• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged So Ebola's back......

cosmicaug said:
It's a valid and realistic concern. I'm not sure why you think such a response would be restricted to Liberians, though.

ETA: If anything like this happens (and I hope you are wrong), the targets will be anyone with dark skin who looks African. Have no doubt about it.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be restricted to Liberians. My understanding was that the gentleman who died contacted the EV in Liberia.
I am sure those who lose their minds and resort to violence would not go about it rationally.
 
I Ratant said:
.
ftfy
We have to hope that bringing an ebola victim from there to here has been seen as a very stupid thing to do!
Click to expand...

I think it was the smart thing to do. We need to stop the epidemic; the best way to stop it is to remove ebola victims from the general population.

If we want to remove ebola victims from the general population, the best way to do that is to provide them with a potential source of treatment that can increase their chances of survival - a treatment center. Otherwise, they may refuse to go, and die in such a manner that others are infected.

For the treatment center to exist and be effective, it needs skilled people willing to work there.

To get skilled people willing to work there, we need for them to believe that they will have little risk of getting ebola, and for them to understand that if they do get it, they get top priority for treatment.

Getting top priority for treatment means, in some cases, returning them to their home nations for treatment, if the transport can be handled correctly.

So, yes - transporting some ebola patients to the U.S. and Europe is indeed the wise thing to do, because that will help ensure that the epidemic os brought under control as quickly as possible.
 
crescent said:
I think it was the smart thing to do. We need to stop the epidemic; the best way to stop it is to remove ebola victims from the general population.

If we want to remove ebola victims from the general population, the best way to do that is to provide them with a potential source of treatment that can increase their chances of survival - a treatment center. Otherwise, they may refuse to go, and die in such a manner that others are infected.

For the treatment center to exist and be effective, it needs skilled people willing to work there.

To get skilled people willing to work there, we need for them to believe that they will have little risk of getting ebola, and for them to understand that if they do get it, they get top priority for treatment.

Getting top priority for treatment means, in some cases, returning them to their home nations for treatment, if the transport can be handled correctly.

So, yes - transporting some ebola patients to the U.S. and Europe is indeed the wise thing to do, because that will help ensure that the epidemic os brought under control as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...


Thank you
 
crescent said:
I think it was the smart thing to do. We need to stop the epidemic; the best way to stop it is to remove ebola victims from the general population.

If we want to remove ebola victims from the general population, the best way to do that is to provide them with a potential source of treatment that can increase their chances of survival - a treatment center. Otherwise, they may refuse to go, and die in such a manner that others are infected.

For the treatment center to exist and be effective, it needs skilled people willing to work there.

To get skilled people willing to work there, we need for them to believe that they will have little risk of getting ebola, and for them to understand that if they do get it, they get top priority for treatment.
Click to expand...
.
Granted....but... the transmission of the virus is so easy that keeping all those with it from those without it is a problem, right?
The infrastructure of the aid giving groups really requires hiring locals for a lot of the grunt work. And the guy with the cough sneezes on the steering wheel in the car you're in, but you will be driving later?? Or he sneezes while replenishing the salad bar at the chow hall??
Kinda demands some visual indicator like a forehead mounted litmus strip that changes color when it detects the virus.,

Getting top priority for treatment means, in some cases, returning them to their home nations for treatment, if the transport can be handled correctly.

So, yes - transporting some ebola patients to the U.S. and Europe is indeed the wise thing to do, because that will help ensure that the epidemic os brought under control as quickly as possible.[/QUOTE]
 
I Ratant said:
.
Granted....but... the transmission of the virus is so easy that keeping all those with it from those without it is a problem, right?
The infrastructure of the aid giving groups really requires hiring locals for a lot of the grunt work. And the guy with the cough sneezes on the steering wheel in the car you're in, but you will be driving later?? Or he sneezes while replenishing the salad bar at the chow hall??
Kinda demands some visual indicator like a forehead mounted litmus strip that changes color when it detects the virus.,

Getting top priority for treatment means, in some cases, returning them to their home nations for treatment, if the transport can be handled correctly.

So, yes - transporting some ebola patients to the U.S. and Europe is indeed the wise thing to do, because that will help ensure that the epidemic os brought under control as quickly as possible.
Click to expand...
No it's not actually. Ebola isn't as transmissible as many other diseases; it's more so than HIV and Hepatitis but it's not airborne, nor is aerosol transfer a major risk.

Personally I think a good comparison for Ebola is rabies; it's another dangerous, even horrific, viral disease (though transmitted mainly by animal bite). However you're very unlikely to die from rabies (in the developed world that is; elsewhere it kills 60,000 people per year) and people don’t live in fear of it because, if you take some basic precautions, you are unlikely to contract rabies.
 
catsmate1 said:
No it's not actually. Ebola isn't as transmissible as many other diseases; it's more so than HIV and Hepatitis but it's not airborne, nor is aerosol transfer a major risk.

Personally I think a good comparison for Ebola is rabies; it's another dangerous, even horrific, viral disease (though transmitted mainly by animal bite). However you're very unlikely to die from rabies (in the developed world that is; elsewhere it kills 60,000 people per year) and people don’t live in fear of it because, if you take some basic precautions, you are unlikely to contract rabies.
Click to expand...
People did fear Rabies in the not so distant past. One chapter in "To Kill a Mocking Bird" relates that an entire neighborhood is essentially in lockdown when a dog is seen on the street acting strange and frothing at the mouth.
 
In TIME Magazine today..
 

Attachments

  • Ebola-TIME-102014.jpg
    Ebola-TIME-102014.jpg
    92.7 KB · Views: 50
crescent said:
I can't vouch for Spain, but the U.S. is doing pretty well in containing it. The first and only case so far could have been handled better, but it seems to have been an effective wake up call. There is no doubt that the American health care system is currently alert and prepared for any new cases.
Click to expand...
Sounds a bit hollow now that a health care worker in Dallas is now confirmed to have caught it. One that also had full protective gear at all times.
 
Red Baron Farms said:
Sounds a bit hollow now that a health care worker in Dallas is now confirmed to have caught it. One that also had full protective gear at all times.
Click to expand...
Based on CDC data, between 1981 and 2000 two hundred US health sector workers were infected with HIV due as a result of their work. The CDC admit this is almost certainly a gross underestimate.
Mistakes happen.
 
Contact with ebola victims and the care givers there should be limited to e-mail, Skype, and parachutes for supplies.
What goes there, STAYS THERE!
 
I Ratant said:
Contact with ebola victims and the care givers there should be limited to e-mail, Skype, and parachutes for supplies.
What goes there, STAYS THERE!
Click to expand...

Have I mentioned that during the SARS "outbreak" in Hong Kong our captain told us that any infected crew members would be on a pizza diet.
That was the only food he was confident of being able to kick under a cabin door. :D
 
No hospital is going to admit that their protocol is lacking, so it's "breach of protocol" on the part of the caregiver.
 
Super dooper.
My facebook feed is going bonkers over someone in a local clinic who was whisked away with "ebola-like" symptoms.

unreal.
 
catsmate1 said:
Based on CDC data, between 1981 and 2000 two hundred US health sector workers were infected with HIV due as a result of their work. The CDC admit this is almost certainly a gross underestimate.
Mistakes happen.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Or maybe the "protocols" are statistical in nature rather than absolute, which would scare me if I were a healthcare worker.

The claim that "the protocols work" could just mean there is a very low statistical likelihood of contraction rather than no possibility of contraction.

It reminds me of when I was in the military and they told us the MOPP gear "worked." Yet there was no actual seal in the suit ( it isn't really a suit at all, just a shirt and pants filled with charcoal. ). It dawned on me that they just meant "statistically," which as a soldier was little consolation.
 
....and now a plane at Logan is being quarantined.

5 people with flu-like symptoms that most likely have....


wait for it.....


the flu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom