AFTER the recent Bird Flu debacle, science is unlikely to recover from its distorted exaggerations of a 50 person “pandemic” effecting millions. That’s right, haven’t we heard this all before, from none other than the AIDS lobbey? Asymptotic graphs and thumbsuck statistics reaching out into infinity instead of the usual plateau of reason that gives scale to proportion?
Nature invariably strikes a balance, which is why I find the kind of scare-mongering going on in the media sickening. Don’t you just hate the way the Bird Flu lobbey like AIDS activism, has seized the moral high ground? You’re not hip unless you’re a condom-waving, std-carrying, drug-user dragging a dead pigeon around while screaming about the problems of salmonella in Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Instead of open-minded debate on either side, we’ve witnessed shouting matches, skulduggery and worse — the suppression and stifling of opinion in exchange for badly shaded political correctness and a new age politics that does absolutely nothing for traditional left values such as openness, transparency and the right to dissent. Could it be that Bird Flu and AIDS activism is just a new form of conservativism in disguise?
An irrational politicking that instead of preaching tolerance, clothes itself in the activism of the eighties (along with public lynchings and mob justice) while demanding that we all buy into the mythology of pandemic, global disaster, end-of-the-worldism (which like bird flu is all about blowing statistics out of proportion) — less than 100 people die in Thailand and that’s a “pandemic”?
There is still a lot about viruses that we don’t know. As the H5N1 mutates, along with HIV, the bird population builds up immunity. As immunity within the population increases, the risk diminishes and what one sees is a leveling off of the supposed disaster. The lesson of the 1918 flu outbreak isn’t that hundreds of people died, the lesson is that hundreds more survived.
Extrapolate this to HIV. Simply via the activity of sexual reproduction, human beings pass on antibodies which confer immunity from infection. However, the New Age Science of today, has demanded that we forget this. Essentially we are told by silicon valley industrialists, that there is no such thing as immunity, and human beings are basically computers, unable to evolve without outside intervention.
That’s right, according to scientists, we are all in need of the latest software patch, be it bird flu, HIV, or salmonella. This machine-age logic does wonders for generating finance in a capital-intensive industry. A “biotechnology” that strips away nature and imposes its own worldview on human social interaction. Drug companies want to make money. Activists need a cause to celebrate. The two groups make for interesting rhetoric, but the damage to ones sense of the universe is measured in increasing anxiety as alarm bells keep ringing, but only for a millennial urgency that is nothing more than a feathery “institutionalised psychosis”.
The real psychotics like Zachie Achmat and Manto Tshabalala-Msimang start running the show, and soon, one can’t do anything or say anything out of fear of being exposed as an AIDS or BIRD FLU dissident. Which is being unkind I guess, to both camps, of course one wants a government that is efficient and takes action, a state that reacts to the latest outbreak of whatever bug is out there, and activism that rings those bells whenever they need to be tolled, but do we, the public, need to constantly worry about all these bugs, magnified through a looking glass, as they are, and amplified by a new science that blows all sense of proportion?
Initially I thought drug companies wanted to make money and activists just wanted a cause to celebrate. Now I believe there is a third force of opportunists who just want to cash-in on the resulting chaos. That’s about all for now ducky.
[DRL has been placed under discursive sanctions by the Independent Group for his contrarian views on AIDS and other topics>/i>]