2 ms·

I don't think your analysis is correct. They're not saying that the money is wasted because we haven't had a flu outbreak. They are saying that, if there was o

by kitd 13y ago

I don't think your analysis is correct. They're not saying that the money is wasted because we haven't had a flu outbreak. They are saying that, if there was one, Tamiflu would be as useful as paracetamol. It would be like (in your analogy) someone claiming that the snow clearing equipment bought was known to be faulty or not work in cold conditions. In that case, saying the money was wasted would be justifiable. I don't have an answer, other than the observation that there are too many cases these days where public health and commerce don't work well together.

robmcm 13y ago
> I would much rather have some Tamiflu than not, even if it's effectiveness varied for patient to patient. At the time Tamiflu was believed to work well, and must have had studies that backed this up (otherwise it wouldn't have got past NICE). If it is in fact no better than paracetamol then with hindsight you could argue it was a mistake to stockpile, however I was reassured that my government had prepared, which in itself could have avoided some additional panic and bad press.