Ebola in America

epepke said:
Here's what I saw:

[qimg]https://scontent-b-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10410383_10152437594766179_5598420032484794848_n.jpg?oh=808d819e292edcf9bef78bc754429c31&oe=54AAAE67[/qimg]

Funny, I thought a Time Lord would be immune, and he could just regenerate.

But seriously, that's a good point. rwguinn makes a good point by saying that many of the people criticizing the nurse are the same ones who masturbate with the Constitution, and that's true. But many of those phonily standing up for the rights of the nurse are masturbating to medical authority. Being careful and getting checked up regularly is quite sufficient for a disease like Ebola, that is, if they do it. However, anybody who hasn't figured out that medical "professionals," as a regular part of their culture, consistently flaunt their disregard of medical advice seriously needs a Haldol drip, stat. Most ordinary people can be trusted to do the right thing and take precautions, but not doctors and nurses, not ever. This kind of sucks, but it's embedded in the culture.
Click to expand...

The US media's handling of this is a complete and total disgrace.
 
dudalb said:
I am opposed to the quarantine policy being discussed,but ,frankly,comparing the flu to Ebola is pretty damn stupid. Ebola is much more dangerous.
Click to expand...

WHO estimates annual deaths from influenza at 250,000 to 500,000. Which is more dangerous?
 
PhantomWolf said:
You are aware that the only way to catch this disease is to come in contact with the Blood, Faeces, or Vomit of an infected and obviously sick victim, and then have that contact enter you via your eye, nose, mouth, or a break in your skin? At the point they are really sick, way too sick to bowl, their salvia is also infectious. Casual contact with a non-symptomatic, and by that I mean someone who is obviously sick, not tired or with a mild fever, will not pass it on. Quarantining people who aren't showing serious shows of the illness achieves nothing other then being placebo to the public's ignorance.
Click to expand...
Also semen, flesh and possibly urine.

rwguinn said:
Show me the science behind the quarantine measures people seem to find "necessary"..
Click to expand...
There are a couple of scientists supporting it, just like there are a couple of scientists who deny AGW.
Otherwise the CDC, WHO, MSF et cetera say it's pointless, unnecessary and a bad idea.

DavidJames said:
How disappointing it must be to the hysterical that the only people who've contracted Ebola here are those who provided direct care to a patient with severe symptoms. Science trumps Internet hysteria again.
Click to expand...
I expect some reduction in the hysterical utterances next week.

PhantomWolf said:
Trouble is that it's not just Internet hysteria, we have politicians engaging in this sort of anti-science hysteria as well, publicising it widely and encouraging those that really don't know better to panic as well.
Click to expand...

Dr. Keith said:
No, I'm pretty sure we're all dead by Wednesday next.

Maybe if you used bayesian analysis . . .
Click to expand...
 
crescent said:
An update:
Click to expand...
Yep a degree of sanity prevails, she continues daily monitoring for Ebola and must coordinate travel with state officials, but her movement should not be restricted because "she's not infectious".
Of course LaVerdiere isn't facing re-election...
 
Monketey Ghost said:
, the government has to have authority in these matters, ]
Click to expand...

And it does.

But like in every other area of American life, there are limits on that authority, and "the government" is not synonymous with the executive branch of government.
 
Steve said:
WHO estimates annual deaths from influenza at 250,000 to 500,000. Which is more dangerous?
Click to expand...

I GET the flu every year, regardless of whether I get the flu shot, and I'm still here. Hell, I was once hospitalized with a severe case of West Nile, if you want to talk exotic viruses. So am I panic-stricken over Ebola? Hell no. I'm statistically a greater threat to my own life than the Ebola virus is, if one wants to put things into perspective.
 
catsmate1 said:
Also semen, flesh and possibly urine.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, I wrote the post based on the idea that those in fear of Ebola weren't planning on having sex with, getting peed on by, or eating those they were demanding to have quarantined.
 
dudalb said:
I am opposed to the quarantine policy being discussed,but ,frankly,comparing the flu to Ebola is pretty damn stupid. Ebola is much more dangerous.
Click to expand...

As noted by others, Influenza is way more easily spread, and kills far more people every year than Ebola has in total since it was discovered in 1976.

So really, which is the more dangerous?

Also consider that the Spanish Flu Pandemic in 1918-19 killed an estimated 20-50 million people.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
Yes I know, I wrote the post based on the idea that those in fear of Ebola weren't planning on having sex with, getting peed on by, or eating those they were demanding to have quarantined.
Click to expand...
Mmm, I dunno now. It seems to be mostly Republicans pushing the quarantine after all...
:)
 
CDC Admits Ebola is A lot More Easier to Catch

Ebola is a lot easier to catch than health officials have admitted — and can be contracted by contact with a doorknob contaminated by a sneeze from an infected person an hour or more before, experts told The Post Tuesday.
“If you are sniffling and sneezing, you produce microorganisms that can get on stuff in a room. If people touch them, they could be” infected, said Dr. Meryl Nass, of the Institute for Public Accuracy in Washington, DC.
Nass pointed to a poster the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention quietly released on its Web site saying the deadly virus can be spread through “droplets.”
“Droplet spread happens when germs traveling inside droplets that are coughed or sneezed from a sick person enter the eyes, nose or mouth of another person,” the poster states.
Nass slammed the contradiction.
“The CDC said it doesn’t spread at all by air, then Friday they came out with this poster,” she said. “They admit that these particles or droplets may land on objects such as doorknobs and that Ebola can be transmitted that way.”
Dr. Rossi Hassad, a professor of epidemiology at Mercy College, said droplets could remain active for up to a day.
“A shorter duration for dry surfaces like a table or doorknob, and longer durations in a moist, damp environment,” Hassad said.
The CDC did not respond to a request for comment.
Click to expand...


nypost.com/2014/10/29/cdc-admits-droplets-from-a-sneeze-could-spread-ebola/
 
Last edited:
In light if the fact that thousands of Americans have been exposed in exactly those ways without a single case, "can survive" and "could spread" are media frenzy feeding exaggerations with no other value.
 
This is nothing new. When stored at very low temperatures around -70°C the virus can last indefinitely.

The possibility has been presented months or even years ago and i think I even saw it on CDC's site: Someone could get infected with Ebola and travel to another country outside of the hot zone where they cough on a table. A tourist then sits at that table and gets the ebola on their hands then rubs their eyes infecting themself. The tourist then flys home before showing any symptoms and not having visited any Ebola affected areas they pass right through the border screening.
 
Dan O. said:
This is nothing new. When stored at very low temperatures around -70°C the virus can last indefinitely.

The possibility has been presented months or even years ago and i think I even saw it on CDC's site: Someone could get infected with Ebola and travel to another country outside of the hot zone where they cough on a table. A tourist then sits at that table and gets the ebola on their hands then rubs their eyes infecting themself. The tourist then flys home before showing any symptoms and not having visited any Ebola affected areas they pass right through the border screening.
Click to expand...

We're all going to die!

Sadly, some of us will die. It seems rather inevitable. Fortunately, that number will likely be very, very, small, but to keep it as small as possible I wonder which course of action would be most effective.

1. Quarantine anyone who goes to Africa.
2. Send more people and supplies to Africa to get the disease in check there.

I mean, we could do both, I suppose, but if we had to do just one, I think number 2 sure looks like a good idea. And number 1 without number 2 just seems stupid.
 
Meadmaker said:
We're all going to die!

Sadly, some of us will die. It seems rather inevitable. Fortunately, that number will likely be very, very, small, but to keep it as small as possible I wonder which course of action would be most effective.

1. Quarantine anyone who goes to Africa.
2. Send more people and supplies to Africa to get the disease in check there.

I mean, we could do both, I suppose, but if we had to do just one, I think number 2 sure looks like a good idea. And number 1 without number 2 just seems stupid.
Click to expand...


For 1 to be effective you need a compleatly isolate Africa or at least the affected regions. But as soon as you try to do that you'll have people on the inside who see their best chance for survival is to get out. This egress pressure will further spread the disease. It's simply not possible to secure the borders.

Education and local treatment are the solution that will work. The disease is survivable for some if they get proper care. The spread can be stopped with local quarantines. This has to start at the household and village and neighborhood level.

When a case breaks out in a village there are three classes of people: those infected, those exposed and everybody else. The village needs to go into a self quarantine mode where the infected are isolated, the exposed cleaned and removed from further exposure and everybody form small clusters with limited personal interaction outside of their cluster for the quarantine period to limit exposure if new cases pop up. The village may need to provide services for the exposed group while they are in self quarantine. They may need temporary housing so they can distance themselves from the infected person. They may need to be provided food so they won't be potentially exposing others foraging for themselves.

But who is going to care for the sick? This role typically falls on the mothers in the village. But without training and little to no protection, they are usually the next victim. I have suggested before that the Ebola patients who are recovering at the Ebola treatment centers should be trained to provide the needed care. They will have the experience so they will know what their patients are going through. They will be standing testimony that it is possible to get through an Ebola infection. And they will have will have protection that the doctors and nurses that treated them did not have, they will have an internal immunity to help protect them from reinfection. When the village caregivers are released from the Ebola treatment centers, they should be better educated for providing care to the next patient in their village.
 
Instead of treating people returning from serving in the War On Viruses like criminals we should be celebrating them on return and treating them to a 21 day welcome home party with pizza and beer and little spotlight interviews that can be plugged into the nightly news as Hero Of The Day spots. Nobody is making these doctors and nurses go to Africa, they're doing out of love of humanity and are taking huge risks. The values we supposedly hold dear are not well expressed by government foot stomping NIMBYist reactionary lawmaking.

My faith in humanity waxes and wanes in response to this.
 
ApolloGnomon said:
Instead of treating people returning from serving in the War On Viruses like criminals we should be celebrating them on return and treating them to a 21 day welcome home party with pizza and beer and little spotlight interviews that can be plugged into the nightly news as Hero Of The Day spots. Nobody is making these doctors and nurses go to Africa, they're doing out of love of humanity and are taking huge risks. The values we supposedly hold dear are not well expressed by government foot stomping NIMBYist reactionary lawmaking.

My faith in humanity waxes and wanes in response to this.
Click to expand...

Overcautious quarantine is not "treating people like criminals".
Now that that straw is out of the way, let's face it: these people choose to go. It's not as if the affected areas in Africa are begging for American doctors and nurses because they don't have enough already, or African doctors and nurses are incompetent.

So why do they go? A) religious do gooders and B) people who know it'll receive more praise than its actual value when it's on their resume. We have plenty of places they can work here in this country... but that's not spicy enough.

When they come home and self quarantine you can throw the parties for them at your house for a couple of weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom