Actually you are slicing health care and early warning prematurely early. Also, the targeted population during the anthrax event (not threat as people actually got sick) was not the general population. A pandemic is the "population" as with SARS or Bird Flu. Further the CDC has expressed they do not have nor can they respond to a general outbreak. They are an identification and warning agency. More akin to military intelligence operations than operational armor battalions. The wariness you express is the result of the political process. The military has universal healthcare (if you can call tri-care healthcare). The problem is that priorities are askew in considering the specific issues.
Don't get me wrong or attribute political ideology that would be incorrect or misplaced. I can see an issue, identify the problems, recognize the severity of the threat along with the likeliness of an actual event. Without devolving into political speak. I am not an expert at pandemic, but I have read many journal articles, been to many conferences, and listened to people who are experts. This is an issue that simply isn't discussed because of the political baggage of the Clinton presidency.
Yet it is incredibly important.
If I told you that I have a stealth weapon that could wipe out a third of the military without attribution or warning and there is no offensive analog how much would you spend on detection measures? Oh, and it will wipe out a third of the contractor staff, the political representation, and likely families supporting the military? I know fear mongering but some of the conferences talk about increasing threat vectors the longer it doesn't happen with increasing virulence and mortality due to the population interactions.
Bookmarks