(10-16-2014 10:51 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  What in the world has this government done the past 14 years that would lead you to even remotely believe ANYTHING a government agency says?

FIFY

(10-16-2014 10:28 AM)DFWMINER Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 09:27 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 09:21 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 09:16 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Lets be clear. All they've proven is that Ebola can potentially enter through Lung Tissue if it is inhaled.

However, despite all of that, the R0 rate (Rate of infections) is still 1.8 (Essentially every patient has the ability to infect two others) (Flu has a RO of 16) We're still talking about literally needing to be right next to someone, who is extremely contagious (to the point of being near death) and having them cough on someone else. The Virus cannot survive for long outside of the host body.

If the virus was airborne and running around causing havoc, the original US patient would have infected more than two others

Yeah, I don't think it's airborne or we'd see a lot more of the folks that first guy came into contact with sick already. This is just more of the mass hysteria out there.

Exactly. I read the article that first listed the potential of becoming airborne, and the reporter ignored a lot of info. They ignored the fact that most transmissions are occurring late in the illness, and that the Virus is known that it cannot survive without a host for very long.

This isn't a situation where an Ebola victim can cough, touch a door knob and then infect some poor girl who touches the same door knob several minutes later. (Flu) The person would have to be deathly ill, and be within two feet of another person and they happen to cough on them. (You know, sort of like a nurse who is leaning over a patient's bed to speak to the patient)

I read an article on NBC today about Cleveland closing several schools due to Ebola fears. You see...A teacher happened to be visiting Dallas this weekend, and flew back on a frontier airlines flight, that wasn't the same as the Ebola Nurse traveled on, but it might you know potentially possible be the same plane, so they shut the schools down.

That's fear mongering, and ridiculous.

You guys keep saying this but i will keep asking to tell me why they keep sterilizing airplanes, ambulances, removing furniture and clothing and incinerating it if the virus can't survive or be transmitted like that?

If we should not be worried about become infected why all the precautions? Either we know this is bad and are taking theses precautions but not being upfront wth the public or we really don't know for sure and are taking precautions just in case.

Actions are speaking louder than words as I watch this from my front porch.

The idea behind the constant sterilizing is to make people feel comfortable. Lets be honest here, if I told you the seat you were sitting in now, was sat in by an Ebola victim an hour earlier. How fast are you changing chairs, and how often are you checking your temperature for the next two weeks?

Odds are that you made contact today with someone who was exposed to the flu virus. That virus kills hundreds of thousands of Americans each year. Are you running into the doctor tomorrow to make sure you're not sick?

You are proving my point. We don't do the things we are doing for Ebola when it comes to the flu and that kills a lot more folks. The actions being taken are leading to people's concerns.

Honestlyote='AngryAphid' pid='11254133' dateline='1413463814']

(10-16-2014 07:31 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Could also have been in storage in Syria and captured by ISIS and taken to Africa to release it. It seems Funny that it started in a country with Strong USA connections. Coincidence maybe.

Not that evil people do logical things, but why Africa?

When infecting just one American hairdresser would have been
just as easy and darn-near guaranteed devastation on the U.S.
[/quote]

Easy access into Liberia. Good movement back and forth to get into the U.S. not a large Muslim population in Liberia. The climate can promote easy spreading of Ebola. Airport screening a little less intense coming to America. Newly infected Carriers can spread it here after arriving here before anyone finds out.
Why were U.S. embassies attacked in Africa? Easy targets to hit I guess.

Honestly anything is just speculation for now, but it needs to be weeded out before dismissing theory.

It almost makes one feel silly for worrying about ISIS.

(10-16-2014 11:01 AM)DFWMINER Wrote:  You are proving my point. We don't do the things we are doing for Ebola when it comes to the flu and that kills a lot more folks. The actions being taken are leading to people's concerns.

There's a vaccine for the flu, along with a ton of medications to treat it. Go hang out in a Nursing home when someone there catches the flu and its an entirely different story.

To be frank, this is pretty much protocol when an unknown disease enters the country. Isolate the patient immediately, decontaminate everywhere they've been, and trace and quarantine any people they have come in contact with.

You have to have confidence in the health profession, otherwise we'd still be dealing with Small pox, Polio, and the Measles.

(10-16-2014 11:01 AM)DFWMINER Wrote:  You are proving my point. We don't do the things we are doing for Ebola when it comes to the flu and that kills a lot more folks. The actions being taken are leading to people's concerns.

The actions being taking are just standard operating procedure. Nothing extraordinary about said actions. The media is blowing up this ebola thing nonstop. That's what is raising people's concerns, not the disinfecting of an airplane.

After reading this thread I can only shake my head...some of you need to get a grip.

(10-16-2014 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:01 AM)DFWMINER Wrote:  You are proving my point. We don't do the things we are doing for Ebola when it comes to the flu and that kills a lot more folks. The actions being taken are leading to people's concerns.

The actions being taking are just standard operating procedure. Nothing extraordinary about said actions. The media is blowing up this ebola thing nonstop. That's what is raising people's concerns, not the disinfecting of an airplane.

If you want to test the theory, go call the CDC and tell them you weren't vaccinated and have the measles. Watch what happens when the people in full haz mat gear show up to get you. Every one of them is vaccinated and completely safe, but there are thousands who don't vaccinate and are not safe, and no one wants to expose them.

I don't want to say that the article from the OP is bullsh*t, but man it's lacking key things that I want to see. I want to see which CIDRAP reps from the UofM are saying these things. I want to see their exact quotes rather than a blanket statement "CIDRAP researcher claims". It's very apparent that this Ebola stuff is a very serious matter and journalist needs to treat it that way, or not put it in print at all until they get specific quotes.

(10-16-2014 11:22 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:14 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:01 AM)DFWMINER Wrote:  You are proving my point. We don't do the things we are doing for Ebola when it comes to the flu and that kills a lot more folks. The actions being taken are leading to people's concerns.

The actions being taking are just standard operating procedure. Nothing extraordinary about said actions. The media is blowing up this ebola thing nonstop. That's what is raising people's concerns, not the disinfecting of an airplane.

If you want to test the theory, go call the CDC and tell them you weren't vaccinated and have the measles. Watch what happens when the people in full haz mat gear show up to get you. Every one of them is vaccinated and completely safe, but there are thousands who don't vaccinate and are not safe, and no one wants to expose them.

Don't we have parents that refuse to vaccinate their kids? Is the CDC showing up at everyone of those parent's homes in hazmat gear? BTW, if folks don't get vaccinated they can't really complain if they get sick.

This is becoming synonymous with AIDS discussions in the early 80’s… for every rumor
of impending doom, there was a reason for dismissal of any kind of health threat.

(10-16-2014 09:16 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Lets be clear. All they've proven is that Ebola can potentially enter through Lung Tissue if it is inhaled.

However, despite all of that, the R0 rate (Rate of infections) is still 1.8 (Essentially every patient has the ability to infect two others) (Flu has a RO of 16) We're still talking about literally needing to be right next to someone, who is extremely contagious (to the point of being near death) and having them cough on someone else. The Virus cannot survive for long outside of the host body.

If the virus was airborne and running around causing havoc, the original US patient would have infected more than two others

From the CIDRAP website... COMMENTARY: Health workers need optimal respiratory protection for Ebola | CIDRAP

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspecti...tion-ebola Wrote:There has been a lot of on-line and published controversy about whether Ebola virus can be transmitted via aerosols. Most scientific and medical personnel, along with public health organizations, have been unequivocal in their statements that Ebola can be transmitted only by direct contact with virus-laden fluids2,3 and that the only modes of transmission we should be concerned with are those termed "droplet" and "contact."

These statements are based on two lines of reasoning. The first is that no one located at a distance from an infected individual has contracted the disease, or the converse, every person infected has had (or must have had) "direct" contact with the body fluids of an infected person.

This reflects an incorrect and outmoded understanding of infectious aerosols, which has been institutionalized in policies, language, culture, and approaches to infection control. We will address this below. Briefly, however, the important points are that virus-laden bodily fluids may be aerosolized and inhaled while a person is in proximity to an infectious person and that a wide range of particle sizes can be inhaled and deposited throughout the respiratory tract.

The second line of reasoning is that respirators or other control measures for infectious aerosols cannot be recommended in developing countries because the resources, time, and/or understanding for such measures are lacking.4

They are directing this warning toward health care workers and saying that the CDC guidelines are inadequate ... to the point that current guidelines recommend a 45 cent mask, but CIRDRAP is saying that only the $460 version will fully protect workers. That's not practical for west Africa... that is more than the average yearly wage. But, you can bet that this will be brought up in a lawsuit if anyone else (other than Mr. Duncan) dies of Ebola from this outbreak.

What CIDRAP is not saying is that there is significantly greater risk of anyone that's been around Amber Vinson coming down with Ebola than there was yesterday. Letting her get on a plane was very stupid, but it's just not very likely that there will be any further outbreak because of it.

(10-16-2014 11:47 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  This is becoming synonymous with AIDS discussions in the early 80’s… for every rumor
of impending doom, there was a reason for dismissal of any kind of health threat.

Exactly. It's like when folks were scared to drink from water fountains for fear of catching AIDS. Or when NBA players were scared to play with Magic Johnson, etc. It comes down to media hoopla and ignorance (not saying that as a bad thing but due to so many mixed messages, etc). History is repeating itself.

(10-16-2014 11:47 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  This is becoming synonymous with AIDS discussions in the early 80’s… for every rumor
of impending doom, there was a reason for dismissal of any kind of health threat.

Such is the nature of irrational fear.

(10-16-2014 11:52 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:47 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  This is becoming synonymous with AIDS discussions in the early 80’s… for every rumor
of impending doom, there was a reason for dismissal of any kind of health threat.

Such is the nature of irrational fear.

Unfortunately today we have 24 hour media coverage that needs advertisers to make it that much worse.

(10-16-2014 11:52 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 11:47 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  This is becoming synonymous with AIDS discussions in the early 80’s… for every rumor
of impending doom, there was a reason for dismissal of any kind of health threat.

Exactly. It's like when folks were scared to drink from water fountains for fear of catching AIDS. Or when NBA players were scared to play with Magic Johnson, etc. It comes down to media hoopla and ignorance (not saying that as a bad thing but due to so many mixed messages, etc). History is repeating itself.

I remember my roommate reading an opinion article (I think in the Village Voice)
suggesting that women could only be carriers of AIDS, but not actually suffer the symptoms.

Ironically, ignorance breeds both hysteria and complacency.

(10-16-2014 10:28 AM)DFWMINER Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 09:27 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 09:21 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-16-2014 09:16 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Lets be clear. All they've proven is that Ebola can potentially enter through Lung Tissue if it is inhaled.

However, despite all of that, the R0 rate (Rate of infections) is still 1.8 (Essentially every patient has the ability to infect two others) (Flu has a RO of 16) We're still talking about literally needing to be right next to someone, who is extremely contagious (to the point of being near death) and having them cough on someone else. The Virus cannot survive for long outside of the host body.

If the virus was airborne and running around causing havoc, the original US patient would have infected more than two others

Yeah, I don't think it's airborne or we'd see a lot more of the folks that first guy came into contact with sick already. This is just more of the mass hysteria out there.

Exactly. I read the article that first listed the potential of becoming airborne, and the reporter ignored a lot of info. They ignored the fact that most transmissions are occurring late in the illness, and that the Virus is known that it cannot survive without a host for very long.

This isn't a situation where an Ebola victim can cough, touch a door knob and then infect some poor girl who touches the same door knob several minutes later. (Flu) The person would have to be deathly ill, and be within two feet of another person and they happen to cough on them. (You know, sort of like a nurse who is leaning over a patient's bed to speak to the patient)

I read an article on NBC today about Cleveland closing several schools due to Ebola fears. You see...A teacher happened to be visiting Dallas this weekend, and flew back on a frontier airlines flight, that wasn't the same as the Ebola Nurse traveled on, but it might you know potentially possible be the same plane, so they shut the schools down.

That's fear mongering, and ridiculous.

You guys keep saying this but i will keep asking to tell me why they keep sterilizing airplanes, ambulances, removing furniture and clothing and incinerating it if the virus can't survive or be transmitted like that?

If we should not be worried about become infected why all the precautions? Either we know this is bad and are taking theses precautions but not being upfront wth the public or we really don't know for sure and are taking precautions just in case.

Actions are speaking louder than words as I watch this from my front porch.

I answered you here: http://csnbbs.com/thread-705734-post-112...id11253896

This is a deadly disease, and the mode and likelihood of transmission make it far easier to stop it than something like the flu, even granting there are vaccines for the flu. But, containing the people and things that have had any exposure whatsoever is critical in order to make the problem manageable. This should be easy to define a strategy to handle an outbreak from a single patient zero. The devil is in the details, though.

There is also the Precautionary principle: "The precautionary principle or precautionary approach to risk management states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action." That was violated in extreme by allowing Ms Vinson to travel on a plane.

That principle can be applied to extremes - shutting down schools in Ohio - but taking assertive action like disinfecting the plane and taking it out of service for some period, quarantine of those who came in contact with Nurse Vinson. Those fall in a category of things that are most likely not necessary at all, but if done, they will absolutely allow us to contain this outbreak and prevent further possibility of it spreading to the public (along with certain other things, like managing healthcare workers better).

(10-16-2014 12:10 PM)smudge12 Wrote:  BTW, what ever happened to the experimental vaccine they gave the two Americans that contracted ebola in Africa? That stuff basically took them from near-death to comfortably recovering in a matter of hours.

I say experiment with it some more...

I think it's been used in other patients but hasn't worked.

COMMENTARY: Health workers need optimal respiratory protection for Ebola | CIDRAP

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspecti...tion-ebola Wrote:There has been a lot of on-line and published controversy about whether Ebola virus can be transmitted via aerosols. Most scientific and medical personnel, along with public health organizations, have been unequivocal in their statements that Ebola can be transmitted only by direct contact with virus-laden fluids2,3 and that the only modes of transmission we should be concerned with are those termed "droplet" and "contact."

These statements are based on two lines of reasoning. The first is that no one located at a distance from an infected individual has contracted the disease, or the converse, every person infected has had (or must have had) "direct" contact with the body fluids of an infected person.

This reflects an incorrect and outmoded understanding of infectious aerosols, which has been institutionalized in policies, language, culture, and approaches to infection control. We will address this below. Briefly, however, the important points are that virus-laden bodily fluids may be aerosolized and inhaled while a person is in proximity to an infectious person and that a wide range of particle sizes can be inhaled and deposited throughout the respiratory tract.

The most alarming part of the CIDRAP report is the information highlighted. That makes me question the core competency of the CDC in handling a larger outbreak.

That said, they may still be able to handle one. It may be that healthcare workers would die for lack of equipment when they could've been saved, while the CDC stops and ponders why it happened even though they followed protocol. But that doesn't mean that they could not still put an end to an outbreak, just that it may take longer, and may result in more deaths.