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.

 

A Way To Stop Ebola Discovered!

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
a reply to: badgerprints



Just remember, don't hug the ebola victims.

Thanks for the advice. I won't bathe their bodies either.
I'm not worried about it.
edit on 10/19/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Who is They?
That you refer to.
Furthermore, do you even understand
what you just said?

Are you describing Phizer,Bayer, Proctor & Gamble
for instance,
or The World Health Organization, National Institute of Health?
I respect your intelligence and record here on ATS,
however, I must say that I think you are out of your league
regarding this topic.

It is my humble opinion that Hubris and Personal Agenda
are clouding your very clear and respected vision.
I have made this error myself before,
so I am experienced with slippery slopes.
Black Diamond Slopes as well.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TinfoilTP



Unless your next argument is for stowaways sneaking onboard giant shipping container vessels I don't see how a blockade would not stop passenger ships from leaving Liberia.

You think people don't stowaway on freighters? Are you going also police the activities of the seaman while they are in port? Ensure that they don't go ashore? Do you really think you are talking practically? And again, under what authority? The navy is going to set up shop in Freeport because they say so?

www.captainmcd.com...


So a modern quarantine is impossible. Nobody has any authority, leaders have no will, and economies are more important than lives.
We are doomed.

Thanks for the doom porn confirmation.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: badgerprints




You really don't get it. It's about preventing EVERY VECTOR POSSIBLE from getting in and KILLING YOU.

Oh, I get it.
I get that there is no way of "preventing EVERY VECTOR POSSIBLE from getting in."


You might want to review the logic of that statement.
There may be no way to prevent "every vector" from getting in.

To prevent "every vector possible" is simply to prevent every one that you can.
And yes. You do prevent every one that you can.
Well not you.

Anyway, have fun with your new guests.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: badgerprints
But they are 3rd world countries who are not yet saddled with the plague of political correctness.
They can still use common sense without half of the country losing their minds.

Or the plague of economic precedence over all else?



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:07 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

So a modern quarantine is impossible.
No. A house can be quarantined. An isolated village can be quarantined. A population of millions, an area of millions of square miles, thousands of miles of borders, cannot be quarantined.


Nobody has any authority, leaders have no will, and economies are more important than lives.
There is no legal (or moral, except for "I, me mine") authority to install a naval blockade of West Africa, with or without the will of "leaders", nor would such a blockade be any guarantee. Lives depend upon economies as much as they do anything else.



We are doomed.
Not by ebola.
edit on 10/19/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:11 AM
link   
a reply to: badgerprints

Now that was one of the Best retorts I have
read on ATS on quite a while.

Good for you Badger!

Keep up the Logic and Clear Minded Thought!

As a side Note, Did you know that Theodore Roosevelt
was given a Badger Pup as a gift during one of his campaigns
across The United States via Train?

He accepted it.

Can you imagine what kind of havoc that animal created on The White House Lawn!
HooHaa! God Bless America!

Thank You for your Exceptional point of view.

Best, Wildmanimal



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:13 AM
link   
a reply to: badgerprints

Here Here.
I Second Line.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TinfoilTP

So a modern quarantine is impossible.
No. A house can be quarantined. An isolated village can be quarantined. A population of millions, an area of millions of square miles, thousands of miles of borders, cannot be quarantined.


Nobody has any authority, leaders have no will, and economies are more important than lives.
There is no legal (or moral, except for "I, me mine") authority to install a naval blockade of West Africa, with or without the will of "leaders", nor would such a blockade be any guarantee. Lives depend upon economies as much as they do anything else.



We are doomed.
Not by ebola.


It is a very limited number of runways and seaports not millions upon millions of miles to be monitored. A vast over exaggeration of the situation.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: badgerprints
But they are 3rd world countries who are not yet saddled with the plague of political correctness.
They can still use common sense without half of the country losing their minds.

Or the plague of economic precedence over all else?


Yeah, but that's being supported by the current powers that be who are being supported by their politically correct constituency.

Unfortunately, the present administration is insisting on open borders so half of the country is agreeing with them on ideological grounds.

You might notice that every african nation has closed their borders to the ebola ridden areas but for some reason the USA seems to think that bringing ebola infected travelers into the country is the smart thing to do.
In reality, it's the politically correct thing to do and has no scientific basis to support it.

I guarantee this,
If the virus gets imbedded and spreads into the population of this country, the left will be the ones to suffer most because they live predominantly in the highly populated cities where this stuff can spread fastest. So, I really don't think they are very smart in supporting the importation of ebola to the us on ideological grounds.
Maybe they really don't think it's real.

I don't know.
Everyone has lost their mind.

Bring em on then. Let's murder half the country to make a point.

edit on 19-10-2014 by badgerprints because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:20 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP




It is a very limited number of runways and seaports not millions upon millions of miles to be monitored.

We cannot create a naval blockade.
We cannot prevent crossing of thousands of miles of borders.

We can prevent air travel directly from the region to the US. That's it. That will not prevent people from the region from reaching the US. That will encourage people who want to come to the US to do so indirectly. Those people will not be screened. Those people will not be monitored. The movements of those people will be unknown.

Preventing air travel from the region will not "stop ebola."


edit on 10/19/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Ohhhhh Yes you can quarantine it .
But is The Civilized World up to the Task?

www.youtube.com...

Not an easy decision to make.
Captain Neutron is Unbiased.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   
OK guys,
It's been fun.
Phage, I think you are out of your mind but you can argue a point like no one else.
Good night everybody.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: badgerprints
Thank you and nighty night.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
How do you send resources to help? "Thank you doctor for helping. But you can't come home."
Good plan.


It doesn't have to be all or nothing. You simply prohibit citizens from those countries from coming here and for any Americans or other travelers who have visited recently those countries (as indicated by their passport stamps), require 21 day quarantine (or 42 or whatever the real incubation period turns out to be; note that 21 days is duration only for 95% of exposed, while 5% of exposed incubate longer).

The all-or-nothing nonsense is a red herring. The big pharma & the rest of sickness industry stand to profit enormously, at least in the short to medium term, should epidemics spread here. Since these industries happen to be the biggest buyers of politicians & bureaucrats, the policies are deformed to suit these parasitic interests.

Even other, non-public health bureaucracies also stand to gain great deal in power and funding from the epidemics, as one can see from the effects of 9/11 -- they will never let the crisis go to waste. Besides mandatory vaccinations (inducing autoimmune diseases and producing big pharma's customers for life), you can also look forward to involuntary detentions if you sneeze in public (that's already an executive order, albeit not enforced), or even if someone merely says you sneezed (and actually wants you out of action for a while e.g. if you are protesting or for failing to show sufficient subservience to policeman or bureaucrat).



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Well my F minus grade still stands for the CDC and if Obama asked the Congress for an Act to create a naval blockade they would pass it and fund it or it would be political suicide to oppose it. These things could be done instead of the let's do nothing approach.

By the do nothing approach we should not even be announcing fever monitors at airports because this in theory should scare people into taking your much vaunted alternative routes to the US where they will not be screened or monitored.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: nightlight7

You simply prohibit citizens from those countries from coming here and for any Americans or other travelers who have visited recently those countries (as indicated by their passport stamps), require 21 day quarantine (or 42 or whatever the real incubation period turns out to be; note that 21 days is duration only for 95% of exposed, while 5% of exposed incubate longer).


Simple? I don't think so. Is it really "simple" to stop people who want to come to the US without legal and valid documentation? Doesn't seem to be. As it stands now, at least there is some monitoring (which will probably improve in efficacy). I don't think that a mandatory quarantine for US citizens for simply being somewhere is legal (are you really calling for more government power?) but if the epidemic is not controlled there will be more and more infected outside of the region. I guess that means that any citizen who travels anywhere will have to be subjected to the quarantine as will anyone from anywhere. In any case, I don't think Liberia is currently a major tourist destination


Besides mandatory vaccinations
There's a vaccine for ebola? That would seem to be big news. I hadnt' heard.


edit on 10/19/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Well my F minus grade still stands for the CDC and if Obama asked the Congress for an Act to create a naval blockade they would pass it and fund it or it would be political suicide to oppose it. These things could be done instead of the let's do nothing approach.
No. They wouldn't. As much as conservative talk radio would like, most people are not living in fear of death by ebola. Though some see it as a wonderful political hammer to be used against the administration, the money would be better spent directly fighting the epidemic than in attempting to keep "them" out.


By the do nothing approach we should not even be announcing fever monitors at airports because this in theory should scare people into taking your much vaunted alternative routes to the US where they will not be screened or monitored.
No. It is the denial of access which encourages the use of alternative means, not screening.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Agree, Alex makes sense for once..or twice.

I love the tv series The Waliking Dead.... but not that much.



posted on Oct, 19 2014 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Thank goodness I mostly just do the charts and don't have to be the one to figure out how to stop the spread of Ebola. But the problem reminds me of time I spent working in computer security for a large corporation. Many of the issues are similar.

In computer networks, you have actual security problems like:

Viruses that spread and replicate themselves on a mass scale, with new versions popping up with little to no warning,

Millions of teenage hackers with nearly unlimited time and energy attacking nonstop because that's what they do for fun,

Uncaring idiots traveling (around cyberspace) trying to sneak in wherever they can and who will wreak large scale havoc intentionally or unintentionally if they gain entry, and

Social engineering con artists who can wiggle their way in to almost anywhere by taking advantage of any dumb mistake humans may make just being human.

And you also have the internal political problems:

Business partners who will gladly bypass any security protocols and accept any level of risk (for others) with no comprehension or concern of risk or potentially catastrophic consequences to save money or make more money,

Low and mid-level bureaucratic managers who just want to collect a paycheck with minimal work and minimal problems who will do whatever they can get away with to placate business partners and avoid heat from above,

Co-workers who may do what they know is wrong rather than stand up to management and business partners,

And leadership at the top who will knowingly take some risk to make more money and acquire power but who may be smart enough not to knowingly accept unlimited risk (unless they think they can bail out with a golden parachute before things collapse). Unfortunately they have no clue about security or real risk levels or how to mitigate risk, and they get all their input from the business partners and bureaucrats.

For the actual security problems, some people try to just secure the network borders. In computer security, that's called 'crunchy on the outside, chewy on the inside.' Once someone or something gets past a firewall (a border), there is no real security inside and they are pretty much free to do anything.

Others try to lock things down by securing nodes - anti-malware software on PC's, etc. But if someone can roam around freely in your borders, continually attacking, eventually they will get access to the nodes.

Generally what is recommended is 'defense in depth' - multiple layers of defense. So you secure your border and limit traffic in and out to only what is essential. You monitor and secure traffic in and out, analyzing it for threats and preventing leaks. At all nodes you immunize against viruses and other threats wherever possible.

Outside your borders, you work with other partners to ensure that they are meeting security standards and not allowing security risks to occur and spread from their end. You work with others to create improved standards, and you lobby for laws that help mitigate risk and law enforcement to enforce violations of those laws.

If the Ebola epidemic were to be approached similarly, I would think that you would want to do everything that you can to limit it at the source of any outbreak and stop it from spreading at the earliest moment possible.

But you would also want to limit it's spread within a country and to limit traffic across borders - inward and outward bound traffic to essential traffic. And not just at your own border, but you would want to limit it across all borders and within all borders, monitoring closely for infections and outbreaks.

Where possible you would want to immunize every node against infection.

Of course you have to fight the same sorts of political problems as described above - and on a much bigger scale - those who will knowingly or unknowingly make decisions that compromise security and increase risk to save or make a buck or gain favor and power, those who don't want to rock the boat or stand up for what's right, and those who have no clue but they are the leaders at the top getting advice from the business partners and bureaucrats who don't have a clue or have another agenda.

The only way to secure a computer network from network based threats outside is to cut all the connections in and out. But someone may get physical access another way, and a general rule of thumb in computer security is that anyone with physical access to equipment can get it. It's the same thing with Ebola, it's hard to stop when there is direct physical access. And even if you can completely secure the border, there's always the possibility that there is already someone inside who is a threat. And even if borders are closed, people are always the weakest link, especially against threats that take advantage of basic traits of human nature like wanting to help others, wanting to socialize, wanting to make money, or wanting to gain influence and power.

I doubt Ebola could be stopped at this stage without a multi-layered approach. And even with that, it won't be stopped 100%. If it was really so easy to secure things, my bank wouldn't have had to reissue new credit/debit cards several times in the last few years and we wouldn't have Ebola spreading anywhere.

FYI - just drawing an analogy here. I wouldn't want to recommend Draconian Big Brother government policies, but I would advocate for a lot more common sense.
edit on 19-10-2014 by ikonoklast because: Fixed a typo.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join