animals. It's still
infecting and killing people in
Asia and it's killing kids in
Turkey -- and Syria, Iran, Iraq, the Ukraine,
Georgia and Azerbaijan are considered
at risk.

It's a virus, folks. It can't be
controlled or predicted. It IS
dangerous. We do know that its
nature is to spread into more
and more hosts -- and then kill
many of them.

It's ridiculous for people who are
not experts to sit back and gripe
about WHO's predictions.

If you yourself are a public health
expert and you know a better way to
solve the problem of bird flu and
other emerging diseases -- then fine,
correct their mistakes.
I'm sure not saying WHO is perfect.

But just because we don't (yet) have
millions of people dead and dying
from bird flu -- that's a reason to
thank WHO, not criticise them.