Swine-flu hysteria

It's a global pandemic, says the World Health Organization.

It's a national emergency, says Barack Obama.

U.S. deaths have surpassed 1,000, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

Nearly 5,000 have died worldwide, according to WHO.

That sounds bad.

TRENDING: Nobel Peace Prize for Trump?

But is it worth the hysteria?

What is it about these deaths that have government health bureaucracies apoplectic?

Is it time for a little context?

What happens when we turn to the same sources to compare deaths due to swine flu with other leading causes of preventable deaths?

Worldwide, nearly 3,000 people die from malaria every day.

Worldwide, nearly 6,000 people die from AIDS every day.

So what is it about this illness that has government so shook up?

Is it that it is so readily preventable?

Actually, that can't be it. Because malaria could be eradicated much easier and more economically. But the most effective weapon in the arsenal against malaria, DDT, has been banned in the U.S. and much of the rest of the world, even though it saved the lives of tens of millions, because of pseudo-scientific hysteria about alleged, unproven environmental effects.

Also, the vaccine for swine flu is extraordinarily expensive, compared with DDT production and treatments. The U.S. government spent $1 billion just to develop the swine flu vaccine, $7 billion to produce 195 million doses and the cost of administering those doses is projected to cost $11 billion.

While no one disputes DDT's absolute effectiveness against malaria, there are no studies that prove the H1N1 vaccine actually prevents swine flu. In addition, many doctors consider it to be dangerous because it contains aluminum, a toxic metal, thimerosal, a mercury toxin and is believed to contain a squalene product that can injure the immune system.

In other words, the swine flu vaccine may not prevent people from getting the swine flu and it may well cause other problems more serious than the swine flu. The cure could well be worse than the disease.

Who is doing the cost-benefit analysis? Government, of course – in conjunction with vaccine manufacturers who stand to rake in as much as $50 billion if the vaccine is administered throughout the world.

OK, so what other factors might be responsible for the do-something-now hysteria over swine flu? Is it because this illness is hitting all over the world rather than in under-developed Third World countries?

Actually, that can't be it. Because AIDS hits some of the most affluent populations in the West and yet government authorities oppose the use of standard public health measures to block transmission of the disease.

And, to further illustrate the point that government officials don't seem to care about the spread of AIDS, Obama announced the day before Halloween that the U.S. will soon lift the travel ban on foreigners with the disease entering the country.

Further, as Sen. Tom Coburn, a medical doctor, revealed in an article published in the Advocate, a national homosexual magazine, another bill signed by Obama last week earmarking $15 billion for AIDS treatment will ensure, along with a government-controlled health-care system, that AIDS patients will be placed on waiting lists for treatment and that many will be denied appropriate care through rationing of services.

I don't know about you, but I don't trust the government to make medical decisions.

I don't know about you, but I don't trust the government to make rational public health decisions.

I don't know about you, but I don't trust the government to play doctor or, worse yet, play God.

I don't know about you, but I don't trust the government to make decisions that affect the lives and the health of my loved ones.

There's a little too much crisis-management going on here. And, when it comes to swine flu, I'm not even sure there is a crisis to manage.