As long as people live in large numbers in small areas and maintain poor hygiene practices, diseases like this are destined to form and cause havoc. People are mammals and are not meant to packed like fish in a bowl.

like Chicago and Detroit...? and LA...? ;please

@ Hollywoods Mom

Yes, because Chicago, Detroit and LA are so much like the heavily populated cities in Cambodia. Maybe if you left your couch every once in a while you would see that cities in the United States are heads above even the biggest most progressive cities in these 3rd world countries. It is a bad idea to pack millions of people into cities that do not have the proper infrastructure to handle that many people. To remove the trash and human waste alone is a stretch for these places. If some of you people would realize what we have here you might be more thankful and less likely to bash our country. Our poor are their upper-middle class.

Good point Travis... But the cases are in RURAL Cambodia... More than packing it looks more as an Animal-to-Human infestation

Update on July 9,2012- the virus that caused the dearths of young children is EV-71 (hoof and mouth disease) very infectious and can be deadly in young children- it is spread through mucus,saliva and faeces. EV-71 was found in 53 cases- in addition others had dengue and streptococcus I. Cleanliness is half the food it is said. This could have ben so easily averted if the first fatal cases in April had been submitted to WHO/Cambodian Health affiliates. Symptoms- high fever and respiratory insufficiency.

Thanks for the up-date mimi jacques!

Interesting thought about the flu, however the article notes that it does not seem to be passed, person to person. I wonder if it might be something passed on via insect bite where as you surmized about adults having been previously exposed and thusly immune. Same thing could happen with a mutation along those lines?

I wondered whether it was something that older kids and adults had built up an immunity to it too, Laurali.

Also, in the US most kids get vaccines against the most serious childhood diseases so maybe in Cambodia that's not the case?

Regardless, I hope they can locate the cause ASAP.

I have noticed that many articles on legit sites/papers are lacking details these days. It seems reporting has gone down hill.

mimijacques--Francisella tularensis is the causitive agent of tularemia; pneumonic tularemia one of the possible manifestations of infection. If it were a case of someone using the bacteria as a weapon, one would expect a lot more cases, since only 10-15 organisms are required for infection, and would expect infection to appear across the age spectrum.

I suspect that epidemiologists have already started investigating.

And, GBR--it is not odd for a disease to show up in a specific age group. There are numerous bacterial and viral infections that are a lot more common, and a lot more serious in small children than in adults. It could be that adults are exposed to the same causitive agent(if that's even the case), but do not develop the life-threatening symptoms the young children have.

Unfortunately, the article does not provide enough detail to even guess what might be going on. The cases could be totally unrelated. It will be interesting to see if there is any follow up news on this.

This was only reported yesterday to ProMedMail (an international email bulletin board used by the infectious disease community worldwide)maintained by the International Society for Infectious Disease), apparently picked up from an article in the Phnom Penh Post by a Dutch medical student traveling in Cambodia. Various teams are investigating but it is early days. You can read the full report (such as it is- many questions unanswered at this point) at www.promedmail.org, search on archive number 20120704.1190037.

Mosanto supplied seeds in their food.

Your over reaction to a joke has Buffoon written all over it. Do you get paid by Mosanto to defend them to the point of being a total ass?

But here, I will entertain you by providing some info on how Mosanto could be related. You keep defending while I entertain myself giving you a hemmorage.

Note here how they took part in making Agent Orange in that same area

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto

Note here how they have been forcing farmers to use their seeds

http://bestmeal.info/monsanto/facts.shtml

And here, have a link to their good work...

http://www.prwatch.org/node/9903

I posted it again below. But this time I will prove my point. You will lose, trust me.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2010/08/asian-economic-community-by-2015.html

Use the FIND feature to skip to the meat of the article, if you don't want to read the entire thing, and really educate yourself apart from all that Mosanto propaganda.

Really Katie? "It would be impossible to live without Monsanto's technologies today."?

You know what, if stupid was money, you could buy Bill Gates with your pocket change.

With all the blabber she wrote, I know she will be too proud to read the links showing how Mosanto forced our farmers, and farmers across the globe now, to use their seeds vs their own naturally grown products. But I guess that is what she considers a company that is "impossible to live without".

But her calling me an uneducated fool has only made me make her look foolish, by easily proving that she has no idea what she is talking about. The evidence presented in many cases prove otherwise, and I can only think she gets pain by Mosanto for writing such foolishness.

Here, have another

http://www.naturalnews.com/032920_Roundup_birth_defects.html

To be fair TFNJ, despicable business practices in monopolizing the seed sources by Monsanto aren't what caused pneumonia in these children. Whether or not Monsanto is a good company isn't the real question here. You are assuming that GM food is killing children. Based on what evidence? These same crops are being grown all over the world so why would only 60 children in Cambodia be affected? The premise doesn't hold up. Now if the accusation is that the Round-up herbicide sprayed on these crops is the problem (and yes Round-up is a dangerous chemical), the real problem here would be the farmers not properly administering and storing the herbicide. However, we don't know anything about the proximity of these children to agriculture, or even to each other, so it would be a stretch to say that it is the cause. Also there have never been such cases linked to this herbicide. Of course there is the problem of worldwide use of the herbicide - again, why would only 60 children in one city be affected?

No, the probable cause is an infectious agent. I'm sure Katie is just reacting to your knee jerk reaction against Monsanto without proof. Even if you say it was a joke, there is obviously a certain sentiment behind it that is not a joke. Unless there is solid evidence here, which there is not, the accusation is off base.

And your reply is what I would have expected out of her if she disagreed with me, and no need to say I was an uneducated fool. More than a fool, I'm a huge a-hole to people who speak without respect.

Yes, I know there is absolutely no proof that Monsanto is involved with this, as if I had that proof, I wouldn't be here talking on a forum. But I have no proof that they weren't part of this either, thus the opinion forum.

But.. if you go above to what she was responding to, you will see that I was replying in a conspiracy way, to a post suggesting it was vaccines, thus adding to the possible conspiracies. A joke, and that is all. It tuned into this because as I said, I can argue ANY post. I successfully made her run off, even though I didn't have any solid case.

If she had answered me respectfully, this would have gone much differently.

And yes, I understand human biology enough to know that exposure to Round Up isn't going to cause fever in these kids, by itself.

Actually the post you were responding to wasn't about vaccines, it was about contaminated medicines from China - something that does have precedent and proof for killing children all over the world and not a conspiracy at all.

Yes, I know there is absolutely no proof that Monsanto is involved with this

So you made a conspiratorial claim without evidence and you cannot see why someone might think you were an uneducated fool? I'm not saying you are or passing judgement here, but that is one way most people respond to off based conspiracy theories that lack proof. Whether it was a joke or not you defended it vehemently - so it doesn't seem like you take it jokingly.

I can argue ANY post. I successfully made her run off, even though I didn't have any solid case.

Anybody can argue any post. The goal here is prove what you're saying. Making someone run off isn't a "win." It's a nothing. Maybe she had work to do, or maybe she just doesn't care to get involved in a discussion with someone who posits conspiracies without proof and then acts as though the goal is to run the other person off? I can't say that that's what happened, but it is certainly one way to look at it. You did continue to make the claim that she is working for Monsanto. That doesn't sound like someone willing to debate the validity of something - when they accuse detractors of pushing a paid agenda. It's attacking the poster and not the poster's information.

Ok Radagast, I was attempting to answer you gracefully even though you stepped into the argument. Why you would, I do not know, other than being bored and looking for an argument between two people and taking a side, just to get your own argument going. I have stated my opinion, and if you don't like like it, tough doodoo. I don't give a rats ass about your evidence, or lack of seeing a joke. We can sit here arguing nonsense as well, if you see that as being intelligent. Or you can get lost and go find another place to try and seem like you know what you are saying, to someone who cares what your opinion is.

I said mine was a joke. If you chose not to believe that, or to say it wasn't funny, then deal with it, un-pucker the butthole, and move along.

Still want to debate a joke?

My guess is you saw her being treated in a mean way, and you want to play hero. Maybe believing you can stand up to my nastiness. I will turn this around and you will get aggravated. I'm not sure why you feel this is worth it to you. But what ever you want.

Wow dude, I thought I was being pretty congenial there. Now your the one with the @!$%#ing attitude. If you said it as a joke then why repeat it not less than five times up and down the thread? It clearly is your viewpoint, which you brought up. I'm sorry if I backed you into a corner asking for proof, but just because you don't have any is no reason to become a dick. Are you interested in the topic are is it all about shouting people down? Why is it worth it to you?

Clearly you only use these threads to get into fights with people and don't give a rats ass about a real debate with logic, different views, and facts. For you this is a pissing contest. But by my metric you haven't defended your position one bit, despite the hostility.

I guess I "win" this one?

I don't need to provide any more proof than what I already gave to katie, which you decided to inject yourself into. I gracefully explained that I was joking above, which you decided to opine that it wasn't funny. Therefore I don't care if I'm being nasty. Your choice if you still want to speak for Katie.

You may have some sort of degree, but fall very short on common sense. I learned long ago not to step in between an argument and expect a happy result.

Your proof to Katie did not make your case. And who cares if I joined the discussion, since when is that strange on NV?? If you need to make up a back story for me that I'm acting as a hero to a damsel in distress then you clearly have made a mistake. Perhaps I, like Katie also like to dispel rumors and conspiracies? If you want to be on NV then you're going to have to get used to people stepping into arguments, pal. That's the name of the game around here. Don't play tough guy and act like we're on the street. Not impressed with internet muscles. If you want to impress people around here, then make your case and defend it - with facts. Don't get all huffy because a new person has stepped in.

I never said that your joke wasn't funny, I said it was off base. It didn't make sense. You could just as easily blamed the Easter Bunny with the same amount of evidence. You have continued defending the stance however, which means you actually do support it, which means it is fair game for me to argue against it if that is my desire.

So in your mind I was sitting here hoping Radagast would show up and fill me with his vast knowledge. Is that really how you are picturing this? Or would I take your post and give it the same value as someone who posts that it is 2012 doomsday that caused their deaths?

Get off it, you are proving nothing but that you needed to find a way to try and show you have some knowledge. How about applying that in real life and get off these forums.

So why do you post on Newsvine if it isn't to share your opinions? I'm sharing mine and you frame it as though I'm some megalomaniac who just thinks everyone wants to hear what I have to say?! You get off it. When you see some bible thumping idiot, I bet you jump all over them with inconsistencies from the scripture - how is that different than what I'm doing here - trying to poke holes in your opinions? We are doing the same thing, but you just can't take it when it comes back to you.

So who really is the megalomaniac? Admit your point about Monsanto is most probably not accurate and be done with it already. Why beleaguer it and get personal?

I did share my opinion, above and it is 6 words.

And why would I admit anything, when it wasn't you I was having this discussion with? What part of that don't you understand?

Why would I "admit" anything I say about Monsanto is probably not accurate, when I am giving an opinion? Do you dream that you can somehow change people's opinions by coming off as some sort of expert? It takes more than that to convince me anyone is smart. And I don't see it yet. Mostly from the fact that you interjected yourself, instead of reading all this and coming to the conclusion that you should probably create your own post and not step into this one.

If defending my point makes me a megalomaniac, well then I am.

"...it wasn't you I was having this discussion with?"

Public forum, guy. Google what it means.

Why do you give so much @!$%# about whether or not I interjected? I have really never seen someone so upset about that in a forum. It is quite amusing. I don't care if you think I'm smart. Did I say I was smart or did you just conclude that because I make more sense than you and it hurts your pride? My facts are THE facts, your facts are opinions. Yes opinions can be wrong. They can be wrong when the real world doesn't jive with them. It could be your opinion that the sky is pink and you would be wrong. You are wrong in assuming that Monsanto has something to do with this. I interjected because whether or not Katie had something to say, I sure as hell was. Maybe she should be mad at me for butting her out? I interjected because I don't like uninformed little piss-ants with internet muscles who think that they know how the world works and just latch onto the most recent conspiracy as though that passes for reasoned argument. People like you make this country a mess with your rumors and tripe, swallowing and regurgitating every little bit of emotional rhetoric, such as that Monsanto causes all disease or whatever the hell your point is. So yeah, you were gonna deal with my rebuttal one way or the other. All you have left is your indignation at being wrong. Suck on it.

If defending my point makes me a megalomaniac, well then I am.

I thought your point was moot! lol!

Now, THAT's entertainment!

http://inhabitat.com/monsanto-being-sued-for-poisoning-west-virginia-town-with-agent-orange-chemicals/

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2010/08/asian-economic-community-by-2015.html

It all comes together.

Guys, this makes no sense. The epidemiology of these cases does not support your accusations.

It helps if you click reply on the post this is inttended for. Someone could take it as being evasive, knowing your points will soon be squashed.

Did you read my links, or do you intend to ignore them, assuming that if you use terms like Systems Management, people here will feel you know what you are talking about.

You don't feel pressure to use Mosanto seeds, but again, did you read the link proving that many US farms don't have that choice?

Do you even see the stupidity in your post saying that we can't live without Monsanto, because they FORCED farmers to use their seeds?

You main problem is that you saw someone post a joke, and assumed he wasn't intelligent. A huge mistake on your part.

Again, this could all very well be tied to Monsanto, as has been before in other cases. Read the links and prove it to yourself, or go milk some cows.

If Monsanto is paying you to be here defending them, then they need to fire you. You know nothing about manipulating a conversation. There are way too many dumb remarks and holes in your post.

Again, how does owning a monopoly of seedstocks result in 60 children in a south Asian city falling ill?

Be serious for a moment - you talk about holes in arguments...

I'm sure you don't like Monsanto, but that doesn't mean they are to blame for all the ills of the world either!

I'm posting this not to say this is evidence that Monsanto is involved, but that there is the possibly that they can be, even in the slightest.

http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/roundup.cfm

Chuck Norris could be equally to blame if we are going to accuse anyone who could possibly be slightly involved.

Round-up being linked to chronic cancers does not in the slightest provide any causative link to the rapid and acute illness these children suffered. There are most likely thousands of other toxins and chemicals to which these children have also been exposed that should be considered before glyphosate. My money is on an infectious disease or even that bad Chinese medicine theory, but I really have to score Roundup ready rice pretty low on this one.

Ok, but they could also have been exposed to this, as well as thousands of other chemicals. So in your own words, there is a possibility. So why are you arguing as if my opinion is so far off base? Because you will eventually be too proud to admit I am right, just like Katie?

If you got that money to bet, then go do something about it. Don't just sit here trying to be the online forum specialist.

The epidemiology doesn't match, that's what I'm trying to tell you. If these kids showed signs of poisoning from glyphosate I would agree with you, but they don't. Why beleaguer it? Are you too proud? Did you actually make the argument from Dumb and Dumber : "A million to one? So you're saying there's a chance?"

Give it up.

Let me spell it out for you Radagast, since your common sense has dropped into your butt. I made what I felt was a joke, Katie called me a fool, I took offense to it and purposely argued a moot point. And in time, regardless of whether I was right or wrong, I would have stumped her, and shown that she really didn't know what she was talking about. Do I have to be an expert to expose someone who is just talking without fact? NO. I was just about successful in my tactic.

And now here you are... jumping in. Do you see how this is a lack of vision on your part? If I was calling for an "expert", I would clearly have argued differently with her. But I didn't have to. Sometimes, Radagast, things aren't as simple as you want them to be. I didn't need your facts here. But why I even need to explain this to you is amazing.

Again, do you often step into arguments and get caught in the middle?

I don't care if Katie knows her stuff or not. I know my stuff. I want to see if you know yours. But now you're back peddling and telling me you were arguing a moot point just to make a point. Ok fine. If your point was valid you could defend it no matter who jumps in, I don't see why that should upset you.

Again, you joked, but you meant it. It's fair game if you defend it. Telling me that there's still a million to one chance that Monsanto is to blame and that therefore your point stands isn't exactly arguing a point you don't believe in. My purpose in this isn't to "win," I just cringe when I see people making knee-jerk accusations about things they don't understand, like Bacchman saying vaccines cause retardation, or HW Bush saying atheists aren't real Americans. Clearly Monsanto has issues, but they didn't cause this and I'll defend that point.

But was I holding my breath hoping that hero radagast would come and enlighten me? Do I really care that you don't agree with me? Do I really care that you didn't seem to get the drift of what I just wrote above? Do I care that you cringe at anything I write?

Perhaps you think to much of yourself. You take a moot point, and want to argue it because, hey, here's your chance to shine. You need to prove yourself? Is your career un-fulfilling? Not getting promoted or advancement? But you know what makes me leagues smarter than you right now? Its that if I saw a guy who posted something that made me cringe because I thought it was so far off base, would I let him take an hour or more of my time arguing something that is going absolutely no where? Even though he warned you above that if you decide to step in this will only lead to your aggravation? He warned you that, even though you may dream of this becoming some sort of medical conversation, my intention is just to annoy you, yet you are still here. You don't take hints well. I can talk forever, and if spending time with someone arguing some random point is good for you, then I'm ok with it.

I'm no doctor, or in any sort of medical field. That should answer your first line above. Not sure whey that is relevant, or how that could possiblt prove you are smarter than me, but what ever you want. It doesn't prove anything. You are easy pray because pride is keeping you from getting out of this conversation. But I did warn you..

"Perhaps you think to much of yourself. You take a moot point, and want to argue it because, hey, here's your chance to shine. You need to prove yourself? Is your career un-fulfilling? Not getting promoted or advancement? But you know what makes me leagues smarter than you right now? Its that if I saw a guy who posted something that made me cringe because I thought it was so far off base, would I let him take an hour or more of my time arguing something that is going absolutely no where? Even though he warned you above that if you decide to step in this will only lead to your aggravation? He warned you that, even though you may dream of this becoming some sort of medical conversation, my intention is just to annoy you, yet you are still here."

Are you blind to the hypocrisy of your arguments? Every single sentence above could apply to you as well. You are a joke. At least I had a point! You are on here just to aggravate people (which you admit) and you say that I'm wasting my time? I can get my work done in between posts so I'm doing fine at work.

I never said I was smarter than you so you can drop the working class hero routine. Good god you find insults everywhere don't you? The point about me finding out if you know your stuff or not is critical only as it pertains to this topic. I don't care what you do for a living or what kind of education you have, but if you're going to make a point about something that I clearly am more informed about, your damn sure I'm gonna use that against you - and I should - because you would do the same. So spare me the tired paranoid ranting about how I have an ego. Yours is the same. Except I don't go personal and negative at the first sign that my ignorance has been exposed. THAT speaks volumes about your character.

Being a jerk to people on the internet just to control a conversation without regard to whether or not you are correct - classy. Then saying that I don't have a life - priceless.

I had a good time yesterday, thanks for playing... LMAO

But if you don't work for Monsanto, then who are you to represent it??? It sounds to me you focused on researching the pros, while completely skipping the cons. And that certainly makes me question your knowledge of the subject.

I do respect people who are knowledgeable on a subject, but when they feel they should attempt and insult someone for having an opinion contrary to theirs, that shows a lack of knowledge in the subject. As I said above, I will win this, and just about any argument. You know nothing of me, nor do I need to prove my credentials. But since you feel you do know who i am, by saying I am an uneducated fool, then I am providing you a chance to backup your claim. I have provided proof to support my claim, which you are very strongly avoiding discussing in any way. Tells me a lot... Your argument is weak.

(Helpful hint.. On the bottom right of this very post is the word REPLY. Use it)

Katiechance, I'm going to bet you didn't read Jeffery Smith's book, Genetic Roulette, The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods.

And since there have never been any good long term safety studies done on GM foods or Roundup chemicals, none of you on this thread really no whether or not this is an infection or some environmental exposure, and that's just how Dow and Monsanto likes it. Keep the public in the dark. Make it hard to prove any liability...

@mimi,

the same goes for Mexico and Central America: I would prefer death than to be a girl or a woman in those catholic-Taliban countries.