artilecastles.com artilecastles.com
   Main :> About Us :> Privacy of Info :> Terms & Conditions :> Add Your Link :> Add Your Article
Search:   
Add Your Link
 

Creative Arts

Shopping & Auction

Games & Play

Family & Home

Self Help

Business & Companies

Hotels & Travel

Eating & Drinking

Teens & Kids

Finance & Investment

Sports

News & Media

Medicine & Treatment

Jobs & Careers

Academics & Learning

Entertainment

Fitness & Health

Automotive

Property & Estate

Society & Issues

Fashion & Lifestyle

Computers & Software

Law & Politics

Science & Space


 

Main –› News & Media –› Political Issues
 

The Balance of Lives

 

George Bush is ready to spend $7.5 billion dollars to protect the US from a disease that currently poses no danger and has so far killed no Americans, and only 62 people worldwide. Meanwhile, Bill Gates, much maligned by the media and internet geeks, is spending over $258 million in research toward Malaria, a disease which kills 1.2 million every year.

Of the $258 million that Mr. Gates is spending, $107 million will go towards accelerating the development of a Malaria vaccine. The added money could lead to the development of a vaccine within 6 years. Experts estimate that a malaria vaccine will cut the number of Malaria deaths in half. In other words, it will save 600,000 lives a year, most of them children.

Bill Gates is quoted in the Washington Post:

Its really a tragedy that the world has done so little to stop this disease that kills 2,000 African children every day, Gates said in a conference call with reporters. If those children were in rich countries, wed have headlines, wed take action, and we wouldnt rest until every child was protected.

Exactly right, Mr. Gates. So why would we spend $7.5 billion to fight a disease that maybe, someday, sorta, could possibly become a pandemic that will, at its worst, do no more damage in total than Malaria does every single year? Why would we not spend a fraction of that money to save 600,000 children every year? Some Liberal pundits would cry racism or classism, but that answer is too simplistic. The real answer is: The Media.

Quite simply, there is a media frenzy around the Bird Flu, and there isnt a media frenzy around Malaria. Even the leaders of the world are susceptible to influence by the media, and they will spend their time, resources, and money fighting perceived threats while ignoring real, but hidden, threats.

So why is the media doing this? why is there more coverage of the Bird Flu, which has only killed 62 people, than there was of the earthquake in Pakistan, which killed tens of thousands? Because panic sells. Alarmism sells. The only thing that sells more media viewing time than a disaster, is a disaster that hasnt happened yet.

There is hope. Eventually, people will tire of hearing about the Bird Flu, and in 6 months you wont hear a peep about it. The Bird Flu will go the way of Anthrax letters, Ebola virus, flesh-eating bacteria, and a host of other medical disasters that never quite managed to manifest.

Author: Terry Connors
 
Author Bio:

Terry Connors

Terry Connors is a Gen-X family guy with 2 step-kids and a loving wife. He frequently blogs about current events, especially if there is a scientific angle to the news items.

All work is copyright, Terry Connors 2005

This article can be searched using: political issues, political news, current political issues, latest political news
 
 
 

Related Articles

 
German Students' Mission And Life In Asia
 
Presidential Tax Simplification Act
 
Bird Flu May Kill All Church Goers
 
Jain Agams
 
Mexican Living: Something's Got to be Done!
 
Wyoming Politicians: Regulators Eager to Fast Track ISL Uranium Mining Operations
 
William Jefferson - Liberals Sacrificial Lamb
 
The Separation of Church and State? Evolution, Intelegent Design and the Bible - Part 1
 
The Balance of Lives
 
Iran Ready for War; Better Be
 
 
 
Main :> Privacy of Info :> Terms & Conditions  
Copyright © 2006-2008 www.articlecastles.com - All Rights Reserved.