It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Ebola: Facts, Opinions, and Speculations.

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 10:30 PM
a reply to: violet

Well I don't know if it was true or false. Sometimes things get pulled and refuted when in fact were true.

Absolutely. Everyone at ATS knows the media is being controlled. Sometimes a reporter will just say, "Screw it." Sometimes an editor will miss something.

There's nothing wrong sourcing a find. I give you two attaboys for coming back and disclosing the retraction ... even if I'm not willing to put my faith in said retraction. Everything happens for a reason.

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 10:52 PM
I don't know if ya'll have seen this yet but this raises some real questions and i think all the medical professionals can back me up on this.....

Here in the U.S.: Different confusion. Different questions. for example, if Ebola is not airborne, why the extraordinary precautions for Dr. Brantley and Ms. Whitebol?

It turns out standard precautions may suffice.

"We're pretty confident that any large hospital could handle an Ebola case using traditional isolation rooms with negative pressure room and with traditional, Stephan Monroe, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.

Droplet and respiratory precautions.

And while I suited up in multiple layers when I was in Guinea earlier this year, the CDC says a mask, goggles to protect eyes or a face shield to protect the face, a protective gown to prevent bodily fluids from covering clothes and arms and gloves can provide protection for most situations.

The WHO is currently meeting and could announce a public health emergency on Friday - that would add even more urgency at the CDC's nerve center here in Atlanta.

Now not to bring up the old argument between airborne and droplet transmission but this. In the medical profession they are 3 basic different types of Isolation....Universal precautions = gloves .Contact precautions = gloves, and gown..If you are going to come into contact with body fluids or during more involved wound care....Respiratory = gloves, gown and mask. For your patients who are most contagious but basically for pathogens spread through the air.....Not just droplet but airborne....If we remember back to to 2009 at the hyped up scare over H1N1 you may remember heaaing wear masks.....but viral particles will seep through a standard isolation mask......It would require a respirator type mask and the general healthcare population never ever wear those.

Unlike facemasks, respirators form a tight seal to the face. Respirators typically refer to CDC-certified N95 or higher filtering face pieces (meaning that they filter out 95% of airborne particles). They are primarily manufactured for use in construction and industrial jobs that expose workers to dust and small airborne particles.1 In order for respirators to be effective, they must be fitted properly according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines.5 Respirators are harder than facemasks to breathe through for extended periods of time and can cause skin irritation. CDC guidelines do not suggest respirators for children or people with facial hair.

edit on 8/7/2014 by paxnatus because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/7/2014 by paxnatus because: to fix links

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 11:57 PM
a reply to: paxnatus

Ok I looked this up on the CDC site
Emphasis in bold ., not mine, but its interesting it says the respirators are to prevent inhaling
So is this the CDC saying its airborne now?
Or is that a stretch?

Just asking are the Spanish drivers wearing respirators?

II.E.3. Face protection: masks, goggles, face shields II.E.3.a. Masks are used for three primary purposes in healthcare settings: 1) placed on healthcare personnel to protect them from contact with infectious material from patients e.g., respiratory secretions and sprays of blood or body fluids, consistent with Standard Precautions and Droplet Precautions; 2) placed on healthcare personnel when engaged in procedures requiring sterile technique to protect patients from exposure to infectious agents carried in a healthcare worker's mouth or nose, and 3) placed on coughing patients to limit potential dissemination of infectious respiratory secretions from the patient to others (i.e., Respiratory Hygiene/Cough Etiquette). Masks may be used in combination with goggles to protect the mouth, nose and eyes, or a face shield may be used instead of a mask and goggles, to provide more complete protection for the face, as discussed below. Masks should not be confused with particulate respirators that are used to prevent inhalation of small particles that may contain infectious agents transmitted via the airborne route as described below. Masks should not be confused with particulate respirators that are used to prevent inhalation of small particles that may contain infectious agents transmitted via the airborne route as described below.

II.E.4. Respiratory protection The subject of respiratory protection as it applies to preventing transmission of airborne infectious agents, including the need for and frequency of fit-testing is under scientific review and was the subject of a CDC workshop in 2004 763. Respiratory protection currently requires the use of a respirator with N95 or higher filtration to prevent inhalation of infectious particles. Information about respirators and respiratory protection programs is summarized in the Guideline for Preventing Transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Health-care Settings, 2005 (CDC.MMWR 2005; 54: RR-17 12). Respiratory protection is broadly regulated by OSHA under the general industry standard for respiratory protection (29CFR1910.134)764 which requires that U.S. employers in all employment settings implement a program to protect employees from inhalation of toxic materials. OSHA program components include medical clearance to wear a respirator; provision and use of appropriate respirators, including fit-tested NIOSH-certified N95 and higher particulate filtering respirators; education on respirator use and periodic re-evaluation of the respiratory protection program. When selecting particulate respirators, models with inherently good fit characteristics (i.e., those expected to provide protection factors of 10 or more to 95% of wearers) are preferred and could theoretically relieve the need for fit testing 765, 766. Issues pertaining to respiratory protection remain the subject of ongoing debate. Information on various types of respirators may be found at and in published studies 765, 767, 768. A user-seal check (formerly called a "fit check") should be performed by the wearer of a respirator each time a respirator is donned to minimize air leakage around the facepiece 769. The optimal frequency of fit-testng has not been determined; re-testing may be indicated if there is a change in facial features of the wearer, onset of a medical condition that would affect respiratory function in the wearer, or a change in the model or size of the initially assigned respirator 12. Respiratory protection was first recommended for protection of preventing U.S. healthcare personnel from exposure to M. tuberculosis in 1989. That recommendation has been maintained in two successive revisions of the Guidelines for Prevention of Transmission of Tuberculosis in Hospitals and other Healthcare Settings 12, 126. The incremental benefit from respirator use, in addition to administrative and engineering controls (i.e., AIIRs, early recognition of patients likely to have tuberculosis and prompt placement in an AIIR, and maintenance of a patient with suspected tuberculosis in an AIIR until no longer infectious), for preventing transmission of airborne infectious agents (e.g., M. tuberculosis) is undetermined. Although some studies have demonstrated effective prevention of M. tuberculosis transmission in hospitals where surgical masks, instead of respirators, were used in conjunction with other administrative and engineering controls 637, 770, 771, CDC currently recommends N95 or higher level respirators for personnel exposed to patients with suspected or confirmed tuberculosis. Currently this is also true for other diseases that could be transmitted through the airborne route, including SARS 262 and smallpox 108, 129, 772, until inhalational transmission is better defined or healthcare-specific protective equipment more suitable for for preventing infection are developed. Respirators are also currently recommended to be worn during the performance of aerosol-generating procedures (e.g., intubation, bronchoscopy, suctioning) on patients withSARS Co-V infection, avian influenza and pandemic influenza (See Appendix A). Although Airborne Precautions are recommended for preventing airborne transmission of measles and varicella-zoster viruses, there are no data upon which to base a recommendation for respiratory protection to protect susceptible personnel against these two infections; transmission of varicella-zoster virus has been prevented among pediatric patients using negative pressure isolation alone 773. Whether respiratory protection (i.e., wearing a particulate respirator) would enhance protection from these viruses has not been studied. Since the majority of healthcare personnel have natural or acquired immunity to these viruses, only immune personnel generally care for patients with these infections 774-777. Although there is no evidence to suggest that masks are not adequate to protect healthcare personnel in these settings, for purposes of consistency and simplicity, or because of difficulties in ascertaining immunity, some facilities may require the use of respirators for entry into all AIIRs, regardless of the specific infectious agent. Procedures for safe removal of respirators are provided (Figure). In some healthcare settings, particulate respirators used to provide care for patients with M. tuberculosis are reused by the same HCW. This is an acceptable practice providing the respirator is not damaged or soiled, the fit is not compromised by change in shape, and the respirator has not been contaminated with blood or body fluids. There are no data on which to base a recommendation for the length of time a respirator may be reused.


edit on 7-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 11:59 PM
Having trouble editing my post above. I couldn't get the rest to type in

Taking it from here:

Just asking are the Spanish drivers wearing respirators?
So just masks are ok , because it is not airborne?
edit on 8-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:33 AM
a reply to: paxnatus

Ebola is not airborne in the classic sense. Yes ... it can be projected through the air and contaminate a surface or another person. That, and the fact that it is *highly* contagious raises the threat. The CDC (and the government) want to downplay everything about this outbreak. They are also avoiding any culpability ... yet still allowing risk factors to multiply.

From your quoted text:

"We're pretty confident that any large hospital could handle an Ebola case using traditional isolation rooms with negative pressure room and with traditional, Stephan Monroe, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.
Just look at their 'script'.

"Pretty confident" ... "Large hospital" ... "an Ebola case"

I'd like to draw attention to the very simple descriptor "an". Okay ... they can handle one. Maybe four is not too many. But, what happens when ten patients show up? Or twenty?

What happens when medical staff start to become infected? What happens when the housekeeping staff realizes a minimum wage job is not worth risking their lives for? If it's not readily apparent, there are more infections in the healthcare community, as a percentage, than any other trade.

You see, not only does the government know this, they think about these scenarios. They're just not making the knowledge public. They'd rather allow you to distract yourself. They might help a little with the misdirection, but they'll let you be the one to 'fall for it.'

The CDC could've protected us. They, instead, accepted unnecessary risk. All they had to do was step up and ban all travel to Africa, ban frequent flyers from international travel (or subsequent return to the US), or any other number of stop-gap measures ... but they didn't.

There is a reason. We'll probably have it in a year or two. Right now they want us to shut up, obey, and let the agenda run its course. Hopefully, in the meantime, there will be no further outbreak. I'm just POd that they think crossing their fingers is an adequate response ... and minimizes their risk of losing their high-paying government position. The CDC guy's prolly gonna get a huge bonus if his gamble with your life pays off.

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:35 AM
a reply to: Druid42
What I find truly baffling is just where and how this virus begins... What is the reservoir? Could it possibly be in the soil/land? Could mining possibly be disturbing this dormant virus? Many of these West African countries also happen to have major/top mines... Just a thought

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:55 AM
Here is the youtube copy of today's congressional hearing:

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:06 AM
a reply to: loam

Thank you Loam...


posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:19 AM
The thing about large hospitals is they are only in large cities.
Well maybe it's different in the states. Here in Canada , there's only about 5 major cities. Well maybe it's 10 or 20. It's very spread out. We have UBC as well.

edit on 8-8-2014 by violet because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:19 AM
a reply to: loam

Thanks I missed it today

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:34 AM

Following the introduction of Ebola virus in the human population through animal-to-human transmission, person-to-person transmission by direct contact bodily fluids/secretions of infected persons is considered the principal mode of transmission. Indirect contact with environment and fomites soiled with contaminated bodily fluids (e.g. needles) may also occur. Airborne transmission has not been documented during previous EVD outbreaks.

There is no risk of transmission during the incubation period.

This is a danger I think that is being discarded by many.

...efforts to control the outbreak are hampered by...the facts that chains of transmission have moved underground making meticulous early detection and isolation of cases, contact tracing and monitoring – the cornerstone of EVD control – difficult to be carried out.

You can't trust the infected.

If the patient with illness compatible to EVD develops symptoms while on an aircraft, contact tracing must be made according to the Risk assessment guidelines for diseases transmitted on aircraft (RAGIDA) protocol1, which indicates contact tracing of all those passengers seated within 4 rows ahead and 4 rows behind, as well as the crew on board. If the cleaning of the aircraft is performed by unprotected personnel, they should be considered as contacts. Contacts should be assessed in a designated area within the airport according to the airport contingency plan.

I wonder if the planes Patrick Sawyer rode on were cleaned with these guidelines in mind.

I somehow doubt so...

Ebola virus disease (EVD), implications of introduction in the Americas

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:55 AM
today I watched live feed from congress grilling cdc manager and a nigerian doctor and a non physician administrator

both the nigerian and administrator expressed dire doom if money is not spent lavishly for the un who actually declaring bancrupsy in such a disaterous time where do find them when you need them.
Both the UN and WHO who proclaimed themselves on the helm for so long giving great credits for great things they had done in the past which I cannot suddenly recall them, Can anyone remind us?)

the nigerian doc emphasised that most transmission happen in hospitals and gangs are burning hospitals to prevent the transmission..
Also the doc clearly expressed than what ever the world will do will not prevent from huge disasterous casualties.
The administrator expressed then the three african countries (not including Nigeria) will collapse ( could not understand what he meant but he sounded eerily scary. They claimed that the last contact with liberia president was complete hopelessness and that people are dying in the streets.

the administrator emphacised that the epidemic will have future outbreaks every twenty days, each outbreak will dwarf by ions the previous one 20 deays earlier. and he also said that the next outbreak will be in about 20 days or less and it will spring simultaniously in probably most counries in the world since the people who are infected that the virus just got in them will not experience any symptoms and will only be known when the symptoms appear together along with the people they had unknowengly transmitted the virus to, in about 20 days at longest.

the medicine from san diego according to the CDC director cannot be known yet if it's beneficial or Harmful? yet. and even with optimal production of it will hardly make enough course for 200 people only!?

The virus was all along in monkeys there and just from time to time infect severly some monkeys, humans never been affected (they might got infected but did not notice it or just as small cold, just like the virus that came with the monkeys to us also did not affect humans (10% of animals and humans had been exposed to the virus in us without humans noticing it, which give them crossimmunity if the african mutant Zaire version active now in africa comes here)

the CDC director expressed there will be needed a great fight with the disease but not without great casualties any way just like the other two who imphasised on the huge casualties but seemed not hopefull like the director , Both were on the front lines in africal for years (nigerian do since the first outbreak in Zaire in 1978, seemed to be more knowledgable about the true ramufications that cdc director whose resume looks just about controlling cigarettes in NY)!

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:07 AM
Listen to Sawyer's story at 2:11:12.

Unfreaking believable. MORONS.

So Sawyer wasn't just caring for a sick sister, he was actively touring ebola patients in at least two hospitals.

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:19 AM
a reply to: Destinyone

Make sure you watch it.

What's clear to me is our guys are still playing catchup and in denial. At times you can see Isaacs in the audience during the first panel's testimony, and I thought he was going to explode. You could see it in his face....crossed arms.... thrown back.

It's obvious he thinks a lot of what was said is BS- particularly the bit about the thousands of PPEs, which the government admitted sit over there undistributed. Of course, I guess that shouldn't surprise me. Look how poorly we've done within our own borders distributing supplies during times of crisis.

Complete cluster F****

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:21 AM
Adding this here:

originally posted by: Manawydan

Currently, WHO reports 1,711 Ebola diagnoses and 932 deaths in West Africa. We believe the reported numbers only show 25-50% of the cases.

-- Ken Isaacs (Vice President of Program and Government Relations Samaritan’s Purse)

Full transcript here:

Btw, it's not an actual transcript of his testimony. This was his prepared statement.
edit on 8-8-2014 by loam because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:37 AM

originally posted by: loam
Listen to Sawyer's story at 2:11:12.

Unfreaking believable. MORONS.

So Sawyer wasn't just caring for a sick sister, he was actively touring ebola patients in at least two hospitals.

Many thanks for that video!!

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:41 AM
Isaacs' bottom line:

"I think we will see death tolls that are unimaginable right now...."

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:28 AM
a reply to: loam

his live statement was much more ominous and doom.
He managed to bring another speaker to the table albeit not directly that of the prsident there, that described him as completely at loss of hope and speaking out the the UN and other organization should have declared emergency a month ago!!

the UN never told them the un bacrupt only to the last minute.
tHAT COUNTRY HAD COMPLETE TRUST IN THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS since they do not possibly know the scientific details.
If you look at the WHO fact sheet about ebola you would think that nobody should die from ebola. the UN was actually mostly talking about the reston variety.!

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:33 AM
UPDATE 1-WHO declares Ebola epidemic an international health emergency

Aug 8 (Reuters) - West Africa's Ebola epidemic is an "extraordinary event" and now constitutes an international health risk, the World Health Organisation (WHO) said on Friday. The Geneva-based U.N. health agency said the possible consequences of a further international spread of the outbreak, which has killed almost 1,000 people in four West African countries, were "particularly serious" in view of the virulence of the virus. "A coordinated international response is deemed essential to stop and reverse the international spread of Ebola," the WHO said in a statement after a two-day meeting of its emergency committee on Ebola.

The declaration of an international emergency will have the effect of raising the level of vigilance for transmission of the virus. The agency added that while all states with Ebola transmission - so far Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria and Sierra Leone - should declare a national emergency, there should be no general ban on international travel or trade. Keiji Fukuda, the WHO's head of health security, stressed that, with the right steps and measures to deal with infected people, Ebola's spread could be stopped. "This is not a mysterious disease. This is an infectious disease that can be contained," he told reporters on a telephone briefing from the WHO's Geneva headquarters. "It is not a virus that is spread through the air."

The WHO said the current outbreak was the most severe in the almost 40 years since Ebola was first identified in humans. This was partly because of weaknesses in the countries currently affected, it said, where health systems were fragile and lacking in human, financial and material resources. It also said inexperience in dealing with Ebola outbreaks and misperceptions of the disease, including how it is transmitted, "continue to be a major challenge in some communities". Although most cases of Ebola are in the remote area where Guinea borders Sierra Leone and Liberia, alarm over the spread of the disease increased last month when a U.S. citizen died in Nigeria after travelling there by plane from Liberia.

After an experimental drug was administered to two U.S. charity workers who were infected in Liberia, Ebola specialists have urged the WHO to offer such drugs to Africans. The U.N. agency has asked medical ethics experts to explore this option next week.


This kind of declaration has been made twice before, two previous ones were polio in may and H1N1 back in 2009, its pretty obvious that this is more serious than just an areal epidemic.
Even Ebola isn´t airborne it spreads like norovirus, very easily.
edit on 8-8-2014 by dollukka because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:51 AM
mr sauyer was suspected at the airport even though he had no symptoms. Only after he fell ill that a doctor and four nurses came to care for him.
the doctor died after Mr sauyer in two days. all nurses got infected (most likey died by now unfortunately).
This will give you example of how fast this is, claiming it is not airborne does not matter at all.
The Samaritan purse clearly said that on after approximately two weeks that a new wave of epidemic that will dwarf the last few days outbreak. it will be world wide, because the infected dont know they are infected (incubation period of up to 22 days). If the next oubreak was 22 days after the current days outbreak, this it proves the epidemic at its weekest version(the Zaire version will be at weakest this time around. If the next wave slope happened only 2 days after now then it will be doom. the epidemic of 80-90 percent will be at its worst (which I dont know what could be worse than 80-%) maybe the spread will be faster but the mortality rate stay 80%, which is really scary.

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in