Ebola: Facts, Opinions, and Speculations.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
Guards yards away?a reply to: loam

I thought you said:

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
We didn't let journalists and videographers or people without even a pair of latex gloves anywhere near the Americans. Our video was caught from a helicopter flown above the ambulance. The people near them wore biohazard suites and so did the victims.

That wasn't FACT, was it?

And are all three of these guys guards?

Yeah dude in my educated opinion. It's not a bioengineering weapon designed by the United states. If it was I'm sure your little hands would never get hold of the information. So yes pure imagination. a reply to: loam

Still yards away. and who are they? Do you know if they are hospital personally? DEC? Certainly not Joe Public out for scrapbook photo opportunities. If it was a journalist we'd have seen the video of his perspective. Have you seen any vid from that vantage point? ceply to: loam

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I keep seeing people talk about how much worse hygiene practices are over there, well having worked in restaurants for nearly 20 years have taught me that less than half of males in the general public wash their hands after using the restroom.

So do females, in equal numbers. But that's beside the point here.

We are talking about a scale that very few people in first world countries understand. This is not about "washing hands". They don't even wash the bloody floor. And I'm not saying "bloody" in an emphatic way. They literally don't wash the floor that is covered in contaminated blood. Whole rooms where patients died from Ebola and vomited or bled out, just stay there dirty, with open doors and windows.

The exact reason why the Spanish priest was brought here was because of the treatment - or to be accurate, the nonexistence of it - he was receiving there.

Look at the pictures in this article:

BBC - Liberia declares emergency state.

These are the things you should consider in those pictures:

- The poor woman collapsing with her child in her legs... That's in front of the hospital.

- The following picture shows how much care is given to contaminated dead bodies. Some people here at ATS were shocked that reporters were filming the US doctor from across the street and from a roof. Those guys in the pictures of BBC are burying two corpses contaminated with Ebola - who died from exactly that - and people are casually around it watching, like they are burying a treasure for a game.

- Then there is a picture of people gathering around two dead bodies, who also died from Ebola. I'm not a virologist or pandemic expert, but that seems very close for comfort. There is no way of guaranteeing the external part of those body-bags is clean.

This is the true scale of the hygiene and care problem in those countries.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
Yeah dude in my educated opinion. It's not a bioengineering weapon designed by the United states. If it was I'm sure your little hands would never get hold of the information. So yes pure imagination.

FACT: You keep changing your position when confronted with TRUTH.

Your original statement to Fylgje's post about the US having a patent on Ebola in 2009 was:

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
Pure imagination.

FACT: Your denial was pure imagination.

Yes when they even have doors and windows. Many are in canvase tents. cer reply to: VashKonnor

You haven't show any proof that this is bioengineering. Get off my back dude. You've not supplied any a reply to: loam

No it was not imagination. Not on my part anyway. Someone's imagination yes. LOL. You're cracking me up here. a reply to: loam

originally posted by: loam

And are all three of these guys guards?

I love how one of them is with his hand on his waist, going all like "damn this Ebola... Nasty stuff".

Isn't it mandatory that those people also get check-ups for being that close?

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
I'm laughing too. Your third link from the New England journal of medicine says Zaire Ebola but the second link you post is supposed to prove its not Zaire. Do you even read the links you provide or do you just repost links others have provided to support their views.? a reply to: JG1993

It is a mutation of Zaire. Not the Zaire that infected Zaire and not Zaire we have had in laboratories since 1976 as insinuated in the post I was replying to.

I provided that link originally in the other thread, I provided it again because apparently your reading comprehension doesn't extend beyond the word "Zaire."

a reply to: JG1993

Causes pneumonia.

So do a lot of diseases as a complication...doesn't make it a respiratory disease.

Again, this is just plain fact....Ebola is not a respiratory disease.

Large water droplet transmission is scientifically plausible & lab-proven.

Ebola is not airborne...large water droplet is not airborne.

If you want to claim these things as your own speculation, feel free.

No.

Yes, it is the Zaire strain. Just because it isn't 100% identical (you aren't going to find 100% match on any virus), doesn't mean it is a completely different strain. Your source, like your others, is from April. All current sources are reporting it as the Zaire strain.

86%

No...wrong. Your source is from April...maybe try getting some updated data.

Current numbers, 1711 cases and 932 deaths....54.47% rate.

That is just something you made up lmao.

No, I acutally didn't. There are three distinct areas that the current outbreak is...three areas that aren't adjacent to each other. Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. It's not made up, they are even tracking the cases and deaths separately for each area.

Liberia: 516 cases, 282 deaths
Guinea: 495 cases, 363 deaths
Sierra Leone: 691 cases, 286 deaths

You can verify all my facts and numbers at: www.cdc.gov...

Facts have up to date credible sources...not 4 month old articles.

originally posted by: VashKonnor

Isn't it mandatory that those people also get check-ups for being that close?

No it wont travel that far as its not a airborne virus, it only travels via droplets. So it wont travel that far in open air.

BUT

It does set a unprofessional and bad image. And if there was a emergency of some kind I may be telling a different story.

a reply to: VashKonnor

I love how one of them is with his hand on his waist, going all like "damn this Ebola... Nasty stuff".

Isn't it mandatory that those people also get check-ups for being that close?

No...because once again...Ebola is not airborne.

Even if it was...which it is not...they are outside in the open (not in a confined area with the infected), the infected patient was inside a suit (not breathing or coughing in their face), and they are a good 15-20 feet away from them.

Suggesting that these people need to have a check up to see if they caught THE EBOLA is just silly. Ebola doesn't have super powers...it can't infect someone just because they looked at a sick patient from 20 feet away.

originally posted by: JG1993

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
I'm laughing too. Your third link from the New England journal of medicine says Zaire Ebola but the second link you post is supposed to prove its not Zaire. Do you even read the links you provide or do you just repost links others have provided to support their views.? a reply to: JG1993

It is a mutation of Zaire. Not the Zaire that infected Zaire and not Zaire we have had in laboratories since 1976 as insinuated in the post I was replying to.

I provided that link originally in the other thread, I provided it again because apparently your reading comprehension doesn't extend beyond the word "Zaire."

And yet ZMapp, which was developed based off the Zaire strain, seems to be working just fine against this virus.

I know you WANT this to be something different...but it just isn't...so let it go.

originally posted by: kruphix
Opinion: People are over reacting to this situation and hyping it up. The media is doing it's best to scare people and they have succeeded. There is undue fear and panic running rampant in a lot of discussions/conversations about Ebola because people tend to speculate towards doom and gloom. People enjoy talking about doom and gloom, but it does little to help a real serious situation.

Speculation: These outbreaks will start to be contained now due to the attention they are getting. Even if other cases pop up in other countries, those will be handled much differently than the current situation in Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. We won't see a worldwide pandemic and we aren't all going to die.

Your opinion seems to be arguing:

"People are over reacting to this situation and hyping it up." And:
Hype and over reaction = Undue fear and panic
Undue fear and panic = Doom and gloom speculation
Doom and gloom speculation = No help
No help = Worsening serious situation
Worsening serious situation = Bad
Therefore:
Hype and over reaction = Bad

But your speculation seems to be arguing:

Hype and over reaction = Increased attention
Increased attention = Better containment of outbreaks
Better containment of outbreaks = We aren't all going to die

But if:
We aren't all going to die = Good
Then:
Hype and over reaction = Good

Your speculation seems to contradict your opinion unless you think a worsening serious situation = good or you think we aren't all going to die = bad.

Personally I think if increased attention means people take actions that lead to "we aren't all going to die," that's a good thing.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
You haven't show any proof that this is bioengineering. Get off my back dude. You've not supplied any

I'm free to respond to your posts.

And since you ask the question...

Human Ebola Virus Species and Compositions and Methods Thereof US 20120251502 A1

...the viral vectors can be engineered...

...virus or variants thereof of the invention are optionally genetically engineered to exhibit an attenuated phenotype...

... Engineered cells are, thus, cells having a gene or genes introduced through the hand of man.....

a reply to: crazyewok

No it wont travel that far as its not a airborne virus, it only travels via droplets. So it wont travel that far in open air.

BUT

It does set a unprofessional and bad image. And if there was a emergency of some kind I may be telling a different story.

Yes, I understand they are safe standing there.

It's just that you see all these rules and mandatory searches about pretty much any security aspect within the US - like the TSA at airports, as an example - that I would assume someone using a black suit would escort those gentlemen to a cavity search, just so they learn to avoid being that close to contagious patients.

I think that wasn't the actual transport because they are surprisingly relaxed about it.

...I mean, it's really scary if you think that was in fact the doctor with Ebola.

a reply to: FlyersFan

The air is not the problem. As Ebola is not airborne the air recirculating round the cabins fine.

The risk is if the patients is vomiting or has Diarrhoea. The problems rests in if they throw up over themselves and those around them or theres contamination in the toilets.

Its still a danger to the passengers and more importantly the airline staff. But you would quickly get a idea who could be infected.

Reposting:

Um, it's not Ebola Zaire. It's similar but not the same according to an article from the New England journal of medicine that was linked in the other thread sometime yesterday. They believe it originated in guinea as a separate strain.

Most uninformed people aren't going to be able to understand the difference between being transmitted via bodily fluids/airborne. If someone just coming down with it sneezes in their hand/has a sweaty palm/scratch or cut etc and then touches a gas pump or anything as common as that, you can't tell me transmission could not occur. All it takes is for the next person to touch their eye, pick their nose, etc.

Yes, it's not "airborne" most likely by cdc definition. To the layperson, it would be. People still believe you can only catch it via vomit/feces from an infected. That's doing a great disservice.

What might have happened if Patrick Sawyer made it back to Minnesota and went to that birthday party? US hospitals do not have the capability (or any other country for that matter) to deal with a surge. All it takes is for a few individuals to get through to somewhere and transmit before realizing they have it and then what would happen? At some point, you can't handle and contain it if there's far too many people.

It was specifically said multiple times that Nancy had NO DIRECT CONTACT and followed all normal hygienic procedures. Do you think she's some idiot who didn't know how to act in an Ebola environment?

Please stop hanging your hat on the semantics of airborne. People who don't know basic biology, etc do not realize the difference between touching contaminated surfaces vs airborne and that will give a false sense of security.

Since you are so all-knowing, why did the emt's wear respirators if there's no chance of transmission that way? During the live broadcast of Nancy's arrival, it was specifically said multiple times that they would be wearing respirators just in case. Dr. Gupta even said it.

Please stop acting like you know everything there is to Ebola unless you can show credentials stating you are an Ebola research scientist. You are doing a great disservice to the people who want to have a simple discussion and exchange thoughts and ideas.
edit on 7-8-2014 by Zebra501 because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-8-2014 by Zebra501 because: (no reason given)