NationStates Jolt Archive

There's a proposal floating through the proposal list. It's about Avian flu. It containts Real Life references, and likely wouldn't reach quorum even if it weren't desited for deletion.

But, the question remains, should the NSUN take up the issue, much like it did for Tsunamis after the Boxing Day disaster?


Here's the text
The Curtailment of H5N1 Flu
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: All Businesses
Proposed by: Eurasia and Oceana

Description: 1. NOTING- with deep concern the gradual spread of the H5N1 avian flu virus throughout the world, via wild migratory birds.

2. RECOGNISING- that at any given time this virus could potentially mutate into a form which is both deadly to humans and is easily transmited through the air by coughs, sneazes, and/or physical contact with infected animals, meat and persons.

3. REGRETTING- that various media outputs are often presenting the general public with false facts, and are guilty in many cases of creating a sense of panic which need not be.

4. FULLY AWARE- that the anti-viral drug Tamiflu is in short supply in many nations, and that bureaucracy and corporate greed is slowing down the process of licensing other drug manufacturers to produce this medicine.

------------

A. DEMANDS- that all member-states immidiately halt the import of wild and domestic birds, and that a quarantine period of one month minimum is imposed on all animals which are sought to enter a given country. Clause A will be reviewed after three months of this resolution coming into effect.

B. REQUESTS- that member-states hold national media responsable for the intentional distribution of incorrect facts on the H5N1 avian flu virus, and that articles or reports strictly relating to the H5N1 virus which are deemed to panic-monger by the sovereign government of a given nation are revoked in public by a representative of the responsable corporation.

C. DEMANDS- that the drug company Roche immidiately distributes licenses for it's Tamiflu product to all nations who so desire it, for the good of human society and the welfare of the general public.

D. REQUESTS- that if the H5N1 virus does so mutate as described in Clause 2, then all member-states posessing the nescessary equipment research an effective vaccine, and distribute it freely once discovered and thoroughly tested. UN members will receive priority supplies.

E. DEMANDS- that if the H5N1 virus does so mutate as described in Clause 2, then conventional air travel between nations is immidiately halted, and that those persons wishing to travel must do so via authorised planes and remain in quarentine for 9 days before bording the said vehicle. Inter-border travel will be by UN permit only. Clause E will be reviewed after six weeks of this resolution coming into effect.

F. REGRETS- that the culling of both wild and domestic birds is crucial to the curtailment of the virus should it mutate as described in Clause 2, and demands that UN nations dispose of these birds in a humane fashion, in regard to the animal slaughtering laws of the given country.

My thought: no. I actually RPed having avian flu affect Gruenberg, as I have a lot of chickens and fowl. But I don't see it as an NS-wide problems. Too many countries would 'already have developed a vaccine' or 'have no animals anyway'. And, for once, I'd be inclined the believe them. I don't see avian flu as an international problem, at least in terms of this resolution.

I agree with my Gruenberger friend. Plus, I don't think a resolution targeting a RL issue this specific is warranted. It'd be one thing to deal with epedemic/pandemic contingencies in general (at least, in NS UN terms), but to go through every single RL disease is an egregious waste of time.

It's a shame, because it looks like some work went into the proposal. I wouldn't reject outright something along these lines that was well-considered, legal, and not too intrusive upon unaffected nations.

I think it just needs to be made more generic.

A generic proposal would be good...

A generic proposal would be good...I've thought a few times some sort of resolution proposing international co-operation for disease control would be worthy of consideration.

Yeah, something generic dealing with the threat of pandemics in general could be good, but concentrating on avian flu, or even just flu, seems too specific.

The problem would be phrasing it so as not to prevent the use of certain weapons...

This is exactly the sort of proposal I think it's unfortunate we can't have: a Security Council-esque response to a RL or NS crisis. Now that'd be cool. But, alas, no. I'm not sure about the generic epidemic idea: I'd have to see a draft, really.

Not to jump in and declare my intention not to act but - http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7243294&postcount=78


Epidemic Prevention Protocol


A resolution to restrict civil freedoms in the interest of moral decency.


Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Strong
Proposed by: Huai bei

Description: Contagious Diseases Epidemic Prevention Protocol

Description:

Globalization, international trade and advanced transportation systems accelerate the spreading pace of contagious diseases and make every nation vulnerable. We need a solution to this problem :
Contagious Disease Epidemic Prevention Protocol

1. Every Nation is obliged to inform international community of every epidemic outbreak and to use all prudent medical means to isolate it.

2. International Red Cross Organization (IRCO) would be utilized to offer assistance to any Nation hit by contagious disease outbreak (recipient). The IRCO will manage donation and its distribution to recipient upon request of the recipient. IRCO will cooperates closely with Health Ministries of its members.

3.

a)Every Nation has the right to quarantine any inbound passenger and potential-pathogen-carrier-cargo from Nation which is hit by the outbreak.

b) Every Nation has the right to ban import of food- and medical-product which is suspected to be a potential-pathogen-carrier from Nation which is hit by the outbreak.

Acknowledging that both actions are notably well within the Nation sovereignity.

Every Nation which is hit by epidemic outbreak and therefore affected by above mentioned actions is urged not to retaliate those actions.

4. Any person who, on behalf of the IRCO, renders medical care or assistance without the expectation of receiving compensation for such service, shall not be liable in civil damages for any act or omission, not constituting gross negligence, in the course of such care or assistance.

Explanation :

1.Definition of Epidemic :
affecting or tending to affect a disproportionately large number of individuals within a population, community, or region at the same time

2. Statement of Sovereignity Assurance:
This Protocol is humanitarian in nature. Sovereignity of each UN Member is guaranteed.

3. Animal to Human Contagious Disease:
If contagious disease suffered by animal can be spread to human and there is proven case that human have been infected, the nation should refer to point 1 of the protocol.

4. Recommended method for (humanitarian) donation :

First step : consult the recipient nation whether it would accept the offer

Second step : consult the recipient regarding the type of the aid

Third step : consult the recipient regarding the method to deliver the aid

Fourth step : If agreement reached of all of the previous steps , conduct the aid

Type of donations:

a) Financial aid
b) Medicament and Food should be sent by civil transportation means. In the case that there is an option to use military transportation means, the recipient should be consulted. If it is agreed upon, the donor can send them.
c) Medical Training ( in case of military medical personals read point b)
d) Medical Personals (in case of military medical personals read point b)
e) Scientific cooperation; Technology transfer

Votes For: 12,093

Votes Against: 2,458

Implemented: Wed Oct 13 2004


Wouldn't this cover it?

Surely that only covers diseases that effect humans directly, and not animal diseases like bird flu or foot and mouth?

Surely that only covers diseases that effect humans directly, and not animal diseases like bird flu or foot and mouth?

Clause 3.


3. Animal to Human Contagious Disease:
If contagious disease suffered by animal can be spread to human and there is proven case that human have been infected, the nation should refer to point 1 of the protocol.

Clause 3.

No, that says that if it is contageous to humans. What about diseases that just decimate livestock?

No, that says that if it is contageous to humans. What about diseases that just decimate livestock?

Such as? There is evidence that - for example - BSE is transmitted from animals to humans etc.

And

Only one case of human foot-and-mouth has ever been confirmed by viral testing in the UK, although approximately 50 cases have emerged worldwide.



(And - sorry - I was basing clause this on this :-


As of 20 October, 2005, there had been 118 confirmed cases of avian flu in humans in Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia, leading to 61 deaths.


Meaning that Avian flu would definitely be covered under this protocol/resolution)

You miss the point. This would only deal with the effects on humans, i.e. treating humans with those diseases. Plus, seeing as so few people have suffered from these diseases, it would not be considered an epidemic as per:

1.Definition of Epidemic :
affecting or tending to affect a disproportionately large number of individuals within a population, community, or region at the same time

I don't think that avian 'flu would even be covered, let alone foot and mouth

You miss the point. This would only deal with the effects on humans, i.e. treating humans with those diseases. Plus, seeing as so few people have suffered from these diseases, it would not be considered an epidemic as per:

But I would argue that the protocol says "prevent the spread of the epidemic" - including dealing with the livestock. So if there is an outbreak of Tistha Disease (infects "darker chickens" and can spread to humans) in Diala District (near the southern borders) we can, under this protocol, take steps to limit the spread, including culling the chickens.

But how can you stop the spread of an epidemic if it isn't an epidemic in the first place? I mean, one man with foot and mouth is hardly an epidemic...

But how can you stop the spread of an epidemic if it isn't an epidemic in the first place? I mean, one man with foot and mouth is hardly an epidemic...

But - and I guess this is purely a matter of perspective -


3. Animal to Human Contagious Disease:
If contagious disease suffered by animal can be spread to human and there is proven case that human have been infected, the nation should refer to point 1 of the protocol.


Mentions a contagious disease that can spread to humans, and has been proven to spread to humans. It doesn't mention that the human has been infected this time - just that the disease has been shown as contagious and contractable by humans.


1. Every Nation is obliged to inform international community of every epidemic outbreak and to use all prudent medical means to isolate it.


If the above is satisfied - if we find a number of cases of Tistha - then, under this protocol, we would be obliged and required to deal with it as an epidemic, even if no human has been infected because of the POTENTIAL for human infection.

At least that is how my judiciary and I interpret it. But as with most UN law, there is obviously a whole boat-load of ways in which it can be intepretted.

Perhaps we could add a clause that would allow nations to take similar measures to prevent the spread of epidemic diseases that only affect particular types of animals, as well as the spread of ones that can affect humans too, in order to protect the livestock-raising sectors of our economies?
For that matter, what about diseases that can't affect humans but that can affect one or more of the various other sapient species [such as 'Catgirls'] that have populations within certain nations?

Perhaps we could add a clause that would allow nations to take similar measures to prevent the spread of epidemic diseases that only affect particular types of animals, as well as the spread of ones that can affect humans too, in order to protect the livestock-raising sectors of our economies?
For that matter, what about diseases that can't affect humans but that can affect one or more of the various other sapient species [such as 'Catgirls'] that have populations within certain nations?

Add a clause? No, amendments aren't allowed. And the original proposal was illegal.

Perhaps we could add a clause that would allow nations to take similar measures to prevent the spread of epidemic diseases that only affect particular types of animals, as well as the spread of ones that can affect humans too, in order to protect the livestock-raising sectors of our economies?
For that matter, what about diseases that can't affect humans but that can affect one or more of the various other sapient species [such as 'Catgirls'] that have populations within certain nations?

I tend to read "human" as "citizen" so that the various sentient species are all covered by default.

Absolutely not. This one is a health care issue - and as such I don't think it should be given any more priority than any other disease (of course, AIDS gets an extensively high buffer compared to other diseases and I think that should be reversed). Tsunami resolution I feel was needed to some extent because we should start putting the process in place to understand and attempt to predict the weather and planet. I equate it to just expanding our knowledge, and we need a global scale of data to do this. In addition, it's a warning system - which is already in place for diseases (otherwise we'd be hearing about several thousand deaths in the US before we even heard about Avian flu).

I could see creating a World Health Org in the UN so that we keep all nations updated on major health issues and perhaps to encourage a focus on specific diseases for developement of cures/vaccines, but that would be the limit

The second proposal listed will not cover it due to House of Cards.

The second proposal listed will not cover it due to House of Cards.

If you are referring to the Epidemic Protocol, it is already UN law - a passed resolution, not a proposal.

(of course, AIDS gets an extensively high buffer compared to other diseases and I think that should be reversed).

Given the fact that it is by far and away the largest killer on the planet, may I ask why you think support should be scaled back for it?

If you are referring to the Epidemic Protocol, it is already UN law - a passed resolution, not a proposal.

Well now, don't I look like the unresearched baffoon

Well now, don't I look like the unresearched baffoon

(smirk) That wasn't my intention I swear - I just thought I would clear up any misunderstandings :}

Given the fact that it is by far and away the largest killer on the planet, may I ask why you think support should be scaled back for it?

In RL, it's not. In NS, it's certainly not. I don't know of a single NS nation who RPs major AIDS problems. And we have...4?...resolutions on it.

In RL, it's not. In NS, it's certainly not. I don't know of a single NS nation who RPs major AIDS problems. And we have...4?...resolutions on it.

I guess. But I would argue as potential world wide disasters go, it is up there on the list. And while there are others that could be as bad, there is evidence to suggest this will be.

And - by the by - has anyone RPed a world wide earthquake disaster? Cause I really am not convinced RP is the way to go for judging things :}

I guess. But I would argue as potential world wide disasters go, it is up there on the list. And while there are others that could be as bad, there is evidence to suggest this will be.

And - by the by - has anyone RPed a world wide earthquake disaster? Cause I really am not convinced RP is the way to go for judging things :}

Yes, they have RPed natural disasters. They tend not to RP things that would weaken their military.

You miss the point. This would only deal with the effects on humans, i.e. treating humans with those diseases. Plus, seeing as so few people have suffered from these diseases, it would not be considered an epidemic as per:

*Snip*

I don't think that avian 'flu would even be covered, let alone foot and mouth

There are, however, quite a few diseases that affect only livestock, and while they're not a direct danger to humans, their potential for wiping out the food supply should be of great concern. For instance:

low pathogenic avian influenza (not the H5N1 strain)

classical swine fever

exotic newcastle disease (birds)

anaplasmosis (cattle, sheep, and goats)

chronic wasting disease (like BSE, or "mad cow," but there's no known relationship between CWD and any other spongiform encephalopathy of animals or people)

Surely, diseases such as these are worth addressing.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstan's Ambassador to the UN
Regional Delegate from Scybala

Given the fact that it is by far and away the largest killer on the planet, may I ask why you think support should be scaled back for it?

Hardly. The epidemic is primarily in Africa (which will likely be wiped out from it), but outside that, the rate is single digits and the time it takes to kill people is often in the range of decades. It is actually the latter combined with the fact that you get it not from a natural cause or long term issues (whereas Heart Disease, Diabetes, Cancer, etc are due to either personal lifestyle and/or genetic issues - which, I believe, are top 3 killer diseases non-respectively in most first world nations) but rather from a night of lust from the wrong person makes it so feared.

I don't think that justifies making it a priority in all our resolutions - just as I don't think whales should be our priority when it comes to endangered animals.

Hardly. The epidemic is primarily in Africa (which will likely be wiped out from it), but outside that, the rate is single digits and the time it takes to kill people is often in the range of decades. It is actually the latter combined with the fact that you get it not from a natural cause or long term issues (whereas Heart Disease, Diabetes, Cancer, etc are due to either personal lifestyle and/or genetic issues - which, I believe, are top 3 killer diseases non-respectively in most first world nations) but rather from a night of lust from the wrong person makes it so feared.

I don't think that justifies making it a priority in all our resolutions - just as I don't think whales should be our priority when it comes to endangered animals.

I would still argue it is one of the single biggest dangers to humanity (in RL, if not NS) and the lack of "respect" that it is given is one of the reasons people don't take it seriously.

And there is one that is aimed specifically at it. Given all the others, I am not sure one is too much to ask.

AIDS is serious, and if people don't take it as such then they are signing a death warrant for the world.

I would still argue it is one of the single biggest dangers to humanity (in RL, if not NS) and the lack of "respect" that it is given is one of the reasons people don't take it seriously.

And there is one that is aimed specifically at it. Given all the others, I am not sure one is too much to ask.

AIDS is serious, and if people don't take it as such then they are signing a death warrant for the world.

Hold on. I'm saying it doesn't deserve a special place in the NSUN medical priorities list. That is not akin to saying I don't respect it. I consider it one of the top 5 most dangerous diseases out there (and actually, I don't consider Avian flu on that list even though if a full scale pendemic happens, it will beat AIDS by a long shot in number of deaths - because it'll happen and then retreat), and it is the only one of the 5 where the method of prevention is simply knowledge and responsibility - not luck of genes or life-long lifestyle choices. If there is any problems, its people's failure to analyze the "chance" component correctly. I know enough people that have had enough random sex that by pure chance, they've probably slept with someone who has had AIDS already. That's because they see it as "oh, 3%, it's unlikely", but chance makes it so that if you sleep with say 20 people, it's something like a 45% chance they have slept with someone with AIDS. Suddenly that 3% ain't so small. If they use a condom every time, they've got something like an 11% chance they've got HIV.

-----------------------------------

KNOWLEDGE of HIV I would agree needs to be improved - and for that I point to the Sex Education Act. That doesn't mean that we need to be putting an International level of aid into helping people with AIDS. We should be working on prevention of them getting the virus in the first place. That's where the respect comes into play, that's where the true danger is in it, that's where they haven't yet signed the death warrant.

So yes, I think our focus on AIDS should be scaled back at an International level - as that is treatment, not prevention. I don't support uneven concentration on treatments. (Stem Cell research is on my list of resolutions I'd like to see repealed for this reason as well).

Hold on. I'm saying it doesn't deserve a special place in the NSUN medical priorities list. That is not akin to saying I don't respect it. I consider it one of the top 5 most dangerous diseases out there (and actually, I don't consider Avian flu on that list even though if a full scale pendemic happens, it will beat AIDS by a long shot in number of deaths - because it'll happen and then retreat), and it is the only one of the 5 where the method of prevention is simply knowledge and responsibility - not luck of genes or life-long lifestyle choices. If there is any problems, its people's failure to analyze the "chance" component correctly. I know enough people that have had enough random sex that by pure chance, they've probably slept with someone who has had AIDS already. That's because they see it as "oh, 3%, it's unlikely", but chance makes it so that if you sleep with say 20 people, it's something like a 45% chance they have slept with someone with AIDS. Suddenly that 3% ain't so small. If they use a condom every time, they've got something like an 11% chance they've got HIV.

-----------------------------------

KNOWLEDGE of HIV I would agree needs to be improved - and for that I point to the Sex Education Act. That doesn't mean that we need to be putting an International level of aid into helping people with AIDS. We should be working on prevention of them getting the virus in the first place. That's where the respect comes into play, that's where the true danger is in it, that's where they haven't yet signed the death warrant.

So yes, I think our focus on AIDS should be scaled back at an International level - as that is treatment, not prevention. I don't support uneven concentration on treatments. (Stem Cell research is on my list of resolutions I'd like to see repealed for this reason as well).


See I would argue that with 34.9 million people infected at the end of last year, treatment should be quite high on the list as well, but I do agree prevention is equally important.

And I have to disagree about stem cell research for much the same reason - preventing diseases is all well and good, but we can't ignore those who are infected if we can help them in anyway.

But anyway - NS not RL, and not entirely the topic of the thread....

See I would argue that with 34.9 million people infected at the end of last year, treatment should be quite high on the list as well, but I do agree prevention is equally important.

And I have to disagree about stem cell research for much the same reason - preventing diseases is all well and good, but we can't ignore those who are infected if we can help them in anyway.

But anyway - NS not RL, and not entirely the topic of the thread....

I think it's 1/3 people in industrialized nations will have cancer in their lifetime - that's like 600 million right there. And you want to put AIDS as a higher priority?

There are, however, quite a few diseases that affect only livestock, and while they're not a direct danger to humans, their potential for wiping out the food supply should be of great concern.
Also, isn't it conventional wisdom that a lot of human diseases are animal diseases that "cross over"? I mean, isn't that why the Europeans had a huge supply of diseases and immunities to those to transfer to the Inca and Aztec people? Because they had much more direct contact with livestock?
For instance:

low pathogenic avian influenza (not the H5N1 strain)

classical swine fever

exotic newcastle disease (birds)

anaplasmosis (cattle, sheep, and goats)

chronic wasting disease (like BSE, or "mad cow," but there's no known relationship between CWD and any other spongiform encephalopathy of animals or people)

Surely, diseases such as these are worth addressing.

I would tend to agree. Though I haven't read through previous legislation to see what isn't covered as well yet.

I think it's 1/3 people in industrialized nations will have cancer in their lifetime - that's like 600 million right there. And you want to put AIDS as a higher priority?

Of course. It's a nice, "politically correct" cause.

Of course. It's a nice, "politically correct" cause.

I direct you to a very well-respected news source.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/40976

I think it's 1/3 people in industrialized nations will have cancer in their lifetime - that's like 600 million right there. And you want to put AIDS as a higher priority?

Honestly? Yes, because it is a much faster growing epidemic, and it is an epidemic. Cancer, as far as I know, is not contractable - it does not spread the way AIDS does, and it can be stopped and treated easier than cancer.

I am not saying we stop treating cancer - we should try to treat everything, but as I said AIDS appears to be a much more urgent problem that needs dealing with.

Of course. It's a nice, "politically correct" cause.

Millions of people are dying. Millions more will die. Just because they aren't rich industrialists - just because they live in the third world where everyone dies - doesn't mean we shouldn't be helping them.

Honestly? Yes, because it is a much faster growing epidemic, and it is an epidemic. Cancer, as far as I know, is not contractable - it does not spread the way AIDS does, and it can be stopped and treated easier than cancer.

I am not saying we stop treating cancer - we should try to treat everything, but as I said AIDS appears to be a much more urgent problem that needs dealing with.

AIDS is an epidemic only because knowledge is poor. Funnelling money into third world nations to keep those who have it alive doesn't solve the problem - arguably it increases the threat as they are around longer to contaminate others before they, themselves, die.

AIDS is an epidemic only because knowledge is poor. Funnelling money into third world nations to keep those who have it alive doesn't solve the problem - arguably it increases the threat as they are around longer to contaminate others before they, themselves, die.

A woman less generous than I could intepret those words as a call for genocide.

This is not the General Forum

If you want to discuss which disease is a bigger killer, take it there. The NS UN has already addressed AIDS (at least once), and doesn't really need to do so again. Furthermore, this thread is supposed to be about Avian Flu. Back on topic.


And speaking of the topic, this whole thing strikes me as unnecessary. Avian flu is not new. It was first discovered in the early 1900's. The 1918 epidemic was a strain of bird flu, as was the Asian Flu of 57-58, and Hong Kong Flu of 68-69.

H5N1, the one everyone's having panic attacks over, was discovered in 1997. Not only is H5N1 not new, it also has no ability to move from human to human. Horray for the media overinflating yet another scare.

My apologies.

And in respect to general epidemics, I would say that the current laws can be applied to mass outbreaks that affect animals and (as it says) have been shown to affect humans, so I am not convinced any new laws are needed to cover avian flu or anything else.

Add a clause? No, amendments aren't allowed. And the original proposal was illegal.

I hadn't realised that this proposal had already gone too far ahead to be changed, and thought that we were still helping to draft it...

I tend to read "human" as "citizen" so that the various sentient species are all covered by default.

Likewise, as far as my own nations are concerned, but I feel that this is a matter that really should be clarified in UN legislation at some point...

Likewise, as far as my own nations are concerned, but I feel that this is a matter that really should be clarified in UN legislation at some point...

It won't happen, because people will tell you that it's a waste of time - they are not passing a resolution that says "humans/elves/dwarves/unicorns/etc" because this is real life damnit. Further more they will tell you there is a problem with it because the moment you pin down all sentient species that currently exist, another one will come along and you will have to go back over old turf.

It just becomes a matter for the nations in the end, because only a very few nations think it is worth while.

I was thinking in terms of a separate proposal (category = Civil Rights, strength = 'mild' ?) that would _
Recognise the role of the UN in setting basic levels of Human Rights (even though the member nations disagree about how far that role should extend).
Recognise that the populations of some nations include members of various non-Human species that are verifiably as sapient as Humanity.
Believe that the members of any such verifiably sapient species should be entitled to all of the same basic rights as Humans.
Require all nations to pass laws redefining the concept of 'Human Rights', as expressed in any UN or national legislation, as actually meaning 'Sapient Rights'.

As long as the fluffies don't try to include dolphins. I actually thought there was something that covered this, but I can't seem to find anything. I guess I'd support: perhaps rather racistly, as a human, not sure how much I'd care.

I was thinking in terms of a separate proposal (category = Civil Rights, strength = 'mild' ?) that would _
Recognise the role of the UN in setting basic levels of Human Rights (even though the member nations disagree about how far that role should extend).
Recognise that the populations of some nations include members of various non-Human species that are verifiably as sapient as Humanity.
Believe that the members of any such verifiably sapient species should be entitled to all of the same basic rights as Humans.
Require all nations to pass laws redefining the concept of 'Human Rights', as expressed in any UN or national legislation, as actually meaning 'Sapient Rights'.

I agree that this should be the case, but trying to pass it will be a nightmare, and most nations (my former one included) class Elves and Dwarves as protected under all rights described as "human", simply because writing legislation with all the different potential species in would be horrible to do, and, in some nations, if you force Elves to accept the descriptor "human" there will be a riot.

The other alternative is describe everything as "sentient" and let the nation decide what sentience is, but again - leads to issues.

(but again we are sort of getting off the Avian Flu topic)

And speaking of the topic, this whole thing strikes me as unnecessary. Avian flu is not new. It was first discovered in the early 1900's. The 1918 epidemic was a strain of bird flu, as was the Asian Flu of 57-58, and Hong Kong Flu of 68-69.

H5N1, the one everyone's having panic attacks over, was discovered in 1997. Not only is H5N1 not new, it also has no ability to move from human to human. Horray for the media overinflating yet another scare.Well, First I'm pretty sure that until recently the 1918 strain wasn't known to be an avian flu strain until a week or two ago (when the gene reconstruction project of the virus, based on virus RNA recovered from autopsy samples and a descendant buried under the Alaskan permafrost, was published). So, the freshness of that news could contribute to the new focus on avian flus.

Second, I don't see it as "the media" which is "overinflating" this. If there's any overinflation, it's by the scientific community which is urging media sources to get the word out. Honestly, every shred of evidence I've seen says that this current media interest in H5N1 and other avian flu strains is spurned by increased scientific interest in the subject. And the media is behind on this, anyway. Scientific sources have been rumbling about possibly pandemics from bird flu since, easily, January of 2004, if not since the 1997 Hong Kong outbreak.

Third, as history supports, animal diseases frequently and rapidly acquire the ability to be transferred human to human. I quote from Wikipedia: livestock (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livestock#Disease)

Disease
Livestock constitute a major source of epidemic diseases in humans; these diseases have had a significant impact on history. When an agricultural society, that raises livestock, comes in contact with a non-agricultural society their diseases often spread to the latter (who lack any resistance), which can have devastating consequences.

The following table lists diseases which originally infected livestock and can now infect humans:

Disease | Source animal
Smallpox | Cattle
Tuberculosis | Cattle
Measles | Cattle
Influenza | Pigs, ducks
Pertussis | Pigs, dogs

Other diseases can be transmitted from animals. Mad cow disease is transmitted between cattle which are fed food containing cattle brains and spines. It is postulated that the disease vector causing mad cow disease can also be transmitted to humans who eat infected cattle, causing the fatal disease known as variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). Though this connection has not been conclusively proven, over 95% of identified cases of vCJD are in Britain, which suffered a mad cow disease epidemic in the mid to late 1980s. Mad cow disease has led to a ban on using cattle by-products in cattle feed.

Other diseases may be transmitted from livestock to humans include bird flu and some may originate from the bacteria E. coli O157:H7. Also, anthrax was called the woolsorter's disease because the skin form of the disease could be contracted from handling raw wool. Anthrax may be contracted from cattle, sheep, goats, camels and antelopes as well as directly from infected soil.

(I would also note that the two common strains of HIV, HIV-1 and HIV-2, are believed to have evolved from Simian Immunodeficiency Virus in Chimpanzees and Sooty Mangabeys, respectively.)

At some point, Measles, Tuberculosis and smallpox, too, hadn't acquired the ability to transfer human to human. But, as we know now, they eventually acquired it after enough exposure to humans, with deadly results. Poultry, as a huge livestock animal in some developing countries (due to the economics of the outsourcing this livestock), come in contact with humans a lot, and that's not about to change soon (everyone likes chicken). And it's just a matter of time that a strain (be it H5N1 or not) mutates to transfer human to human.

According to a CDC website, (http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/avian-flu-humans.htm)H5N1 has had outbreaks among workers with poultry (or others exposed to poultry) in Southeastern Asia, since January 2004. It also noted that the H5N1 outbreak in Hong Kong infected 18 humans (six of which died), and "that the virus spread primarily from birds to humans, though rare person-to-person infection was noted".

So, as yet, an H5N1 strain mutated to transfer human to human is terra incognita, and not something we've experienced before. And, according to leading scientific data, it's something we should be concerned about happening.

I agree that this should be the case, but trying to pass it will be a nightmare, and most nations (my former one included) class Elves and Dwarves as protected under all rights described as "human", simply because writing legislation with all the different potential species in would be horrible to do, and, in some nations, if you force Elves to accept the descriptor "human" there will be a riot.
The other alternative is describe everything as "sentient" and let the nation decide what sentience is, but again - leads to issues.
(but again we are sort of getting off the Avian Flu topic)

Fair enough. I'll start a new thread for this topic...

This is not the General Forum

If you want to discuss which disease is a bigger killer, take it there. The NS UN has already addressed AIDS (at least once), and doesn't really need to do so again. Furthermore, this thread is supposed to be about Avian Flu. Back on topic.

I just note that the deviation started because I thought we should be repealing some of the AIDS resolutions so I think it is relevant to this forum - though it is a hijack so I shall say no more on the matter here.

My thought: no. I actually RPed having avian flu affect Gruenberg, as I have a lot of chickens and fowl. But I don't see it as an NS-wide problems. Too many countries would 'already have developed a vaccine' or 'have no animals anyway'. And, for once, I'd be inclined the believe them. I don't see avian flu as an international problem, at least in terms of this resolution.

I'm not sure I agree with you, as I would suspect that enough players would be interested in RPing that the possibility of a pandemic exists. But even if we assume that there are enough nations that consider themselves not at risk, the issue of public health could be generalized.

A UN resolution calling upon nations to share the techniques to making vaccines or the vaccines themselves at a time when a multi-nation pandemic is identified might be worth working on. I know committees are often over used, but this is actually a good situtation to create a World Health Organization (WHO) that could act as both a clearing house and point organization for indentifying if and when there is a significant health issue at hand.

Yes, they have RPed natural disasters. They tend not to RP things that would weaken their military.

The Ottoman Empire RPed a massive earthquake and invited other nations to participate. This is something I was eventually hoping to Wikify.

(OOC: This thread is getting horribly OOC.)

(OOC: This thread is getting horribly OOC.)
Okee-dokey. To rectify that, perhaps I should move forward to the position of instead of asking "what about an avian flu proposal?" to saying "I feel there's a place for livestock-based disease prevention legislation."

At least, that's what I've been thinking more and more as I read through the debate. It seems most logical to leave protocol and measures with direct relation to infectious diseases either up to previous legislation, or national and regional agreements and governments (I have no new ideas worth writing down about "ultimately" stopping diseases from spreading, quite frankly).

However, given the sizable impact exposure to agriculture has on infectious diseases, as I've learned over the past few days looking up things (as well as was implanted in my memory when SARS first surfaced), perhaps there're some worthwhile things the UN could do with regards to livestock based infectious diseases. My preliminary text bullet points are as follows: Educate nations and individuals regarding livestock's role in human (or "sapient being" or whatever) disease help fund, or support in some way, the research of proper methods for agrarian societies to interact and minimize spread of such diseases perhaps some mechanism to monitor the strains of disease which appearing around the world Requiring that nations interact with their regional neighbors (the most likely to spread livestock-like diseases to said country) in order to establish protocols and standards for livestock treatment.

I'll need to do more research, and will likely tweak, overhaul, and replace or add to item(s) on this list. But, I ask now, does this seem warranted?

Again - I would argue no in the first instance, because the epidemic protocol provides "cover" for anything that can spread to humans.

However for diseases that can wipe out animals without touching humans there could be a case made.

While I am not against having something that counters disease for the peoples of our lands there are two reasons i am against this.

1, Why why why must we have a singular resolution for every disease that strikes? Why cant we have a single resolution that counters all disease threats? Call it UN One Organisation for World Disease Control if you like. What is the love affair with the inefficient and fund leaking lets make lots of single resolutions that can easily be covered by a one resolution to fit all resolution?

2, I hate RL Current Affairs leaking into this Game. We see it with the tsunami disaster thingy, and others. I play this as a release from the real world and its events. Using RL current Affairs for resolution proposals when People are suffering in RL is weak game play IMO and stinks of laziness and a general lack of ideas.

Rant over... please continue.
VL.

While I am not against having something that counters disease for the peoples of our lands there are two reasons i am against this.

1, Why why why must we have a singular resolution for every disease that strikes? Why cant we have a single resolution that counters all disease threats? Call it UN One Organisation for World Disease Control if you like. What is the love affair with the inefficient and fund leaking lets make lots of single resolutions that can easily be covered by a one resolution to fit all resolution?

2, I hate RL Current Affairs leaking into this Game. We see it with the tsunami disaster thingy, and others. I play this as a release from the real world and its events. Using RL current Affairs for resolution proposals when People are suffering in RL is weak game play IMO and stinks of laziness and a general lack of ideas.

Rant over... please continue.
VL.

I agree with you, your Highness. Show some imagination,mates. Every RL tragedy or threat doesn't have to show up here in NS or the UN. I would vote against this proposal on general principles. Now I'm off for a booster shot of 101 proof snakebite remedy, that nectar of the gods, Wild Turkey.
Excelsior,
Sen. Horatio Sulla

What VL said.

I semi-agree with VL and co, but let's not waste the thought that's already gone into this topic. I think a resolution establishing a WHO-equivalent is an excellent idea (likewise a WTO and a WEnvironmentO).