… says Standard & Poor’s.see here
As it goes on to say in that same thread, this rating was done in 2003 - no new rating has been done recently.
(also, the links within that thread on the opening statement do not lead you to the articles quoted - all a bit misleading I think.)
S&P repeated that statement in April 2005 when rating “Vita II”. The links in that thread lead you to the “presale” articles for “Vita I” and “Vita II”, which have the exact quotes as stated in the chapter “Mortality Risks”.
The epidemic risk is mitigated by advances in disease control and prevention as well as developments in health care technology.
This should be on the humor thread.
The H5N1 army is attacking us ~1 at a time, modern medicine is getting its butt kicked. What happens when it attacks us by the tens of thousands, the hundred thousands, the millions?
What would their prediction of the world trade center falling into rubble on 9/11/01? If we polled the entire country on 9/10, everyone would have said it couldn’t, wouldn’t happen. Or what about Katrina? I don’t think the world will come to an end, but the probability of this flu being serious seems pretty high to me.
Hi anonymous. Thanks for starting this thread. In all things, it is not good to have ying without yang…you can choose which one you go by.
At one time I was the contrarian, way out in left field. Authorities were saying 2–7 million, I was saying hundreds of millions…I didn’t know about Dr. Osterholm or Dr. Webster or anyone else for that matter. I was my own one man army and it was mildly painful.
Now, your position is the contrarian one…and I am the mainstream…funny how things work out.
I am grateful that you continue to balance things on flu wiki but you should give your personal reasons for feeling a mild pandemic or no pandemic is going to happen…or if you use other scientists you must give also a defendable scientific argument on the facts as you know them…I am not sure that has been happening so far.
My position is that we don’t know but every indicator indicates that this will be in the more serious tier of pandemics and that history has now fully demonstrated that serious pandemics are the norm rather than the exception.
I don’t think we are in for one pandemic…I think we are in for a serious of 2 or 3 or more in the next twenty years.
As you would know, previous to 1997, in the past 50 yrs, there had been two indentified avian influenza cases in humans and both of them survived…maybe it would be helpful to discuss how the bedrock has shifted in the past few years.
We now have a serious of high virulence influenza’s that have infected humans in separate geographical locations around the world. I can’t list them all but they would be in order of importance…H5, H7, H9 and I think H10…you can correct this where it is wrong.
The second piece of vital circunstancial evidence is H3N8. A virus that was stable in comparison to other influenza’s for fifty years in horses…why it decided to jump to dogs a few years ago, is anybodies guess…my guess is that it was pushed by the same force that is pushing all of these other influenza viruses and other pathogens around the world.
So strategicallly speaking, even if your argument about this pandemic was correct, you fail to acknowledge the number of pandemic potential influenza viruses in the pipeline that are waiting for their turn…think airplane runway.
…and influenza viruses are not the only viruses pandemic capable. Nipah virus has followed the same pathway as influenza and SARS (from the extremely stable coronavirus family)…bats-pigs-humans.
Thanks and continue to make the argument…just provide some scientific information to back up your hypotheses.
Get a handle too.
Tom, a great review for the uninitiated. Even for us it is hard to keep the whole overall “state of the viral world” firmly in mind. We flit here and there geographically, the “black hole” of China one day, an increased “bubbling” in Indonesia another day, with scattered “skirmishes’ chiming in elsewhere in the world.
And then we scatter ourselves among the various studies as they come out, dissect and contend and then forget half of them, (or at least I do).
Feeble beings, formidable opponents.
/:0)
treyfish – at 09:57
“Get a handle too. “
I think you’re beating a dead horse, Trey. If he/she hasn’t by now, he or she obviously doesn’t want to. There are no “rules” that say a person has to have a handle here.
anonymous – at 02:42
Thank you for starting this thread and for stciking to your guns. I read your posts with great interest.
Another Anonymous at 10:12-“There are no ‘rules’ that say a person has to have a handle here”.
There are no “rules” about “passing gas” at the dinner table either, but considerate people refrain from it.
anonymous – at 02:42 For everyones sake I hope you are right and Some day I can buy you a beer while we all eat crow pie. You can laugh at us and call us funny names. That would be great. Like Tom has said keep on posting as you keep us all with our feet on the ground. (we would really like you to pick a name so we can raise our glasses to you in a toast when it does not happen).
I hope you are right anonymous. The thing is, if people listen to the doom-sayers and the doom-sayers are wrong, people are left well prepared for any catastrophe, but if they listen to you and you are wrong they get to watch their children starve or worse.
Oremus – at 10:59
I think having a similiar background as yours (NPS class 8607, NPTU Idaho, ET2/SS, SSN699, CGN37), I have agreed with every post you have made.
If I may, let me add a thought: The thought of defending my family from panflu or civil unrest for months or years, only to drown in my own bodily fluids, terrifies me.
But the thought of watching my children perish, from something I was warned about and chose to do nothing, well, that there horrifies me.
anonymous – at 02:42 Standard & Poor’s Wasn’t this the same group that gave Enron an A+ rating in the late 1990′s.
anonymous. I am glad that an economist has said it is not going to happen…
…but if I remember right, econ 101 said that ‘economists were invented to make weathermen look good’.
I am glad for the evidence you have provided and it is important…but is there some science that backs your position up…Thanks.
Anonymous,
You are basing your statement on Standard & Poor’s analysts’ (no they are not economists) sales pitch when they were trying to sell some junk bonds (junk bond being a technical and not derogatory term) based on information in November 2003, when there were only 2 cases of H5N1 infections from the current clades of viruses, the one in 1997 having been exterminated.
Even for the purpose of financial analysis and forecasting, that’s so way out of date that I seriously question why this is dug up now to support a point. I doubt that if you go and find the same analysts whether they can give you the same analysis now.
You can believe whatever you want to believe in. If you want to persuade others, I think you need to do a lot better than that.
TomDVM,not “an” economist but _Standard & Poor’s_ . _Moody’s_ has also given
a similar rating. And the market trades them at “about 9% probability
for a pandemic worse than 1918 in USA in the next 4 years”.
The science behind this is called statistics. When you disagree,
get about $10million to ensure interest payments and emit such
mortality bonds by yourself .
22, read the whole thread. There is also data from 2005 and 2006.
Not junk bonds, but mortality bonds and they are not selling those
but rating them. You should be able to find insurances now to sell
mortality-insurances. They could sell such bonds and thus
convert the risk to the market, for a safe profit.
Just a matter of getting it organized. This is how the market sees
the risk. And they are betting about $1billion on it, so you
can assume that they did some analysis.
mortality bonds fall into the category of junk bonds by their rating, dear.
see here for an independent analysis. Page 28 has a chart of Vita II Apr.2005-Apr 2006, which shows how panflu-fear already drove them up from about 8% probability in 5 years to about 9% probability in 4 years. Someone please check the calculation. I don’t know about their indicators and calculations.
OK, I will concede that not all mortality index bonds are junk bonds, by the strictest definition of rating. But the point is, that information is put out based on the analysts’ understanding of risk. How many of these analysts understand pandemics? As a matter of curiosity, have we ever have any posts from financial analysts here asking questions about pandemics? Yes, they got their information from somewhere, but I would much rather get my assessment based on the opinion of scientists than on stock analysts who know zilch about viruses.
Anonymous, if you don’t know how they arrive at their indicators or do their calculations, maybe it is more prudent not to count on them for predictions of real life events?
I never base any of my financial decisions on ratings or risk calculations that I don’t understand.
There are a couple of useful aphorisms in investment:
OK, junk bonds if you want so. But it’s different from normal bond-rating, and it’s a rather new product. I only found 4 of these mortality bonds. They ordered an analysis by an actuarial consulting firm (Milliman)and did their “stress tests”. Anyway, the investors apparantly did accept the price.
Anonymous, do you really think that financial analysts have no special interest in trying to keep the economy ticking along? Do you really think that they are qualified to make a judgement on this in any way?
Anonymous, you think in numbers. Sadly Nature does not.
anon_22, the point is that they believe in the analysis. If you have a _good_ argument that the price is inappropriate, then very good, find some institutional investor and convert your knowledge into money ! I strongly assume that they did consult some experts in virology and epidemiology. They won’t risk $200 million without analysis. Also the other insurance companies, they would hurry to follow the example of Swiss Re and Scottish Re if the actual prices were such low.
anon_22, you can’t understand how they rate “normal” junk bonds either. If you would, then why would you need rating companies at all ? They have their expertise and the performance-history shows that you can trust them.
bgw, do you think they are biased ?? Their business is their reputation. They were not biased in the past, why should they suddenly start with these bonds ? Nature has its laws and is described by mathematical models using _numbers_ .
We should ask Milliman, how they analysed the risk. We should ask Standard and Poor’s, why they trusted Milliman. We should ask the investors why they trusted Standard and Poors and baught at the suggested price. But if I have the choice between Standard and Poors and anon_22, or Monotreme, or Osterholm, guess who I would trust more ?
the shortest answer to all those is that financial analysts know finance, virologists know viruses.
I wouldn’t ask my dentist about what school to pick for my kid, why would you ask a finance geek to give you advice on infectious diseases?
I read in The Wall Street Journal about a month ago about how unreliable markets are for predicting megaevents with large downsides. World War I was a case in point. The investors and the Big Boys looked the other way right to the point of hostilities. And then everybody invested got creamed. Historical Fact. And many more were given, if I only had a photographic memory.
yes, and what does Stanard and Poors know about building cars,selling drugs, pumping oil etc. ? Yet they do rate these companies. They have access to virologist’s opinions. Why would investors risk hundreds of millions by asking dentists when they have no evidence that they can trust them ? Why would Standard and Poors accept rating-orders when they don’t feel competent ? They have a reputation to lose.
you are basically saying that you are more competent to rate mortality bonds than Standard and Poors or Milliman.
Katrina was easy to forsee. I knew it was only a matter of time, as did many in New Orleans. Knowing it’s only a matter of time before Mother Nature kicks you in the teeth doesn’t stop it from happening or prepare you for it. And if anything should be clear from Katrina it’s that FEMA has been made completely impotent by the Bush Administration and this government isn’t going to be able to handle ANY catastrophe that happens without screwing it up completely. So, better safe than sorry.
anonymous – at 14:52 bgw, do you think they are biased ?? Their business is their reputation. They were not biased in the past, why should they suddenly start with these bonds ? Nature has its laws and is described by mathematical models using _numbers_ .
>Yes, in this case I think they would be severely biased. If there is a monstrous pandemic, such as 1918, their business is pretty much likely to be mostly kaput, along with the rest of the economy.
Numbers do not allow you to predict which mutations will occur. As I said before, you think in numbers and do not take many important aspects of the problem into consideration. Most other people do not think this way. When more than one eminent expert has labeled the virus in question as the worst flu virus they have ever seen, I’m going to think that it is LIKELY to be a severe pandemic.
If you dissuade even one person from prepping as much as they are able, then yes, you will be morally responsible for a death.
And if they are wrong on a “1918″ panflu, their reputation will be the least of their problems and in some scenarios inconsequential, moot.
And I do believe, that “mootness” is why it is hard to apply the “heat” on TPTB on this issue of impending panflu.
anonymous, thanks for starting this thread. I think this is a good place to list people who expect either no pandemic or a mild pandemic. My contribution:
Charlie Rose Show that he thought a pandemic was unlikely.
I’ll try to add more as I find them.
Sorry, the rest of my message at 15:46 didn’t post. I’ll try again:
When more than one eminent expert has labeled the virus in question as the worst flu virus they have ever seen, (including the 1918 virus) I’m going to think that it is LIKELY to be a severe pandemic.
If you dissuade even one person from prepping as much as they are able, then yes, you will be morally responsible for a death in the event of a severe pandemic.
bgw, overprepping causes deaths as well as underprepping.
I.e. in 3rd world countries.
Monotreme, your list is a bit off-topic here.
Your estimates had been considerably more pessimistic than those of
Standard and Poors, the Reassureance companies, the investors.
Do you think now, that
1) you were wrong or
2) you are more competent in predicting mortality risks than Milliman,
Standard and Poors,RMS ?
Well, curiouser and curiouser…When I initially posted my message only part of it showed up on my screen. When I posted again and it refreshed, all of it showed up. That’s the reason for the reposting. I’m scratching my head over this one.
anonymous – at 16:04
I’m not sure you read my list correctly. The people and institutions I cite agree with you.
To answer your question, I pick 2.
anon-Are you a name-dropper or a fact-checker?
anonymous – at 16:04 bgw, overprepping causes deaths as well as underprepping. I.e. in 3rd world countries.
>How so? They will still be able to eat their preps. Also, I believe I stated that people should prep to the best of their ability.
Ha! I got part of the answer to my problem. I posted the last two messages to the wrong thread. (I use Firefox, and have lots of extra tabs open.)
bgw, …if there is a pandemic. There are other nonflu-viruses which are
similarly bad, yet we are not afraid of a pandemic.
These virologist are often not very good in estimating probabilities.
See Webster,(50% could die) Peiris(pandemic within 10 years extremely likely). They should cooperate with these financial experts to improve their predictions.
OK, it would be interesting to know whether Frieden,CDC,Schwarzenegger,
based their opinions on the Standard and Poors estimate.
Monotreme, I predict you will have a hard time to convince
officials , politicians , insurance companies of 2.)
bgw, weren’t there some suicides in India because they had to cull their chickens ? And the Indonesians don’t cull, because they
need their chickens to survive.
I’m not saying that we are currently overprepping, though.
anonymous – at 16:19
bgw, …if there is a pandemic. There are other nonflu-viruses which are similarly bad, yet we are not afraid of a pandemic.
These virologist are often not very good in estimating probabilities. See Webster,(50% could die) Peiris(pandemic within 10 years extremely likely). They should cooperate with these financial experts to improve their predictions.
>That is exactly my point! There are no other flu viruses as bad as H5N1! It is not proven that it will be the cause of the next pandemic, but it has been repeatedly mentioned as the most LIKELY. If it is not the cause of the next pandemic, will we ever know if it won’t cause one some day.
These virologists (and epidemiologists) are the ONLY ones who are qualified to estimates on probabilities of virus behaviors. As to why they have not counseled Standard and Poor, et al, I imagine it is because they have not been asked. They have certainly said what a terrible virus it is in public and in print often enough. I think the analyst prefer the internist, Marc Siegal, to tell them what they want to hear.
why should they ignore the experts ? They are risking their money. The public statements were probably known and included in the estimate. Maybe we are underestimating the historical factors ?
Anonymous: bgw, weren’t there some suicides in India because they had to cull their chickens ? And the Indonesians don’t cull, because they need their chickens to survive. I’m not saying that we are currently overprepping, though.
>Yes, there were suicides in some cases. The farmers were not properly recompensed. Culling is not, however, considered prepping, but rather attempts at control of the virus.
I am glad you are not saying we are overprepping because that is the chief danger in your somewhat spurious argument.
anonymous – at 16:40
why should they ignore the experts ? They are risking their money. The public statements were probably known and included in the estimate. Maybe we are underestimating the historical factors ?
>As we have pointed out, they are risking nothing. In the case of a severe pandemic their wealth is likely to be mostly wiped out. If the economy tanks in advance the effects will also wipe out a huge percentage of their money.
Hi anonymous - Ok, one thing that everybody has overlooked here is how those sly foxes who are underwriting these instruments have rigged the game a bit in their favor pandemic-wise. If you look at their age distribution chart for their “target population,” fewer than 20% of them fall into the age bracket of being under 30 years-old.
So…if you are an insurer and you are writing mortality bonds and maybe, just MAYBE, there is a chance that a pandemic is coming and the most likely candidate on hand is H5N1, which rips its mortality figures from the cohort most likely to be under 30 well…write your bond to write out nearly all of that heavy risk. Sneaky.
Anonymous, I too, like bgw, think that there are biases and suppositions underwriting all the actions of the financial players. The biggest assumption they make is that things will basically continue to go on, more or less as they have. It is really not worth their time and effort to model scenarios which assume the world as we know it will drastically change, as they know very well that in times of great stress on the financial system (the 1890′s, 1929 into the 1930′s), often the whole thing is scrapped and basically regbuilt again. If they are wiped out, they know their competitors will likel have found themselves in the same position, which makes it all ok. Everybody starts over. The few who have retained more assets it’s true, do have a leg up, but the effort into ensuring you are one of those kinds of survivors, from an institution’s point of view, may not be worth the cost now. So while S&P may be pretty good at pricing bonds in an economic sea they understand and know something about navigating. They know nothing about pandemics, and nothing about a pandemic-ridden or post-pandemic world.
I don’t know if it was mentioned in this forum but last Sunday’s Parade magazine included BF in it’s list of killer disease you don’t really have to worry much about. Parade is inserted into millions of Sundays papers across the country. Ken
Yep, and they were talking about bird to human, non-pandemic bird flu. Of course we don’t have to worry about that. We haven’t found high-path H5N1 in this country yet (We hope). I think they were irresponsible in the extreme in not making that clearer.
What people that have not prepped don’t realize, is the time it takes to get adequately prepped for 6 weeks. They also have not figured out that 98% of the population cannot prep sufficiently in the last week or two because of limited supplies (just-in-time inventory)in each store. All the people that are waiting until we know for SURE it is going to go into pandemic mode, are taking one heck of a chance with their families. Even if the government had some emergency stocks of food, they do not have the ability to feed 98% of the population for six weeks.
anonymous – at 15:40 yes, and what does Stanard and Poors know about building cars,selling drugs, pumping oil etc. ?
Er… maybe cos these are businesses? That work on principles of supply and demand and profit and technology and human resources and commercial laws and regulatory bodies?
Infectious diseases work on different rules.
I would consult such analysts when I want to figure out when it’s time to invest in cars or oil, but not in infectious diseases.
Markets do not necessarily work well with rare events (once every 100–300 years) or even more frequent ones, as we have seen in the tenfold increase in property insurance premiums in one year on Cape Cod. If the actuaries were paying attention, they would not have charged such low insurance premia, and now maybe they are over-reacting. Anonymous, I do not believe that you can assume markets such as you cite have strong predictive value - and I am an economist who works with markets all the time. When there is a thick fog, people make wild ass guesses or even less wild calculations and sometimes lose a lot of money (certain very smart hedge funds). Even oil, a major and well studied commodity went from $25 to $75 a barrel in a few years with no major shocks - hardly a sign of prescient markets. For viruses, any prediction has to have a low confidence level but several on FW have shown more understanding of the trends observed so far than most “official” sources, which might be the ones S&P, etc. listen to. I would finally add that the desire not to appear foolish often influences expert opinion. As one famous econometrician taught, “Forecast often!”
The great economist John Maynard Keyes once said, “I would rather be roughly right than precisely wrong” and thats why I preped. Maybe I can’t plan for a civilization busting pandemic like the ones in the 14th and 16th century but I can prepare for pandemics such as the 1918 or 1968 varity and be roughly right. If I don’t prepare for I open myself up to being precisely wrong. Then again, If I change my handle to Anonymous who would know.
For a while in my checkered past, I did some temp work (Kelly girl) on Wall Street. Some of the financial “experts” were simply people who spoke forcefully about what they were peddling that day. (I believe Karl Rove has borrowed this technique quite successfully — just state, fiercely, that something is so, and, by gum, lots of folks will think you know what you’re talking about) — I’d pay attention to anything Peter Lynch said or Charles Schwab — but I’d be cautious about planning my life on what financial “experts” of unknown quality have to say.
Another great reason for picking a posting name other than “Anonymous” : there have been some fairly obnoxious “anonymous-es” posting in the past. Some one might think less of what you have to say because of that previous experience.
If there is a pandemic, an investor’s primary concern will be for the safety of his/her family not how much money will be lost in investments. The rating on these instruments may be undertstood to recognize this as well.
I know the theory goes that the market is efficient, and all available information is priced into a security…
One catch is that investors’s opinions of this information are completely irrelevant as to whether or not H5N1 can pick the human lock or when that might happen. Another is that until a pandemic occurs, the likleyhood of one is discounted; the difference between a possibility and a fact. If or when a pandemic begins, you’ll see the new facts quickly priced into the market.
Also…humans are known to be poor at estimating the probability of negative events.
Anonymous -
Hummm, Where were the stock analysts when the “Stock Market” crashed? Oh, thats right, they were the ones jumping out of windows!Makes me wonder if this is a setup. Believe me, some few will have the inside thread. They will cash in their bonds. As they are laughing all the way to the bank. Are you by any chance one of them?
I’m sure noone thought the “Stock Market” would crash in 1929, but it did. This too could happen again.
The “Stock Market” is a legalized “Craps Shoot”. A pandemic influenza will not be! Will you be ready?
Being prepared is the only insurance I will invest in, for insurance companies will go flippers up very quickly. Good luck in any pandemic if you’re not prepared. gina
bgw at 16:31, yes I was unclear. Wanted to say that (over)prepping = spending
money leads to death in some (few) cases, e.g. by accidents, cuts in health
care for other diseases, etc. Some people here are buying/selling houses,
are planning their career based on panflu-threat. If overprepping were impossible, then why do we have so little Tamiflu, prepandemic vaccine … ?
At some point you have to stop. It’s wrong to say “prepare for the worst”,
“you cannot be overprepared”.
bgw at 16:47, I don’t see why S&P,SwissRe, would be wiped out in a 1918-pandemic
Pixie at 16:57, but the 33% excess mortality in 1918 in their example
was from that weighted age-distribution, (or not ?)
That’s where I based the calculation upon.
They also consider risk from war, other diseases, … so they can’t well
adjust the distribution to panflu. And any “bias” can only work,
when S&P,Milliman, investors won’t detect the trick
anon_22, they do consult other experts for company-specific considerations
or here for virology. They also rate pharma-companies whose fate depends on diseases spread. We really have to ask Milliman, how they did their analysis. But obviously they consider the historical argument more important
than you,Monotreme,Osterholm,…. Is it unreasonable ? Hard to say.
infomass, when you think the market is wrong, very good, just go and earn
money with that knowledge. Either a severe pandemic is as unlikely as S&P,
Milliman, Reinsurance companies and the market suggest or we could make
lots of money with our knowledge. But I myself won’t claim at this point that
I could estimate the risk better than those.
But obviously they consider the historical argument more important than you,Monotreme,Osterholm,…. Is it unreasonable ? Hard to say.
Historical arguments - aren’t finance gurus the ones who always say past performance may not be good indicators of future, or something like that? And that’s also assuming pandemic viruses are standardized events and that past pandemics are good guides to future ones, and that we know enough about what actually happened in past pandemics, and that the same pandemic will have exactly the same effect on 21st century society as previous ones, etc etc.
But I myself won’t claim at this point that I could estimate the risk better than those.
At the risk of bragging, I am comfortable with saying that I can probably estimate pandemic risk better than financial analysts. I will concede that they can estimate financial risks better than me, most times.
anon_22 – at 23:17 I will concede that they can estimate financial risks better than me, most times.
Don’t be so sure……..
i know, that’s why i added most times.
The times when I’ve made money though, were the times I didn’t listen to analysts. LOL
Anonymous says: bgw at 16:31, yes I was unclear. Wanted to say that (over)prepping = spending money leads to death in some (few) cases, e.g. by accidents, cuts in health care for other diseases, etc. Some people here are buying/selling houses, are planning their career based on panflu-threat. If overprepping were impossible, then why do we have so little Tamiflu, prepandemic vaccine … ? At some point you have to stop. It’s wrong to say “prepare for the worst”, “you cannot be overprepared”.
>You must realize that here in America we have many more disasters possible and increased possibilities for violent civil unrest. Also, I have specifically stated that prepping should be done to the best of your ability. This means within your budget. A family needs to be prepared to be as self-sufficient as possible to be adequately protected against any number of horrible possibilities.
Spending for public healthcare by the US government has been grossly inadequate. We shouldn’t be “robbing Peter to pay Paul” in any case. There is a lot of money wasted on special interests that needs to be controlled instead.
bgw at 16:47, I don’t see why S&P,SwissRe, would be wiped out in a 1918-pandemic
Anonymous, if you haven’t been paying attention to ALL the threads on the wiki on the economic effects of even a 2% CFR in three waves, I really can’t help you. This is too much to recapitulate.
Mathmatical randomness is more random than human randomness. Humans are very prodictable with less fat tsils on the bell curve.
suppose, you succeed to convince the local politicians that the threat is much larger than the financial markets suggest. What should they do ? Invest available money in Tamiflu-stockpiles,masks, store food now or “buy insurance” instead by selling mortality bonds ? When panflu hits, the price for Tamiflu will probably rise slower than the gains with the mortality bonds, so they could effectively buy more Tamiflu with the then available money.
Anon_451 ¨C at 12:05
anonymous ¨C at 02:42 Standard & Poor¡¯s Wasn¡¯t this the same group that gave Enron an A+ rating in the late 1990¡äs
Anonymous would you care to answer as to how they were so wrong on this group, and Global Crossing. Or was it because they were looking only at the numbers and not what was happening on the ground. They did not take the time to pull back the covers and look underneath. Nature is not predictable. You do not know what risk you will take with it. Ask the People of New Orleans.
In answer to your question, I would trust Anon_22 and Montreme on this far more than Standards and Poor. At least I know that they have done the research, I can not say the same for the Wall Street crowd.
I have always thought more people will survive the pandemic than `the financial consequences thereof and still do.
451, do the complete statistics instead of picking examples. It should be available somewhere.They can’t be always correct. Same with NO. Anon_22 and Monotreme can’t be trusted, they are not considering all the aspects. They have an agenda here. We can’t even know whether they are saying what they really think.
anonymous – at 00:29
I assure you I mean every word I write. Of course no way to prove it. Except to check my posts for the last year.
As regards the financial gurus, they know no biology. They know no science. They don’t know whom to ask. I note that you never argue on the basis of science, only history or quotes from “the experts”.
What bothers me the most about the nay-sayers is that they almost never argue on the basis of science. I would like to be convinced that I am wrong, but threads like this one just re-inforce my high level of concern.
I can now add the financial markets to the list of DGI’s (don’t get it’s). Time to sell my stocks I think.
anonymous – at 00:29 451, do the complete statistics instead of picking examples. It should be available somewhere.They can’t be always correct. Same with NO
If you are basing the lives of your family on any agency that even you admit can not be always correct, then I feel sorry for your family.
I have based my prepping and my trust on the information that I have gathered over the past 10 months on my own research. Much of my information has come from the government and I do include the WHO and CDC in that. When it comes to what Anon_22 or Montreme have said I have found nothing inconsistent with the governments analysis other than they take it to it logical conclusion. In deed if you had been on this site for any time you would have found that they, along with DemFromCt have been some of the biggest naysayers in the group. 22′s most oft quoted saying is “there is insufficient data to support your claim”
You (and I can only assume that there is only one) on the other hand have not provided sufficient writings for me to determine your agenda. At this point I write you off to being a government troll sent in to the wikie to put us down and keep the sheep from learning of the wolf at the door.
anonymous – at 00:29
It is a sign of failure to win an argument when someone switches gear and accuses others of having an agenda. Well, yes, I have an agenda. My agenda is to write what I know or what I think I know, in the hope that either someone else will benefit, or if I am wrong someone else can point it out so I can learn.
This forum rests on debate by presenting a convincing argument, not by forcefulness or accusations. Folks on this forum do not owe me or Monotreme anything, they don’t have to say we are right when we are not. If what you are saying is convincing, there would have been people writing to support it. We have no control over who writes and what they write. So quit being personal and stay with substance.
Monotreme - Nesbitt Burns (Bank of Montreal)Canadian stock brokers get it!! Have you read Sherry Cooper’s (Chief Economist)) publication - (there used to be a link on the main Wiki page - http://tinyurl.com/17a) said the Bird Flu fight must start now - back last March!!
Monotreme, you are not even adjusting your estimates due to the
new info about the mortality bonds. That’s not credible.
You sometimes exaggerate, where I’m not sure whether you really mean
what you say. E.g. worm of Weybridge, Chinese swine-sequences.
I still repect your opinions more than average here.
But it’s clear that bird-flu-forum people are too pessimistic.
More than the experts who in turn are
more pessimistic than the economists and the rating companies.
The financial gurus have access to all the public information,
and magazines, probably more than you. They also probably consulted
some virology experts.
RMS e.g. lists Ferguson as consultant.
I usually argue by quoting
“the experts” because -other than you- I don’t claim that I’m more
competent than they. The arguments are known, the problem is
how to weight them.
Good decision to sell your stocks, when you estimate
the risk higher than the market.Maybe buy panflu stocks instead
like Biota,Biocryst etc. Selling mortality bonds were
preferrable but that’n not for the average people.
I haven’t checked in as often as I would like, but I have 2 statements as regards this thread:
1. Monotreme and Anon_22: Your impeccable reputations speak for themselves on the wiki.
2. Where is BB? We could certainly use his services! I hope he is just moving and is not ill or did not have a wall of RWFK preps fall on him!
Many Cats, he is in the process of moving right now.
Hopefully he’s crated all of the good stuff properly for the trip:-)
451, we can’t know the future, so we must try to predict it as good as
possible. Mere luck will always be a factor.
I’m just quoting S&P and the market here. You can hardly argue this
is made up to put you down.
22, there _are_ people writing to support this. I.e. the 2 most trusted
rating companies on the planet.
gharris, Nesbitt Burns don’t specify/valuate the thread AFAIK.
Only unclear considerations. IMO any financial analysis about pandemic
which misses the S&P rating and the mortality-bonds market is not serious,
not complete.
anonymous ,
Are you comfortably prepped to make it through what all of the experts say is coming?
Are you prepped enough to help someone who wasn’t?
Is everyone around you prepped? How bout around them?
Thanks, MaMa! :)
OK, all of us here know that this Anonymous is gs. We have a lot of past history with him. He is very easy to pick out. For the rest of you that admire gs please read this thread from last December at Current Events. There he is known as gsgs because you can’t register there with only two letters. If you read this thread you will know why I do not admire gs.
No problem! :-)
We all miss him!
Goju, I send my preps by email.Not all experts say it’s coming. Most say: “no one knows…” At least the “when” and the “how bad” is most unclear
bgw, it could be gs,someone mimicing gs,someone just forwarding gs-posts.. unless it isn’t signed with gs, we can’t know. Yes, gs isn’t liked because he tries to figure out the truth about the magnitude of the panflu-threat and flubies don’t like that.
anonymous: You talk in terms of taking financial bets when there is real uncertainty and large variances we do not know. Most here think in terms of taking prudent precautions to save the lives of their families. You do not contest that markets such as the ones you cite often have low predictive value. They are the “best guesses” of financial/investor types and these guesses AVERAGE out to a positive return for those who stay in business. If that is the reasoning you wish to use to predict a benign outcome or justify a low level of preps, I am glad that you are so easily persuaded. Good luck.
Have you folks read what the World Bank is saying?
Soory about the long address and the side scroll. Can anybody correct this for me?
Generally speaking, getting stuck in intellectual guesses about probablity and risk because one likes to think about numbers more than they can grok situations like a 1918 virus’s impact on today’s world for a year, is not something people can do who see
the Impact is Greatly Severe whether it is a Low, Moderate, or High probablity, or Certain event;
it has to be prepared against, since we do for much less devastating events, where we could get some outside aid.
Preparing for a pandemic year would also make communities and household more resiliant against all the current things they aren’t prepared for.
Grooving status quo keeps some brokers and politicians and bureaucrats and billionaires content, for now,(even the generally stressed public,) but complacency is going to seed unnecessary suffering, and set up long-term economic recovery problems. Getting sidetracked may have grievous side-effects.
worldbank released also some statements last year :
Nov.3 2005 : $260 billion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4402000.stm
Nov.7. 2005 : $800 billion
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/07/051107140432.kfipw169.html
Sep.17 2006 : 2000 billion
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060917/ts_nm/birdflu_economy_dc_1
mortality bonds went up 0.2% (~probability for a severe pandemic per year)
from August to December 2005. I have no actual quotes.
infomass and others, wouldn’t you like to buy panflu insurance ? E.g. you pay $1000 and you get $10000 when there is a pandemic like 1918 or worse in the next 5 years ? You could use that money then to complete your preppings or to ensure your payments when you have no income in a pandemic.
(Gee, shucks! Do you really not “get it”, or can you really think we did not “get it”, years before?)
See also the “currency collapse” threads, any new visitors…
also, these low market probabilities are presumably the reason, why no
peramivir factories are built now and why we get no prepandemic vaccine
and why there is so little H5N1-research and why the communities
and companies are not investing so much into prepping.
The politicians and economists and insurances look at such numbers,
even if the people here don’t.
Osterholm has a difficult job to convince the companies to store
essentials and give up on “JIT”, when they can watch the probability
of a severe pandemic from the mortality bonds.
I’m almost certain that insurances will pay more attention to
the market prices of those bonds than to Osterholm warnings.
Humans don’t learn from History, so the species is doomed to repeat the unpleasant bits.
fixed
insurances do re-insure their risks or sell mortality bonds.
here is a list
of the insurances which are most at risk.
See the graphic on page 20
I recall a story from the start of World War II. The Japanese had overrun all of SE Asia (the source of most natural rubber) and there was only one synthetic rubber plant in Texas. The plant burned down and a military officer ran into the Secretary of War’s office with the news. He calmly took in the news and then asked, “Is it insured?” Anonymous, you and he are first cousins.
What part of 75% fatality rate do you not understand?
anonymous – at 10:11 I will not buy pandemic insurance because if this hits with the force I expect it to, the thing would not be worth the paper it is printed on (but I could use it in the toilet). I do buy Home owners insurance, car insurance life insurance and Health insurance, all of which I can use in the here and now. But again in a sever pandemic they too would be worthless. My insurance policy for a pandemic is the stock of food, water, seeds and alternative power sources. It would also serve me in a flood, Hurricane, tornado or in the very off chance a terrorist attack. Can you say the same for your paper.
451, the money would be prepaid by the investors and kept by a special company separated from other insurance money. You could even have it in gold, if you wish.
If you want “insurance” that if a pandemic occurs you will have something of value, think of what you can buy relatively cheap now, but will be valuable (for bartering) once a pandemic occurs. I’m thinking things like salt, spices, n95 masks, 12 gauge shells, fishing equipment, seeds, nails, or other things that were of value around say 1800. These things could be worth, relatively speaking, 100 maybe 1000 times what you pay now for them.
I don’t think cash will be worth much.
Jumping Jack Flash – at 10:59 Jack this person just does not “get it”. What good is a promise to pay (even in gold) if the delivery systems are down. You are right about the barter items and I have spent about $200 in those type of things. If I do not need them for barter, at greatly increased prices, then I can use them. My last barter item to get is Cigarettes. Since I do smoke I will lay in a stock and then rotate them just like normal and if it does hit they will be worth more than any gold in town.
anonymous – at 10:01
Oh boy, there’s a pandemic, give me my 10,000!
Reply: We only recognize a pandemic when WHO states that we are at level six.
Two weeks into the pandemic: WHO just went to level six, give me my money!
Reply: We will transfer it to your account, it will take 3 to 6 buisness days.
Finally gets money: Runs to store only to find that it closed 20 days ago when the shelves were emptied by the pitiful procrastinators that failed to prep when they were warned. Sign on store says closed due to lack of employees and the fact they havent received a shipment in two weeks and that one was sold to the mob as it was unloaded.
Thanks but no thanks. I will invest my 1000 in preps now, they will pay off big dividends later.
anonymous – at 03:42 bgw, it could be gs,someone mimicing gs,someone just forwarding gs-posts.. unless it isn’t signed with gs, we can’t know. Yes, gs isn’t liked because he tries to figure out the truth about the magnitude of the panflu-threat and flubies don’t like that.
I somehow doubt that, since gsgs started this same thread at Current Events:
http://www.curevents.com/vb/showthread.php?t=59378
Name of this Current Events’ thread is probability of a 1918-like pandemic “extremely low”.
I will say his English has improved a great deal through constant correspondence. He got very few answers on his thread because most people there have him on ignore.
I can see it now. Food supplies dwindling to the point of exhaustion. Someone knocks on my door with 10 ounces of gold and wants to buy a hotdog. Answer. “No. I don’t need heavy shiney pieces of metal. My lead sinkers work just find!”
I thought about smokes and booze, but in a dire life and death situation, I think the seeds or fish hooks would have more relative worth. And the smokes will get stale before long.
I also pondered investing in a ton of N95 masks and hocking them on ebay right as the panic starts. But:
1. that would be kinda like the guy who goes to Florida selling generators right after a hurricane marked up 5X. 2. the money received would probably not have any relative worth. 3. i’d have a hard time explaining my behavior to my maker.
I’ve been racking my brain on this, and THINK (not know), that the relative worth of salt would probably be the best bet.
gs. I have chosen not to participate in this thread but some of the comments that you have elicited are really good…
…Thanks
Jumpin Jack Flash. Historically it is sugar.
Tom. Sugar, huh?
where did you see that?
Tom. Sugar, huh?
where did you see that?
Jumping Jack Flash. I’m not sure if you know this but at the end of the war between France and England in the 1600′s (including the Plains of Abraham in Quebec City Quebec)…France had an opportunity to maintain Canada except it traded it instead for an island in the Carribean (don’t know which one) that produced sugar…it is my understanding that at the time sugar was more valuable than gold…
Hay you guys, this anon is an insurance salesman and it thinks we are suckers.
Here’s a quote we can all appreciate. I just wish I knew who said it. “Figues don’t lie, but liars do figure.”
Did my post at 23:01 get under your skin and hit to close to home for your comfort? Couldn’t help but notice how you jump over it. It must have hurt to read the flaws in your arguement.
For future reference, remember: When you attack one in this group you attack us all. Great minds think alike. In case you haven’t figured it out, you are the odd man out. gina
Oremus, there would be a secondary market. As soon as the bad news comes
in from Asia, your paper will skyrocket and you can sell it.
Sugar or salt is not so good, my wallet can’t handle enough of it.
And it mustn’t get wet, too impractical. How about computer-chips,
CPUs,RAMs,razorblades,LEDs,needles,sewing cotton,…, I still think money
is best.
Tom DVM at 11:53-I think Ogden Nash said “Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker”.
The French, you see, don’t like to leave anything to chance in matters of the heart (and a little more). : )
anonymous. Do you have a wheel barrel? You going to need on FULL of 100 bills to buy a teaspoon of my salt. The C notes will be good for starting fires once my 1,000 gallons of propane is used up.
anonymous – at 12:28
But the stores will be empty that day.
Money will be worthless. It’s value now is an illusion that holds only because people have faith in it. It is not backed by gold, and even if it was, would gold hold up in a pandemic.
Perhaps we should go on a rice standard. Printed on the money like the old gold and silver certificates. This one dollar note is redeemable by the Federal reserve for one pound of rice.
You won’t need money until AFTER you survive. I think there will be very few “greater fools” out there after the first two weeks.
Attention Mods – at 12:41
Sorry, forgot to change handle back.
Closed and continued here.
Anonymush is scared.Scared of losing his money.Why would anonymoot give a a sheeet about anyone prepping or not?Anonymouse talks of how it wont be severe but can’t see the forest for the trees.Aninimous follows money traders and insurors,people who are afraid they will lose money also.They wouldnt dare tell you the truth and disrupt the cash flow.Anonymust will stay here to talk condescendingly to anyone that will listen to him/her in the quest to disprove a panflu.Anonymoose would probably be better to post at a financial site where coveting money makes people happy.Anonymuck will just stay around to give his/her expert opinion on what “most likely will never happen”,according to the ‘most informed’of experts.More informed than we are.Anonymite thinks of himself/herself to be important,yet can’t qualify themselves as nothing more than a passing footnote,known as an”anonymous poster.”I FIRMLY BELIEVE, anonymudd looks down upon anyone preparing for a pandemic, and will continue to come here to try and disprove it is coming.Why else would an anonymous poster come here ,show no credentials,and continue to ride this site like a donkey.Ego boosting.Plain and simple.Anonymish wont even get a handle.What are you afraid of anonymad?Your reputation?Your money?Flu?I’m not impressed by you and i read an awful lot of sites.You can still post your swill here,but should make your handle anonymouth.
anonymous – at 12:28 Hope this formats correctly.
In that you love numbers so much though I would give you some.
Index case contacts the disease in Indonesian and starts the spread of a true Human to Human H5N1 influenza.
It takes 48 hours (2 Days) before they start to shed virus. They shed virus for 48 hours (2 days) before they show symptoms and no longer infect any one else after 24 hours of showing symptoms. (They only infect others for 3 days and that pattern holds true for all cases). With a rate of infection (RO) of 1.5 (current US government standard) the entire world is infected in 46 days. At an RO of 3 (first US government standard) total world infection in just under 30 days. With an RO of 5 (most likely standard) total world infection in 25 days. Note the curves, it starts very slow in the beginning and then explodes.
Days RO = 1.5 RO = 3 RO = 5 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 2.50 4.00 6.00 4.00 4.00 7.00 11.00 5.00 6.75 18.00 40.00 6.00 11.75 38.00 94.00 7.00 19.38 88.00 288.00 8.00 33.00 195.00 747.00 9.00 55.31 441.00 2,147.00 10.00 93.06 988.00 5,788.00 11.00 156.66 2,223.00 16,235.00 12.00 263.25 4,992.00 44,428.00 13.00 442.92 11,220.00 123,456.00 14.00 744.73 25,208.00 339,808.00 15.00 1,252.46 56,645.00 940,853.00 16.00 2,106.31 127,277.00 2,595,465.00 17.00 3,542.08 285,992.00 7,176,274.00 18.00 5,956.82 642,615.00 19,813,791.00 19.00 10,017.48 1,443,946.00 54,754,308.00 20.00 16,846.39 3,244,514.00 151,227,798.00 21.00 28,330.53 7,290,360.00 417,823,064.00 22.00 47,643.30 16,381,287.00 1,154,148,263.00 23.00 80,121.61 36,808,421.00 3,188,509,275.00 24.00 134,740.16 82,707,768.00 8,808,022,792.00 25.00 226,592.04 185,842,671.00 26.00 381,058.99 417,584,688.00 27.00 640,825.45 938,304,280.00 28.00 1,077,673.77 2,108,350,576.00 29.00 1,812,319.90 4,737,420,745.00 30.00 3,047,771.57 10,644,887,785.00 31.00 5,125,425.96 32.00 8,619,409.54 33.00 14,495,228.59 34.00 24,376,571.34 35.00 40,993,988.26 36.00 68,939,435.73 37.00 115,935,189.53 38.00 194,967,771.78 39.00 327,876,567.81 40.00 551,388,789.75 41.00 927,268,451.94 42.00 1,559,383,864.80 43.00 2,622,409,974.90 44.00 4,410,096,982.34 45.00 7,416,443,492.74 46.00