Thank you, but I can't take all the credit, you provided a few gems yourself.You give us lots of facepalm material.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Ebola Comes To USA
- Thread starter skychief
- Start date
Bob Lee (QSC)
In case you missed it, I work for QSC Audio!
- Jul 3, 2001
- 12,668
- 2,036
- 67
- Disclosures
- Former Technical Communications Developer, QSC Audio
Ok, I think I understand. Lets see if i got it straight...
When I make a statement and you challenge it, i need to substantiate the statement with sources obtained from the web. I do that, and you promptly dismiss any references i have to offer by simply invoking the same old tried-and-true 'tin-foil hat' rhetoric.
But when YOU make a claim and I challenge you to support it, you respond "I don't have to".
Thats rich.
You're completely full of it, One Drop.
You can go back to your room now.
Last edited:
slobake
resident ... something
slobake
resident ... something
That more developed nations pay greater attention to a disease that may affect them is a given, but I don't think it is "morally execrable." A country that has earned its wealth has an option to spend it on their own well being above others not so well off. I will take care of my family before I take care of yours. Human nature.
Was watching CNN a few moments ago (I know, CNN is just a tin-foil hat propaganda news outlet), and they were discussing the events that led up to Thomas Duncan being rushed to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital with raging Ebola.
CNN Medical Contributor Dr. Sanjay Gupta offered this remark when asked how it was possible a person from Ebola-torn West Africa to wind up in a Dallas hospital:
"Well, there were some mistakes made."
Thank you Captain Obvious.
We were kinda hoping for some insights as to why Duncan was sent home when there should have been red flares and sirens going off when he arrived at the hospital with obvious Ebola symptoms.
The cavalier attitude by Chief Medical professionals is very disturbing.
CNN Medical Contributor Dr. Sanjay Gupta offered this remark when asked how it was possible a person from Ebola-torn West Africa to wind up in a Dallas hospital:
"Well, there were some mistakes made."
Thank you Captain Obvious.
We were kinda hoping for some insights as to why Duncan was sent home when there should have been red flares and sirens going off when he arrived at the hospital with obvious Ebola symptoms.
The cavalier attitude by Chief Medical professionals is very disturbing.
Such an easy thing to type while sitting in the comfort of a home or office speculating on death. Probably not so easy to draw that conclusion when your bleeding internally and your organs are shutting down. But at least should it ever happen you can rest easy in the knowledge that your choice is being honored.
I guess I'm trying to find all the people "freaking out" and those who are "forget(ting) to enjoy life." Does discussing ebola on an internet message board equate to freaking out? If I spend a few minutes a day researching news stories and looking at death toll numbers is that freaking out? If I decide to cancel my plans to visit Liberia just now am I forgetting to enjoy life? As it stands, I don't see anyone here advocating moving into a bomb-shelter to wait out the looming apocalypse. I don't know any of you in three dimensions but I assume most of you have gone about your daily lives today much as you always do. I know I have. But I'm also monitoring the ebola stories. Somehow, Ive managed to do that without being put into a straight jacket and I even went so far as to enjoy my life at the same time. This ability to multi-task seems to be working...go figure.....
It appears that the British and French governments are taking the Ebola outbreak quite seriously. The have now suspended airline flights from Liberia and other African countries where Ebola is present. I wonder if more countries will follow their lead?
Last edited:
Seems a lot of mistakes were made. 80 people and counting exposed. (What, single dude is living with kids and other adults!!! Uh, oh!)
[URLhttp://Invalid Link Removed"]www.star-telegram.com/2014/10/01/6165611/officials-say-only-one-ebola-case.html][/URL][/url]
However exposure is not infection:
- Ebola is not airborne. Yet a cough will spread it. But
- ultraviolet light kills it. Not instantly like Dracula, however. So...
- hand washing is everyone's friend. Ebola has to get inside you to infect you. Which means no nose picking or rubbing your eyes at your boring ass job. So, compulsive face touchers, you're screwed.
[URLhttp://Invalid Link Removed"]www.star-telegram.com/2014/10/01/6165611/officials-say-only-one-ebola-case.html][/URL][/url]
However exposure is not infection:
- Ebola is not airborne. Yet a cough will spread it. But
- ultraviolet light kills it. Not instantly like Dracula, however. So...
- hand washing is everyone's friend. Ebola has to get inside you to infect you. Which means no nose picking or rubbing your eyes at your boring ass job. So, compulsive face touchers, you're screwed.
Ok, I think I understand. Lets see if i got it straight...
When I make a statement and you challenge it, i need to substantiate the statement with sources obtained from the web. I do that, and you promptly dismiss any references i have to offer by simply invoking the same old tried-and-true 'tin-foil hat' rhetoric.
But when YOU make a claim and I challenge you to support it, you respond "I don't have to".
Thats rich.
You're completely full of it, One Drop.
You can go back to your room now.
Sorry you feel the need to start a war. Frankly I don't care to.
Ebola has been the source of horrific scare stories and doomsday scenarios since its first outbreak due to it's lethality, horrible symptoms, and the fact that little was known about its origins and how it spread at first.
Of course all the various scenarios were played out in the press, it was also the inspiration for big Hollywood movies and lots of made for TV ones. I'm not sure how you missed all this.
All I meant was that because someone predicted it would spread by airline passengers who did not yet display symptoms, or ones that knew they were sick but risked it anyway, does not validate their more extreme claims.
The exact same scenario was predicted for SARS, and was the reason given for the massive stocking debacle of the Tamiflu vaccine by the WHO, which cost them a huge loss of credibility due to the overreaction, made clear when the bird flue failed to turn into an epidemic.
My 'sources' are common knowledge in this case, it wasn't very long ago and it was all over the mass media. But if you feel better starting a crusade, go for it, I'm not sure you are making yourself credible by attacking me over something that played out so publicly just a little while ago, and by insisting on supporting what is YOUR proposition with dubious sources.
And to the others that insist on twisting my remarks, I am not denying this is a deadly and horrible disease,and that it is worth the massive attention it is receiving by the medical community. I am saying it is probably not going to affect you nor will you be at serious risk of catching it, whether you be in the US or elsewhere besides Western Africa.
Last edited:
That's an interesting take, as valid as any other. I just hate the shortsightedness of it in a world where there are no borders to disease, and also the way Pharma companies abuse their power and use the 'third world' to their own ends.
Our prosperity is unfortunately due in many ways to the ways we exploit have-not countries. I know it's not that simple and do not believe the way we administer aid is the way to improve anyone's situation, but putting our heads in the sand and thinking any one country can just take care of itself is not possible or viable anymore, and besides being unrealistic is dangerous.
I respect your attitude and share it. I do think though there are some people here freaking out, and instrumentalising it for political reasons, maybe without realizing it.
As to my own attitude to death, I would not like to die of Ebola but I have lost many people close to me and have lived a very good life, and though I would love another few decades of it I am not afraid to die and will not spend one single second of the time I have on earth worrying about things I can't avoid.
It is fascinating and inspiring to travel in countries where death is considered a part of life and people accept its inevitability and don't hide it away and pretend they are immune to it. I lost a friend in an avalanche in the Himalaya last year, and narrowly missed being killed myself. I also put myself at great risk by stating in the avalanche zone for for over twenty minutes while giving CPR to him. I am not boasting but I am clear in my head that I love life but am prepared to accept dying. It's very liberating.
Last edited:
Since other diseases were brought up, I'm surprised no has mentioned tuberculosis and Staph (yep, read through the tread).
TB killed 1/4 of the worlds population for thousands of years up until only100 years ago with evidence of this going back over 2000 years (I.e. mummies). It's the reason most major cities in the US have a law against spitting on the sidewalk still on the books.
While Ebola has the potential, TB actually was the worst with staph infections coming in a close second.
TB is airborne and can be viable in dirt for decades. Staph is airborne also.
We're only a short step ahead of TB (it's tough and takes a cocktail of Meds to treat). While penicillin has held off staph, MRSA is becoming a problem.
Don't forget to wash you hands kids : )
TB killed 1/4 of the worlds population for thousands of years up until only100 years ago with evidence of this going back over 2000 years (I.e. mummies). It's the reason most major cities in the US have a law against spitting on the sidewalk still on the books.
While Ebola has the potential, TB actually was the worst with staph infections coming in a close second.
TB is airborne and can be viable in dirt for decades. Staph is airborne also.
We're only a short step ahead of TB (it's tough and takes a cocktail of Meds to treat). While penicillin has held off staph, MRSA is becoming a problem.
Don't forget to wash you hands kids : )
heres an interesting article posing the question that is in back of everyones mind since Duncan brought the deadly virus to our country:
Invalid Link Removed
This statement made my eyes pop out.
“If you try to shut down air travel and sea travel, you risk affecting to a huge extent the economy, people’s livelihoods and their ability to get around without stopping the virus from traveling,”
Ya, but if you restrict air travel and sea travel from Ebola-infected persons wouln't that be better at containing the virus? I mean at this point, Im not so much concerned about Liberia's economy as I am the need to contain the spread of the virus and keep it from spreading throughout the globe.
That trumps the well-being of Liberia's economy, imo.
Oh, and BTW, theres reports of a new Ebola patient in D.C.
edit:
I'm coming to the realization this article is written by totally clueless people. She further states:
Air travel restrictions ignore the way Ebola is transmitted:
"Ebola can only be contracted through direct contact with a sick person's bodily fluids. That means saliva, feces, urine, blood, vomit or semen. It isn't transmitted through the air, so you are more likely to catch a cold on a flight than Ebola."
If this statement weren't so incredibly ignorant, it would be laughable. The reason for Air Travel Restrictions is not preventing transmission of the Ebola pathogen within the aircraft, ITS PREVENTING THE TRANSMISSION OF THE PATHOGEN TO THE REST OF THE PLANET, YOU DUMMY.
Good grief, how did this even make it past the editor?
Invalid Link Removed
This statement made my eyes pop out.
“If you try to shut down air travel and sea travel, you risk affecting to a huge extent the economy, people’s livelihoods and their ability to get around without stopping the virus from traveling,”
Ya, but if you restrict air travel and sea travel from Ebola-infected persons wouln't that be better at containing the virus? I mean at this point, Im not so much concerned about Liberia's economy as I am the need to contain the spread of the virus and keep it from spreading throughout the globe.
That trumps the well-being of Liberia's economy, imo.
Oh, and BTW, theres reports of a new Ebola patient in D.C.
edit:
I'm coming to the realization this article is written by totally clueless people. She further states:
Air travel restrictions ignore the way Ebola is transmitted:
"Ebola can only be contracted through direct contact with a sick person's bodily fluids. That means saliva, feces, urine, blood, vomit or semen. It isn't transmitted through the air, so you are more likely to catch a cold on a flight than Ebola."
If this statement weren't so incredibly ignorant, it would be laughable. The reason for Air Travel Restrictions is not preventing transmission of the Ebola pathogen within the aircraft, ITS PREVENTING THE TRANSMISSION OF THE PATHOGEN TO THE REST OF THE PLANET, YOU DUMMY.
Good grief, how did this even make it past the editor?
Last edited:
Look - I have said it before - I work for a company that has extensive investments in West Africa and even if there has not been a case reported in Ghana, I am not exactly running there.
The report that has me worried is this idea of a 3 week incubation period. I do think that is a little scare-mongery because what I have seen tends to report between 3 days and at most a week. That 3 week incubation report is particularly scary and I can see why SkyChief would then suggest that it is better to just quarantine West Africa. My understanding though is that if you are not symptomatic you can't spread the disease.
To be honest though - while I have no grand desire to contract Ebola - it also doesn't worry me as much as other people on this board.
EDIT - having just read your link SkyChief - it seems like a pretty good article to me and I generally agree with what they are saying. You just pulled out one sentence that you didn't agree with.
The report that has me worried is this idea of a 3 week incubation period. I do think that is a little scare-mongery because what I have seen tends to report between 3 days and at most a week. That 3 week incubation report is particularly scary and I can see why SkyChief would then suggest that it is better to just quarantine West Africa. My understanding though is that if you are not symptomatic you can't spread the disease.
To be honest though - while I have no grand desire to contract Ebola - it also doesn't worry me as much as other people on this board.
EDIT - having just read your link SkyChief - it seems like a pretty good article to me and I generally agree with what they are saying. You just pulled out one sentence that you didn't agree with.
