You're more than welcome to be "That Person" if it makes you feel good, Jess. I've known Natalie for nearly four years, and she's Cordelia-level blunt and honest, so if she tells me that this happened to her, improbable as it is, then I'm going to believe her.

You're getting this at "a friend of a friend" level, so feel free to treat it like junk mail.

I'm so glad Jessica posted that before I did. I didn't want to be the penguin pooper.

What is the polite thing to do? The other day I told a friend she had retold me an urban legend and she seemed kind of miffed. I do it a lot and I feel like I'm preventing people from continuing to repeat stories and being embarassed later on when they find out the truth. If it's a harmless story like the penguin would it be better for me to keep quiet?

Is the UK getting a different result because bunches of mid-level sick people DO exist and actually seek medical treatment? Are more Americans becoming critical because they put off/forego medical treatment?

That's a really interesting question. We do have massive Tamiflu centres here, handing out pills to anyone with enough symptoms to be likely to have H1N1. The government's being criticised for this policy - which clearly has some major drawbacks and is a colossal waste of money - but it is potentially saving lives, too. I was so ill before I got hold of Tamiflu, I can see how I might have developed serious complications without it. (But I'm in a high-risk group.)

In short: do you need to waste buckets of money to keep people from getting critically ill? Or is there a better system somewhere in between?

Edit, because I really need to learn to check I've finished all my sentences before posting. (And again because I can't spell.)

do you need to waste buckets of money to keep people from getting critically ill?

And if it works, does it really count as waste?

Fay, it honestly never even occured to me to doubt the penguin story until I scrolled down that link and saw Dudley Zoo mentioned in the (supposed) original version of the story. Now I don't know what to think.

I sometimes hear a good true story and repeat it as though it happened to me. (and hilariously, once repeated it to the person who told it to me) I suspect Fay's friend believes the story is true but that it didn't actually happen to her.

And unless the school district is relatively wealthy, teachers will have to supply their own.

I supply my own hand sanitizer and my own Kleenex. In fact, my room has been Kleenex-less for 2 weeks because I ran out and can't afford to go buy some. We've already gone through 2 boxes this year that I bought. I've asked the kids to bring some in and have even offered bribes (not extra credit, that's not allowed but we have these incentive wooden nickels that they can "buy" candy with on Fridays at lunch). So far, no takers.

Of course, there is the fact that even the Snopes story points out that there are reasons that penguin-napping seems plausible since they're neither shy nor dangerous. And if the Dudley Zoo has noticably faulty enclosures...urban legend and true are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Anyway that's my story and I'm sticking with it.

ETA: Now I want to go dig up the story from a few years ago when I was in Moscow and a peacock got in a spat with some other birds and escaped from the zoo, prompting a city-wide man-hunt bird-watching obsession until he finally came home. And I know that was true because it was in The Papers.

The point of vaccinating healthcare workers is, primarily, not to protect them from getting sick. It is to prevent them from inadvertantly passing the flu onto an immunocompromized patient. The same logic ought to apply to anyone in close contact with a high-risk population.

I'd think that keeping healthcare workers healthy during an epidemic would be a pretty high priority. Unlike babies, old people, young people, immune-compromised people, pregnant people, and teachers, if enough doctors and nurses get sick and can't work for weeks (or forever) societies ability to fight the illness is in danger.

That's a really interesting question. We do have massive Tamiflu centres here, handing out pills to anyone with enough symptoms to be likely to have H1N1. The government's being criticised for this policy - which clearly has some major drawbacks and is a colossal waste of money - but it is potentially saving lives, too. I was so ill before I got hold of Tamiflu, I can see how I might have developed serious complications without it. (But I'm in a high-risk group.)

In short: do you need to waste buckets of money to keep people from getting critically ill? Or is there a better system somewhere in between?

My understanding is that the US's tight-fisted Tamiflu guidelines are to try and prevent the flus from becoming drug-resistant.

Teppy! Come here! Is the UK policy different because their population is smaller and denser? Or are they operating on a different philosophy.

I thought I had heard that penguin story before. It's still awesome. What kid woudnt want a penguin of their own?

Teppy! Come here! Is the UK policy different because their population is smaller and denser? Or are they operating on a different philosophy.

That one, I don't know. It's possible that they CAN operate on a different philosophy BECAUSE their population is smaller and denser.