It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ebola Patient in Atlanta Hospital

page: 95
128
<< 92  93  94    96  97  98 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00

Just in case you missed your own quote:


In the laboratory, infection through small-particle aerosols has been demonstrated in primates, and airborne spread among humans is strongly suspected, although it has not yet been conclusively demonstrated


Fair enough, but I expect you to stop saying "it DOES NOT transmit airborne" and from now on start saying "it MIGHT not transmit airborne" because we want to be as precise and correct as possible, right? You cannot say "it DOES NOT" when you now have a credible source saying "IT IS STRONGLY SUSPECTED." That is all.




posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: 00nunya00

Considering it has never been airborne I am going to go ahead and stick with the fact it isn't airborne. You can say "it might" all you want, but the disease has been around for many decades and if it was airborne we would know it.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: DirtyD

It is reasonable to believe that it can be spread airborn from pig to human, since Ebola is a respiratory infection in pigs and they have shown it can by spread airborn to other primates.

But it is not reasonable at all to take from this research that it can be spread from human to human airborn....because it hasn't been shown that Ebola is respiratory in humans at all.




It hasn't been proven, but the scientists who are are far more qualified than you (who admittedly are nothing near a scientist or medical professional) STRONGLY SUSPECT that it can be airborne from human to human. Please concede a point when you have been given the evidence you asked for, and not just stick to your story by playing semantics. It hasn't been proven, but it is STRONGLY SUSPECTED. Meaning, they're pretty sure it does, but have no real-world firm evidence of it, because, you know, every time someone gets it when they've taken every precaution possible, the naysayers just chalk it up to "a tiny tear" or "incompetent decontamination" no matter how experienced and professional the people who are involved might be. That, IMHO, is "sunshine and rainbows porn."



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00

Considering it has never been airborne I am going to go ahead and stick with the fact it isn't airborne. You can say "it might" all you want, but the disease has been around for many decades and if it was airborne we would know it.


No, we wouldn't, because we have never had an outbreak in any significant numbers such as we are now. There were only a very few cases (relatively speaking) that we had to study, and the entire time, docs were far more concerned with containing the spread instead of studying how it does spread. Would you like them to intentionally infect some patients and place them in perfect lab conditions so we can prove it? Not gonna happen. That's the ONLY reason why it's never been proven.

Let me add for you:

While all Ebola virus species have displayed the ability to be spread through airborne particles (aerosols) under research conditions, this type of spread has not been documented amo ng humans in a real - world setting, such as a hospital or household.


Straight from the CDC
edit on 6-8-2014 by 00nunya00 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: 00nunya00

Wrong.

healthmap.org...


What do these findings mean? First and foremost, Ebola is not suddenly an airborne disease. As expert commentators at ProMED stated, the experiments “demonstrate the susceptibility of pigs to Zaire Ebolavirus and that the virus from infected pigs can be transmitted to macaques under experimental conditions… they fall short of establishing that this is a normal route of transmission in the natural environment.” Furthermore, because human Ebola outbreaks have historically been locally contained, it is unlikely that Ebola can spread between humans via airborne transmission. - See more at: healthmap.org...


And that crazy doctor may have hit on something:


However, the study does raise the possibility that pigs are a host for Ebola. If this proves to be true in the wild, there are direct ramifications for prevention and control measures. It is still unclear what role pigs play in the chain of transmission. To continue work on answering this question, the team plans to take samples from pigs in areas known to have recently experienced Ebola outbreaks. - See more at: healthmap.org...


And here is the very doctor who wrote the paper:

crofsblogs.typepad.com...


*However*, the kicker was not that Ebola is transmitted by air in human outbreaks, but rather that there may be something unique about pig physiology that allows them to generate more infectious aerosols as a general rule–so though aerosols aren’t a transmission route between primates (including humans, as well as non-human primates used experimentally), pigs may be a bigger threat as far as aerosols. Thus, this may be important for transmission of swine influenza and other viruses as well as Ebola.


Edit: Brackets
edit on 6-8-2014 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

Sorry, HealthMap (lol) does not beat the CDC or the Canadian department of health. Try again. You're arguing with the CDC and government-funded professionals now, and believing some crackpot website like HealthMap? Discussion over. My lord.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: 00nunya00

You keep posting links you don't understand at all.

From your link:


While all Ebola virus species have displayed the ability to be spread through airborne particles (aerosols) under research conditions, this type of spread has not been documented among humans in a real - world setting, such as a hospital or household.


You and many others don't seem to understand what an aerosol is medical terms. This means someone has to sneeze right on you, or cough in your face.

So the research conditions are the pig to monkey. That is the ONLY time it has been documented to have passed over distance via aerosols. I already posted the link to the very doctor who did that study and wrote that paper. She clearly says this does not apply to humans.

Again, link to the doc:

scienceblogs.com...
edit on 6-8-2014 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Gosh, this was a nice, informative thread where info and ideas could be exchanged.

Just think, the world as we know it could end all due to semantics...



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: 00nunya00

The CDC agrees, you haven't posted anything that shows the CDC thinks it is airborne. The person who should be saying "My Lord" is me since your reading comprehension is fail+1.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   
I have been wondering why ZMapp was given to Bently and Nancy in Africa, instead of here in Atlanta.

This article states the reason is because the FDA has no jurisdiction in Africa. It appears the FDA has it's panties in a wad over it too.


There are other problems too. Monoclonal antibody drugs like ZMapp are very expensive to produce, so determining the smallest dose that's still effective is important, Caplan said. That requires proper testing.

Likewise, product liability and payment issues are much more complicated for unapproved drugs. Insurance companies "don't even pay for some things that are already approved," Caplan said. "Paying for things that are experimental is not their thing."

Caplan said he doubted the two Americans would have received the drug if they were in the United States. The FDA does have a system for allowing patients with life-threatening conditions to use unproven drugs when they have no other options, but they must get a "compassionate use" wavier and convince the agency that the drug won't present any unnecessary risks.

But Brantly and Writebol did not need such a waiver, because they received the drug in a Liberian hospital, beyond the FDA's jurisdiction.

An FDA spokeswoman said she could not reveal whether Mapp Biopharmaceutical Inc., the company that developed ZMapp, applied for a waiver in this case.

Even if the drug were deemed safe for immediate use and a donor were found to pay for it, it could take months or longer to produce enough to treat everyone who wanted it.

"You'll be in shortage right away and you'll have some hard choices to make about who goes first," Caplan said.
www.latimes.com...


According to an interview I saw with a Zmapp person yesterday, it hasn't even been approved for human testing. Some mighty big strings were pulled to give it to the 2 Americans. Considering it's kinda Monsantos' baby. I can only imagine who pulled those strings.

If there are outbreaks of ebola in highly populated areas where the FDA does have jurisdiction. I see lengthy legal battles in the future. The FDA considers themselves a GOD when it comes to all things medical.

Des



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

So you're saying the CDC and Canadian health doesn't know what they're talking about when they use the term "airborne". Okay. I think you might be confused. YOU are not the virologists; THEY ARE. They do not use "airborne" AND "aerosols" interchangeably. The documents speak for themselves, and they do not need you to school them on vocabulary.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: 00nunya00

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00

Just in case you missed your own quote:


In the laboratory, infection through small-particle aerosols has been demonstrated in primates, and airborne spread among humans is strongly suspected, although it has not yet been conclusively demonstrated


Fair enough, but I expect you to stop saying "it DOES NOT transmit airborne" and from now on start saying "it MIGHT not transmit airborne" because we want to be as precise and correct as possible, right? You cannot say "it DOES NOT" when you now have a credible source saying "IT IS STRONGLY SUSPECTED." That is all.


No, since there has never been a reported cases of human to human airborn transmission or further, there has never been a case of human to human transmission where the infected person was not in very close physical contract with a sick person...it is perfectly fine to say that it is not airborn.

There are people who suspect a lot of things...doesn't mean we have to alter our language to satisfy their baseless speculation.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

Except the quote where they say "airborne transmission is strongly suspected." Tell you what, call up the CDC and try to lecture them on their use of terms, then record the half hour of laughter from them that follows.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: kruphix

LOL, wow, the CDC and Canada are using "baseless speculation". This just gets more and more hilarious.


(post by JG1993 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00



You and many others don't seem to understand what an aerosol is medical terms. This means someone has to sneeze right on you, or cough in your face.



You don't seem to understand that sneezing in someone's face is called "droplet transmission". Aerosols are when the virus comes out in a form that's small enough to stay floating in the air, hence the term "airborne". Please check your vocabulary.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

For the sake of thread continuity. Please stop the attacking of every poster. This is a thread for the collection of any and all data. It's not your let's bash everyone I disagree with thread. ATS is a conspiracy site. Everything posted here does not have to be vetted by you for inclusion.

Thank you...

Des



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: 00nunya00

The CDC has NEVER said it "might" be airborne. They have flat out said it isn't.

The Canadian health site said it is suspected that it "could" be, and that is based on a study about transmission from pigs to monkeys. I linked you the very doctor who did that study, and she vehemently disagrees with their assessment.



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   
From natural news. 21 important questions about this rather suspicious Ebola.


#1) How can U.S. health authorities claim there is zero risk from Ebola patients being treated in U.S. hospitals when those same hospitals can't control superbug infections? "Many hospitals are poorly prepared to contain any pathogen. That’s why at least 75,000 people a year die from hospital infections. If hospitals can’t stop common infections like MRSA, C. diff and VRE, they can’t handle Ebola." - Fox News (1)

#2) Why should we trust the CDC's handling of Ebola when the agency can't even keep track of its anthrax, avian flu and smallpox samples?

#3) Why were Ebola victims transported to cities in the USA when they could be given state-of-the-art medical care overseas? "Now, they are bringing in highly infectious patients into this nation that is Ebola-free. In doing so, they are violating the primary rule of contagion: isolation." - Radio host Michael Savage (2)

#4) Why is the company working on Ebola vaccines -- Tekmira -- receiving money from Monsanto and considers Monsanto to be one of its important business partners? (3)

#5) If Ebola is "not a threat" to U.S. citizens as government authorities keep claiming, then why did the U.S. Department of Defense spend $140 million on an Ebola-related contract with the Tekmira company?

#6) If Ebola is not a threat to the U.S., then why did the Department of Defense deploy Ebola detection equipment to all 50 states? (4)

#7) Why did President Obama just sign a new executive order authorizing the government arrest and quarantine of Americans who show symptoms of respiratory infections? (5)

The language of his new executive order states that government officials may forcibly detain and quarantine people with:

...diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled.

#8) How can we trust a government to tell us the truth about Ebola when that same government repeatedly lies about Swine Flu, influenza, Fukushima radiation, weather control technology, the security of the border and seemingly everything else?

#9) If U.S. doctors claim to be so incredibly careful around Ebola that the virus could not possibly escape from the containment rooms at Emory University, then how did the American doctors being treated there contract Ebola in the first place? Weren't they also being careful?

#10) How are U.S. doctors and health workers supposed to even identify people with Ebola when they appear "fit and healthy" right until the very end? "What's shocking is how healthy the patients look before they die and how quickly they decline. A number of the Ebola patients I've seen look quite fit and healthy and can be walking around until shortly before their deaths." - Dr. Oliver Johnson (6)

#11) If Ebola is not spread through the air as some claim, then why do doctors who treat Ebola patients always wear masks?

#12) If hospitals are good at infection control, then why did so many SARS victims contract the infection while sitting in waiting rooms at hospitals? "A government report later concluded that for the hospital overcome by SARS, 'infection control was not a high priority.' Eventually, 77% of the people who contracted SARS there got it while working, visiting or being treated in a hospital." - Fox News (7)

#13) If Ebola escapes from patients at Emory University and begins to infect the public, do you think we would ever be told the truth about it? Or instead, would the official story claim that "Ebola terrorists" let it loose?

#14) WHO BENEFITS FROM AN EBOLA OUTBREAK in the USA? This is a key question to ask, and the answers are obvious: the CDC, vaccine manufacturers and pharma companies, and anyone in government who wants to declare a police state and start rounding people up for quarantine in a medical emergency.

#15) We already know there are powerful people who openly promote population reduction (Bill Gates, Ted Turner, etc.) Is a staged Ebola outbreak possibly a deliberate population reduction plan by some group that doesn't value human life and wants to rapidly reduce the population?

#16) Why are U.S. health authorities intentionally concealing from the public the true number of possible Ebola victims in U.S. hospitals who are being tested for Ebola right now? "In an apparent attempt to avoid hysteria, U.S. health authorities are withholding details about a number of suspected Ebola victims from the public." - Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars (8)

#17) If Ebola infections are so easy to control (as is claimed by U.S. health authorities), then why are Ebola victim bodies being openly dumped in the streets in West Africa? "Relatives of Ebola victims in Liberia defied government quarantine orders and dumped infected bodies in the streets as West African governments struggled to enforce tough measures to curb an outbreak..." - Reuters (9)

#18) Why do many locals in Sierra Leone truly believe the recent Ebola outbreak was deliberately caused by government officials? "Ebola is a new disease in Sierra Leone and when the first cases emerged, many people thought it might be a government conspiracy to undermine certain tribal groups, steal organs or get money from international donors..." - The Daily Mail (6)

#19) Given that the U.S. government has already funded outrageous medical experiments on Americans and foreigners (see the NIH-funded Guatemalan medical experiments), why should we not believe the government is capable of deploying Ebola in bioweapons experiments in West Africa?

#20) Given that many vaccines accidentally cause the disease they claim to prevent (due to weakened viruses still remaining active in a small number of vaccine vials), isn't it likely that Ebola vaccines might actually cause Ebola infections in some percentage of those receiving them? How can we trust any vaccines when vaccine manufacturers have been granted absolute legal immunity from faulty products or failures in quality control?

#21) How can we trust a medical system that continues to put mercury in flu shots, refuses to recommend vitamin D to cancer patients and has been criminally corrupted to the point where drug companies are routinely charged with felony crimes for bribery and price fixing?


I can see their point in a lot of these questions.

What do u guys and girls think?



posted on Aug, 6 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Destinyone

Attacking a poster? I think you need to step back and check yourself.

When a poster claims the CDC says that Ebola might be airborne, yet that is absolutely not true, of course I am going to call them out. I understand you all want your private little doom porn circle jerk, but someone has to actually bring truth and reason to this thread.



new topics

top topics



 
128
<< 92  93  94    96  97  98 >>

log in

join