Increase In Citizenship Privileges – A Carrot We Have To Bite

By Low Wei Xiang

The following article was originally written by the writer at myhometown.sg .

Comparing the newspaper headlines of a few months ago and now, one can certainly see the stark differences.

A few months ago, a prevalent theme in The Straits Times was MM Lee’s calls for Singaporeans to put up with the increasing presence of foreigners, and his emphasis that Singapore would be nothing without them.

Now, in what seems to be a sudden turnaround, reports on the government putting Singaporeans first by enhancing their privileges in issues like housing, healthcare and education are coming fast and furious.

Adding on to the flurry are goals to make Singapore a more productive nation which depends less on the mass imports of foreign labour.

If a Singapore citizen was to read the news, what would he make out of it?

It would be tempting for us to feel complacent and pompous, now that the government’s focus has turned to us. “The citizens always come first,” the government now says, an avowal that sounds pleasing and almost refreshing to the ears, considering the government’s past remarks that “Singaporeans should learn to mix with the foreigners and fight hard so we would not lose out to them”.

It’s like after giving attention to the newly-adopted baby, the parents remember their first-born biological child and his pressing needs.

But to feel loved again – that would be the first step in the major mistake of becoming spoilt citizens.

While it is encouraging to be reminded that we are not forgotten, do not forget the responsibilities of a first-born child.

As the oldest, he is ultimately the caregiver of the entire family.

The enhancement of citizenship privileges over that of foreigners might give us a boost in terms of “status”, but to ride on this wave of newfound glory and start basking in the sun would mean we have forgotten about our responsibilities and the government’s calls.

The calls for productivity, specifically.

With the government’s declaration to increase productivity by relying less on cheap foreign imports, and with numerous proposals that increase the cost of living for foreigners, what will happen (which is also the government’s intention) is that the proportion of foreigners in Singapore will remain stable, instead of increasing the way it has in previous years.

What this also means is that the people who will have to rise up to the government’s calls for increased work productivity are us, the citizens.

Foreigners go where the wind blows, but citizens are here to stay. The government has realized it cannot rely forever on foreigners to sustain continued growth for a country that is almost bursting at its seams.

The onus is thus upon us, the citizens, to work more productively and industriously to prove that the government’s decision to have faith in its citizens will not go wrong.

Thus, while it is tempting to give ourselves a pat of self-congratulation and assurance that the government has not forgotten about us, sitting back too far would only cause us to fall backwards.

MM Lee said, “Instead of many job opportunities and rising asset values, including prices for resale HDB flats, the reverse will happen…fewer jobs, lower salaries, lower asset prices…pay will fall and so will the number of jobs and promotion. When this happens, many of our own talents will leave for greener pastures, which will exacerbate the downward spiral and eventually lead to Singapore’s decline”.

The enhancement of citizenship rights is timely, with murmurs of a General Election up ahead, but one should also consider if it is timely because with less reliance on foreigners, the government actually has to depend more on us to spur the country on forward?

This increase of citizenship privileges might merely be a carrot dangling in front to encourage us to move forward. However, it is a carrot we have to bite to show that the government’s faith in its citizens to rise to the challenge of increasing work productivity for the economy has not gone misplaced.

Don’t forget about us, says university students

By Low Wei Xiang

Singaporeans might have plenty to cheer with the government’s announcement of price hikes and changes in the primary school balloting system to enhance the privileges of citizens, but they could be losing sight of the big picture.

Last week, the government announced that PRs and foreigners will pay higher fees to study in government primary and secondary schools. Singapore citizens also get twice the number of chances when balloting for places in popular primary schools.  These changes are in a bid to draw a clearer distinction between citizens and non-citizens.

However the government might have lost focus on the more important issues.

Changes across primary and secondary school levels are likely to be well-received by citizens, but there would have been little difference with or without these changes.

Citizens and foreigners alike would still get their respective places in government primary and secondary schools.  Perhaps the only difference would be that citizens now have an edge in popular primary schools – but an education in a primary school that is more or less popular would not result in substantial differences.

In addition, the effects of these changes are minimal, since only 4% of the primary and secondary school students are foreigners.

In contrast, foreigners account for 8% of polytechnic and ITE students and 20% of university students.1

While citizens should be heartened by the changes, we should bear in mind the bigger picture. If the government wants to enhance the privileges of citizens, there are bigger, more impactful issues in education of the higher levels to address.

Issue 1: School Fees Between Citizens and Non-Citizens in Tertiary Institutes

School fees for foreign students in Singapore’s government tertiary institutes are comparatively low since they receive the same amount of government subsidies extended to citizens and PRs, but how fair is this measure?

Scenario: If a student was newly enrolled into the following courses for Academic Year 09/10, the tuition fees payable annually for the 2nd year onwards would be as bolded (fees for the 1st year are lower for some schools) –

My Dad is Right: Women are Cats

By Low Wei Xiang

When I first heard that journalist Joanne Soh made a bold proclamation to the whole nation with her article titled “My mum is right: Men are pigs” in The New Paper on 4 Dec 09, my first reaction was to blush.

That’s right – I positively turned a shade of beetroot.  After all, it is not every day you receive a generous compliment from someone of the fairer sex.  Pigs – we have been called pigs!  Creatures of high intelligence, curiosity, insight, affection, geniality and loyalty!  Thinking about it is enough to bring out the Asian modesty in me – I am afraid I cannot measure up.  Nevertheless, it is time to bring out the champagne and pop the party streamers!

It is only thereafter I heard again that Joanne Soh meant “pigs” in the derogatory sense – in specific reference to Tiger Woods and his infidelities with other women.  My excitement then subsided and paved way into deep confusion.  This is especially so after several others also jumped in and defended Joanne Soh, saying that men, like pigs, are biologically engineered to breed, not to stick to one lifelong partner.

I am confused because pigs are generally solitary – and rarely have sex – except during mating seasons.  They are known to be monogamous too, sticking to one partner their whole lives.

How would these traits be supposedly relevant to Tiger Woods, and men in general, in her arguments?

Why did she not consider other animals then?  How about “all men are whales” – a blowhole would’ve been pretty cool.  Or “all men are Poogles” (a hybrid dog from a Beagle and Poodle) since it highlights how men would stray from who they are supposed to have sex with? 

Or if she really wanted to drive at our lack of commitment, why did she not compare us with hamsters?  I remember I was younger, I had one male and one female hamster, which was a pretty sweet pairing until the duo went on – much to the amazement of the young child I was – to mate all day and night, producing litter after litter.  We once peaked at over 30 hamsters in a 3-storeyed cage, so you can imagine the din at night when the males start pouncing on every female they can get.  The way they go at it fervently, it would have been, in Ricky Martin’s words, “shaking your bon bons”.

It is therefore regrettable that I did not manage to read Joanne Soh’s article in its entirety because I would love to have the haze around me cleared up.  What I did read though was Melvin Singh’s follow-up article on 6 Dec 09 defending his colleague.  However I do not understand his points very well, so I shall refrain from commenting and being further labeled as a “stupid pig”, especially since he is a man, and men should stand by men in times like these.

This reminds me of an occasion sometime ago.  Just like Joanne Soh, my father “once offered sage advice” too of the opposite gender.  He told me, “women are cats”, and that – in remarkable resemblance to what Joanne’s mother told her – “we must always be aware of (their) activities, regardless of how devoted and loving they are.”1

At this point, I am suddenly struck that by labeling us as “pigs”, Joanne Soh might be in-swine-nuating that we are the source of the swine flu that is currently plaguing the world!  Swine flu is caused by men!  Oh, the shock – I cannot even begin to tell you how rudely mortified I am right now.  I would like to immediately clear any misconceptions should the AVA begin a culling of men.  The swine flu virus, or H1N1, is a combination of genes from pigs, birds and humans, and cannot be spread just by being around us – I mean – pigs.

I would thus like to put forward that perhaps – just perhaps – these women with swine flu have been munching on too many feathery friends, because like my father said, “women are cats”.

Because I have decided that I am unable to handle an angry tsunami of mails directed at me, I will draw upon Joanne Soh’s lesson and learn to quantify my statement.

“SOME women are cats.”

There, I feel safer.  A quantifer is one of the most important lessons for a writer, because it is like a get-out-of-jail-free card – it allows us to make generalized statements, but at the same time will not offend an entire population because the self-delusional ones find comfort in the fact that they belong to the antithesis.

I kid, I kid.  I do solemnly believe that it is important to quantify one’s statements.

And for what reasons would a pig of a man call a woman, well, a cat?

Let us talk about dogs first (this is starting to feel like a zoo, what with dogs, cats, birds, pigs and a Tiger loose in the Woods).  Many of us prefer dogs for companions as they are loyal and trustworthy.  Cats, on the other hand, have been portrayed to be cunning and sly – they only appear when they need you.

In fact, British researchers have found out that cats have a special cry embedded into their purr with frequencies similar to a human infant’s, and this triggers urgency in the owners to attend to their needs.  The research also found out that “cats will use whatever is most effective”, and this “solicitation purring” is utilized when they want food or their owner’s attention.2

Does this not remind SOME of you of the lady in your office who knows how to get what she wants?  She who squeezes into tight tops and skirts that show more skin than material, with a high-frequency whine that makes every man drop whatever is on their hands and rush to be at her beck and call?

Do not even get me started on SOME women getting involved in cat fights, whether literal (think women soccer players, claws bared and pulling each other’s hair) or figuratively.

But really, let us focus on the issue with Tiger Woods.

When we talk about Tiger Woods getting involved with other women, let us not forget to turn the tables – do these “outside” women not know that Tiger Woods is married with kids?  What are their motives for committing the “transgression”?  If Tiger Woods was just an ordinary Joe, would the temptation be as high?

It is not surprising that when an “outside” woman gets involved with a celebrity, it is often with the prize at the end in mind.  The superstar prestige.  The bragging rights.  The instant fame when the media gets wind of it.  The publicity for herself and her career.  The money paid by the celebrity himself to shut up.  The money paid by gossip magazines to spill all.  All the better if a baby should pop out – the last I heard, more money can be squeezed out too.

David Beckham’s scandalous affair sometime back definitely titillated.  As The Sunday Times reported on 6 Dec in a sports edition, “without wife Victoria near him after his move to Real Madrid in 2003, (he) reportedly found comfort in his personal assistant Rebecca Loos”.  She was reportedly paid US$600,000 for letting British tabloid News of the World in with “full, steamy details of the affair”, catapulting her to instant fame.

Loos never fails in reminding the world of her existence, from harping on the event that happened years ago, to giving updates on the baby she was expecting with her real boyfriend.  As if she has not milked enough from her money cow, she is recently reported to be in talks with publishing houses about releasing her tell-all book for, well, the only event that people know her for.

A friend told the Daily Star, “She wants to get the best deal possible with a publishing house before agreeing to release the book.  We’re talking millions – after all, he is the biggest sportsman in the world and people will want to read about his behaviour while they worked together.”3

Another example raised by The Sunday Times report is that of tennis legend Boris Becker’s quickie affair with Russian model Angela Ermakova.  Despite the “briefest of (sexual) affairs, lasting barely a few minutes”, Becker soon received a fax from Ermakova saying: “The result of our meeting is now in the eight month.”

The end result?  She receives a home in the United States and London each and a monthly maintenance of about 20,000 pounds.

Now anyone would wonder – why did Ermakova not head straight to inform Becker upon learning about her pregnancy, choosing to wait until her penultimate month of conception?  We can only speculate that she did not want to be coerced into abortion – because look at all the “baby bonus” that she got!  That is more than what any government can offer!

If we look at the above two examples (the list is non-exhaustive), can we not say that some women indeed are cats?  They are smart, deceptive and cunning, making full use of the arsenal of what they have to achieve what they want from the men – sex, money and fame.

While it is easy to launch into a tireless tirade blaming Tiger Woods, the blame should be apportioned fairly.  When both parties know that a male celebrity is married, who should be getting the lion’s share of the blame?  The man who succumbs to the chip in his genetic configuration for sex, or the woman who goes into it knowingly for sex, fame, and money?  The man who has everything to lose, or the woman who has everything to gain?

Joanne Soh might feel that all men are pigs, but has failed in quantifying and substantiating her comments with valid reasons.  But since we are on this topic, let it also be known then that women are cats too – or at least, SOME of them are.  Perhaps the men, in these cases, are the real “stupid pigs”, grunting and going along with it, right into the traps laid out invitingly by these women.  Meow.

 

References:

1 This is purely fiction – my father has never used “women” and “cats” in the same breath.  It is more of a parody to Joanne Soh’s article.

2 Source: ABC

3 Source: Times of India

 

About the Author:

Low Wei Xiang, a self-dubbed writer with journalistic aspirations, has found himself graduated from Hwachong Institution, released from the army, and is currently thrown back onto the streets.  He is also a self-confessed owl and sleeping is his secret passion, although it clashes with his other interests.  Aged 20, he writes short stories on top of serious stuff, and will be entering NTU’s Wee Kim Wee School of Communications and Information in 2010.

PSC Scholars Selection Process: What Can Be Improved?

By Low Wei Xiang

An excerpt of the speech given by the Public Service Commission (PSC) chairman, Eddie Teo, in The Straits Times on 5 Nov 09 has brought to limelight the issue of the PSC scholars selection process again.

This time, he highlighted that “most of the current generation of young scholars are responsible and dedicated, but a few have a poor attitude and misplaced expectations”. This is a cause of concern.

Firstly, many of these “young scholars” will go on to assume top governmental positions. Secondly – and this will probably strike a stronger chord with people – taxpayers’ money is used to fund their scholarships costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Thus, it is important that the money goes to the right people who can best serve the country in future, and what improvisations can be made to ensure that this group of people will be selected.

As stated on the PSC website, “the PSC is responsible for the appointment, promotion, transfer, dismissal and exercise of disciplinary control over public officers,” including “selecting and managing PSC scholars…to attract and groom talent for the Singapore Civil Service.”

The PSC scholars selection process is perhaps not well understood by many, but we have to understand what goes on behind the scenes before we can even begin critiquing it. It is no doubt a highly rigorous and almost-flawless process designed to frazzle candidates such that only those who do not break will prove themselves to be capable and deserving.

The process is split into a few stages:

1^st stage: Psychometric Test

The psychometric test examines a candidate’s cognitive ability (in English, Mathematics, logical and visual reasoning) and personality profile, with multiple questions to be completed within a very tight time limit.

2^nd stage: Psychological Interview

Candidates are assessed and profiled by a psychologist for 2 to 3 hours. The interview is mostly reflective and introspective in nature, requiring them to evaluate their personal traits, relationships, situations and experiences. The psychologist’s report is then submitted to the interview committee.

3^rd stage: Panel Interview

Facing as many as 10 interviewers from all walks of life, candidates are assessed on practically anything and everything – current and governmental affairs, controversial and ethical issues, policy making, personal ambitions, or even grilled on glaring inadequacies in their portfolios. Some questions no doubt deliberately put candidates on the spot so that their reactions can be gauged; others intend to fill in the missing jigsaw pieces of a candidate which the previous stages have failed in piecing.

These, coupled with academic results, school transcripts, Co-Curricular Activity (CCA) and Community Involvement Project (CIP) reports, paint an almost complete picture of every candidate and leave little room for doubt when it comes to selecting the scholars.

The PSC should be lauded for its extremely thorough and intensive selection process, sparing no expenses in ensuring that nation’s best, brightest, and most suitable will be chosen for government service. Only Singaporean citizens or Permanent Residents who will take up citizenship before leaving for studies are eligible for application.

One question should be asked – despite the extensive selection process, why, at the end of it all, do some scholars turn up “flawed”, as brought up by Mr. Teo? What went wrong and what can be improved?

In addition, as provider of one of the most prestigious government scholarships, PSC should have a responsibility and be accountable in ensuring that the playing fields are leveled for candidates as much as possible, such that – in line with our value of meritocracy – no candidate is denied a scholarship because of disadvantages he faces. Has PSC done so?

A closer probe into the system, however, and cracks will surface:

Common gripe: Financial inequalities and debunking it

A perennial issue about the selection of PSC scholars is that of financial inequalities. It is known that candidates from more affluent backgrounds tend to do better academically or have stronger portfolios because of a host of reasons including being able to afford private tuition or having top-level connections for direct internship opportunities to boost their portfolios.

A common gripe is that it is unfair to those less well off with the same potential to shine if given the chance, but whose opportunity of going to a prestigious top overseas university is denied by someone who can afford it on their own. In addition, wealthy scholars will probably connect less with the ground issues that the man on the street faces when they assume top governmental positions in future.

In an attempt to prove that the not so well off are given the same opportunities as those who are, PSC has disclosed that for the 2008 batch of PSC scholars, 47% live in HDB flats and 53% live in private housing, showing a near-even divide between the rich and the not so rich.

However, one has to consider that nearly 80% of Singaporeans live in HDB flats, thus if anything, the statistic only shows that PSC scholarships still go to affluent candidates in a much larger proportion.

As PSC secretary Ms Goh Soon Poh puts it, “we should not confuse meritocracy, where each succeeds based on his abilities, with affirmative action which seeks to equalise outcomes.” She assured that “there is no quota (in the number of scholarships given), so when two candidates are equally deserving, we never have to discriminate…we give the award to both.”

In Mr. Teo’s speech, he also said that “(PSC) pay(s) special attention to those from a humble background to draw out those who have great potential but may not yet have the polish and finesse of their more socio-economically advantaged peers.”

Let us also not forget that there are bursaries, subsidies and financial assistance schemes to aid needy students, and no student is denied a place in local universities just because he cannot afford it. While it may be argued that this is nothing compared to a top overseas university, our local universities are nevertheless still credible and internationally recognized.

It is simply a matter of accepting this hard fact of life – it is near impossible to level out the playing field based on affluence, because like most things in life, those with the money will be advantaged. Those who are not so well off should accept the fact that they have to work doubly hard to prove themselves instead of waiting for the opportunities to come to them.

That said and placed aside, there are other more concrete issues that PSC has to consider to cover up the cracks in its system:

Inequalities in opportunities by the school

Top schools like Raffles and Hwachong are like mega factories when it comes to producing PSC scholars, and like all big corporations, they enjoy certain economies of scale. These top schools will fight hard to present opportunities to their students for them to have outstanding portfolios and records. They will also find it easier to do so, being better equipped with the expertise and support – for example, top science and research agencies will willingly collaborate with these schools and their bright minds.

Can we say that the same opportunities have been extended to other schools? Would PSC be punishing a candidate who got into a lower-notched school by virtue of his lower examination scores in his early years, but who has since bloomed over the few years and now possesses the aptitude and potential that rival those from top schools?

PSC should take into consideration that whether a candidate, given the opportunities presented by the limits and constraints of his school, make him a more deserving candidate (especially if he goes to create and find his own opportunities), compared to someone who simply has to sit back and make a few selections out of the plethora of choices laid in front of him like a buffet spread by his school.

Arrogance of scholars from top schools

Mr. Teo also mentioned that some scholars are adamant on receiving the more prestigious postings, and will “get upset if posted elsewhere”. Is this any wonder, considering that the bulk of the PSC scholars comes from top schools?

In the early impressionable years in my school, we were repeatedly told that we are the crème de la crème and amoungst the top 3% of the nation. It instilled a sense of arrogance in me – I believed that I was indeed above and better than the others in Singapore. Even in the later years, as I shook free of this mentality, we were still constantly reminded that we will go on to become leaders in our respective fields.

Thus, it is no surprise if several scholars emerge from school with this haughty superiority and believe that they do deserve the best – and now that they have received one of the best government scholarships, they deserve the best postings and appointments too.

I have to be quick to justify though that it is nevertheless important for students in top schools to be given the confidence and self-belief that they can indeed soar high if they make the effort. My school grounds us firmly in traditional values, of which modesty is one of them. It is only a few that slip through the cracks and allow their confidence to escalate into arrogance.

Differences in confidence levels instilled by the school

Having said the above, the attention now swivels to students from lower-notched schools. One wonders if the same confidence is instilled into the top students of these schools. While the numbers are inevitably smaller, there is still a small bunch with aptitude and potential that can rival those from top schools.

Are the top students from these schools intimidated from fighting for a piece of the PSC cake, or have the schools done enough to instill in them the confidence that they too have done well and can go far? Similarly, has PSC done enough to promote its scholarships to them, or have they been overlooked and it only focuses its attention on handing promotional packages to top schools?

Instead of looking up all the time, it is perhaps time for PSC to also look down for students who never thought they could, but who actually can.

Flaws in CIP system

It is important for leaders of the country to possess community spirit and to understand that the community is larger than the individual. However, Mr. Teo mentioned in his speech that some scholars tend “to place their personal interest above organizational interest”. If the PSC scholar selection process was so rigorous, why has it seemingly failed to sieve out the few who value one’s selfish wants above the overall organization’s needs?

The problem is this – the CIP system in schools is one of the few, if not the only, ways to gauge a student’s community spirit, however its model is not the most polished. Anyone can impassively engage in CIP activities just to clock the hours and beef up their CIP records without actually being tangibly involved in the entire process.

PSC also has to know that they are dealing with top, ambitious students – if PSC’s selection process can almost paint a picture of candidates, the candidates can also research into the type of questions that will be possibly asked during the interviews. And if these academic high-achievers have been giving model answers all their lives, it will not be difficult to reproduce a textbook answer to questions about serving the community that serves to impress, but which otherwise is not a reflection of their personal convictions.

If the students can keep up and weasel their way around to beat the system, it is time for PSC to be smarter and faster than that.

Misleading advertising by PSC

Advertisements by the PSC often treat its scholarships more like products to be pushed into the hands of the consumers. While creating awareness of its scholarships is in itself not a bad thing, it will become a problem if these “consumers” are lured because of the glitz, glamour and glitter, rather than because they are interested in the obligations and responsibilities that are attached to the scholarships.

How then should PSC promote its scholarships?

Perhaps Vaughn Tan sums it up best in an entry made in SingaporeAngle¹. He stated that “given that the main objective of public service scholarships is to systematically maximise social utility by concentrating resources on those best suited to serve, only one supposition needs to be made for the purposes of this brief survey.

It is this: the scholars who will best fulfil the PSC’s objective (and society’s) are likely to be those who commit to a PSC scholarship in full knowledge of these requirements and objectives.

By this I mean those students who commit to a scholarship in full knowledge that it is above all else a public service scholarship in every sense of the word, one that requires a passionate commitment to public service qualitatively distinct in scope of concrete and moral responsibilit(ies) from private engagements and remunerative employment.”

He elaborated, and I paraphrase, that glitzy marketing by the PSC of its scholarships often gives one the impression of good job security and benefits. However, what it often does not highlight is that attached as well is a heavy responsibility to the public.

PSC should instead brand its scholarships as a hard choice that will do good, instead of a good choice that is not hard to make – instead of branding purely in terms of benefits to the individual, the larger sense of duty and accountability to the nation should be emphasized. Only then might PSC draw the intended crowd to its scholarships.

In fact, this has been adopted by some foreign armies which see a consistent high turnover rate, because glorious advertisements stirring up heated emotions of patriotism and heroism turn out grossly incongruent with the actual daily tasks that the recruited soldiers have to undertake.

Conclusion

It will be near impossible for a foolproof system to be devised such that every scholar is the spitting image of what the selection panel in PSC has in mind. PSC has already done well with its rigorous screening process, but if it would take the above into consideration, perhaps the few that inevitably slip through its cracks will decrease in number. And of course, taxpayers’ money would not go to waste.

¹The entry can be found at http://singaporeangle.blogspot.com/2005/07/sze-meng-blogs-more-on-scholarships.html

About the Author:

Low Wei Xiang, a self-dubbed writer with journalistic aspirations, has found himself graduated from Hwachong Institution, released from the army, and is currently thrown back onto the streets.  He is also a self-confessed owl and sleeping is his secret passion, although it clashes with his other interests.  Aged 20, he writes short stories on top of serious stuff, and will be entering NTU’s Wee Kim Wee School of Communications and Information in 2010.

Why You Do Not Need the H1N1 Flu Vaccine

By Low Wei Xiang, Social Correspondent

It has been reported that the government will start selling the H1N1 vaccine – one million doses of it for our population of nearly five million – likely eliciting a rush to hospitals and clinics for those eager to be amoung the first to lay their hands on it. Should you be one of them?

Instead of blindly joining in like how Singaporeans queued for hours to get their hands on the Hello Kitty plush toys offered by McDonalds sometime back, it would be useful to have an understanding – even if it is a layman’s one – of the virus, vaccine and what you could be in for.

The H1N1 flu is not new to us – a variant of H1N1 killed millions worldwide during the Spanish flu epidemic from 1918 to 1919. This current one afflicting the world is a new variant, but really, perhaps it is time the general public got a sense of perspective instead of treating the H1N1 flu with uptight reverence.

H1N1 is perhaps similar to known seasonal influenza strains in more ways than some imagine.

The key differences are that H1N1 seems to affect a younger demographic, especially those pregnant or with pre-existing medical conditions, and that it is also seeing high activity at a period where seasonal strains are known to be more dormant.

Other than that, symptoms of H1N1 and seasonal strains remain largely similar (vomiting and diarrhea may occur additionally for H1N1). More importantly, the death rates of both are comparable, with estimates agreeing on a mortality rate of substantially below 1%. On 11 Jun 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) raised the H1N1 alert level to that of a pandemic, but it is important to understand that this is a reflection of the geographical prevalence of the virus rather than its lethality, which remains way below that of SARS (about 15%) and the bird flu or H5N1 (about 75%).

Perhaps the reason why alarm bells were sounded for H1N1, creating worldwide media ruckus, is because the strain is a mix which the world has not seen before and has no defense against.

But as long as we understand that the flu is highly contagious but is otherwise not virulent or deadly to most, with a mortality rate similar to that of the seasonal flu, there is no need for unnecessary panic or alarm.

The only thing we should be afraid of right now is that the current strain would further mutate into a deadlier one.

 

What is a virus?

The H1N1 flu is caused by viruses. Viruses are parasites – they do not metabolize (break down food for energy) and thus have to inhabit in host cells, “leeching” off their hosts to survive and replicate themselves. Without host cells, they are nothing.

According to an article by Associate Professor Paul Ananth Tambyah from Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine in NUS, by Darwin’s theory of evolution, virus strains that are able to survive longer (which also means keeping their hosts alive) will find themselves replicating and infecting new hosts, while strains that kill their hosts will perish and gradually fade out themselves.

The genital herpes (watery blisters or ulcers) virus, for example, is the model virus – there is no cure and it remains in the human body for life, causing “little” more than recurring pain or itch for its host, but whose life is otherwise not endangered. The human host is thus able to live an average lifespan, and similarly, the herpes virus is kept alive too.

Thus it is safe to assume that as long as the H1N1 flu virus does not mutate into a new strain which is uncompassionate to the host, it should otherwise be relatively harmless and we should expect a continued low death rate, because there is no incentive for a virus which has been doing well for its survival to suddenly turn on its back and kill the hand that feeds (and also “committing suicide” in the process).

In addition, the WHO estimates that up to a third of the world population would be hit by H1N1. If this is the case, this “fortunate” group of people would likely have developed some form of immunity against it, and are likely spared from this particular H1N1 strain.

The danger is this – what if the H1N1 flu virus, by interacting with another influenza strain, mutates to form a deadlier version compared to its predecessor which people have no immunity against?

 

What are vaccines and how do they work?

When viruses (like H1N1) invade our body, our immune system will cause the creation of antibodies (substances to fight the viruses). However, it might be too late by the time antibodies are produced. In this case, vaccines aid us – by using deactivated harmless viruses to stimulate an antibody reaction from our body’s defense mechanism, our body would be armed and prepared should the actual virus attack.

However, vaccines are specific workers and would protect us from viruses that they can actually recognize (i.e. that of the same strain). In other words, should the H1N1 flu virus mutate into a new strain, existing vaccines would probably be rendered ineffective, and many Singaporeans would have queued up for nothing.

 

What does this mean?

So much talk has been given to the dangers of a new strain springing up – has it happened yet?

We are currently entering the peak season of seasonal influenza – traditionally, most flu outbreaks occur between November to April. Judging by the speed at which flu viruses replicate themselves, it would not be foolhardy to say that the new H1N1 virus might interact with an existing seasonal flu virus and emerge as a newer, hardier, not-so-seasonal strain which the world has not seen before.

Whether this newest strain would be deadly or not remains another question – the pertinent issue is that the vaccines that the world spent the past few months in researching and producing could potentially go to waste. The one million machine guns that Singapore spent money in procuring for the defense of the country’s health might turn out to be only able to shoot blanks.

One might wonder that if flu viruses are constantly mutating and coming up with new versions of themselves every year, it would then seem that vaccines are not useful in even protecting us against the seasonal flu, let alone H1N1. Not so – according to Shannon Brownlee, a senior research fellow at the New America Foundation, every year the WHO and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention “collect data from 94 nations on the flu viruses that circulated the previous year, and then make an educated guess about which viruses are likely to circulate in the coming fall. Based on that information, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issues orders to manufacturers in February for a vaccine that includes the three most likely strains.”

Thus vaccines are actually products of human calculations, presumptions and projections – all of which have room for human errors, one might add. This is why vaccines were never a surefire way of protecting us against flu viruses – we can only hope that the projections the scientists have made turn out accurate.

However, the H1N1 virus strain is new and we might not have the privilege to archives of information or knowledge collected about it to be able to predict with certainty future paths that the virus might take. What scientists probably relied on was data collected over the past few months that the virus has surfaced, but basing predictions on calculations done over such a short period of time would actually provide space for more human errors in the vaccine production.

And consider this – a recent preliminary study conducted in Mumbai by pathologists who studied the tissue samples of those suspected to have died from H1N1 found that “two-thirds of those suspected to have died of swine flu did not have the virus, despite showing all clinical symptoms”. In other words, while they appeared to have been afflicted by H1N1, it seems that the virus in question is not a genetic match to the H1N1 strain we know of. In fact, a main finding of the study is that the “new” virus causes “a more potent viral infection” than the existing H1N1 virus – a mutation, anyone?

Top research agencies and companies spent a few months rushing to produce a vaccine for the world, only to find out that they could potentially have been beaten to the finish line by the faster virus. Can we say for sure that we have kept up with the mutation of the H1N1 strain and produced a vaccine that will curb the spread of the latest strain for this upcoming flu season?

Chances are that the H1N1 vaccines are ineffective – is it still urgent that people should rush to grab hold of the vaccine before it runs out of stock, especially if its side effects are still not established? You decide – after all, you do not want it to be like the Hello Kitty toys which we used to hanker after, but which have since been stashed away collecting dust.

 

Related articles:

>> Cost price of H1N1 vaccine revealed

>> H1N1 flu vaccination begins

 

EDITORS’ NOTE:

If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account (temasekreview@gmail.com). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you!

Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview

 

About the Author:

Low Wei Xiang is a proud graduate of Hwachong Institution and a self-dubbed writer with journalistic aspirations.  Aged 20, he has been writing short stories and social commentaries for the past 3 years and will be entering NTU’s Wee Kim Wee School of Communications and Information in 2010.