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.

 

Obama - no quarantine of ebola HC workers

page: 5
29
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

no it's called covering your ass, fact is they don't know it all and will not admit it.
to worried about the effects of trade and the money they would lose.




posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   
The flu kills people who are in a high risk category. The elderly, those with asthma, those with a compromised or weakened immune system.

The Spanish flu epidemic that killed millions was in 1918, long before the pharmaceuticals and equipment we now have.

Ebola isn't choosy. You can be fit and healthy with an immune system that kicks ass and you can still get it. And supposedly there is no cure. Evidently, that's just another lie, as we have been told the two nurses have recovered. There is only a cure for certain people I guess.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   

to worried about the effects of trade and the money they would lose.
By doing what?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Phage

no it's called covering your ass, fact is they don't know it all and will not admit it.
to worried about the effects of trade and the money they would lose.

The discussion isn't even about that at all. It's about quarantining HC workers who have come into contact with the disease. That number, on the grander scale, is rather small. One has to wonder if Phage knows the definition of prudence.
edit on 07954Sundayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords




And supposedly there is no cure. Evidently, that's just another lie, as we have been told the two nurses have recovered. There is only a cure for certain people I guess.

We also know that the survival rate in West Africa is 30%. The difference would be the level of health care received while the body develops its defenses against the virus.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22



One has to wonder if Phage knows the definition of prudence.

I do. And it doesn't generally include kneejerk reactions. It means taking a thoughtful approach, doesn't it?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bilk22



One has to wonder if Phage knows the definition of prudence.

I do. And it doesn't generally include kneejerk reactions. It means taking a thoughtful approach, doesn't it?
How is it a kneejerk reaction? We already have had returning HC workers become infected. We do not yet know if they infected anyone else. The incubation period is still ticking.
edit on 08259Sundayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

by implementing a quarantine on the countries that the outbreaks are occurring and placing people that go there and return.
the WHO AND CDC are controlled by the U.N. and the U.S., just as soon as it is verified that transmission is easier than what is being claimed the world will start demanding quarantineing.

they know that when that happens, the world economy will tank.

edit on 26-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Bilk22



One has to wonder if Phage knows the definition of prudence.

I do. And it doesn't generally include kneejerk reactions. It means taking a thoughtful approach, doesn't it?


Depends entirely on the motive for the thoughtfulness, doesn't it?



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Maybe that's why our government seems to be taking things a bit more lightly than one would expect with a deadly virus like Ebola. We have had---what?---seven or eight Ebola patients here and the only one to die so far is the Liberian man....or so we've been told.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername




Depends entirely on the motive for the thoughtfulness, doesn't it?

No. Prudence is prudence.
I was asked if I knew the meaning of the word.
edit on 10/26/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie



they know that when that happens, the world economy will tank.

The world economy does not depend upon West Africa.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigent
a reply to: Phage

You forget sweat, semen, saliva, urine and milk


And tears.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

but it depends on air travel, people transfer on flights all over, also there are many buessiness people that go there, goods are delivered there, air crews take breaks there.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
DP


edit on 26-10-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Bilk22




How is it a kneejerk reaction? We already have had returning HC workers become infected. We do not yet know if they infected anyone else.

It's a kneejerk reaction because of what you just said. There is no evidence that these healthcare workers did, or could have infected anyone while they were not isolated. The evidence shows that it takes direct contact with the body fluids of an infected person to contract the disease.

A prudent approach weighs actual risk, benefit, and cost. Forcing non-symptomatic health care workers into quarantine is not prudent, it is a kneejerk reaction to fear and speculation.
edit on 10/26/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Ebola can live for days or weeks on certain surfaces in certain conditions. The fact no one was infected yet by returning healthcare workers does not mean they pose no risk.


+1 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The most prudent approach is elimination of risk, a fundamental of which is to eliminate individuals from leaving the country of the diseases' origin.

Once that has been breached, the next best thing is immediate isolated quarantine in the country of arrival for a nominal period of time.

Any other option increases risk, kneejerk or otherwise, that's is my personal stance on the matter.

In this instance, the human rights of the collective far outweigh the human rights of the individual.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yes, under certain conditions. It has been found that the virus can survive on surfaces.

Is there any evidence that it is transmissible via that method from patients who are barely symptomatic (or even those who are highly symptomatic)? Viral load is an important factor and is why the bodily fluids of highly infected people is dangerous. Again, we have the lack of evidence that transmission occurs by this method. Again, Thomas Duncan's family has not gotten sick. None of his contacts have. No one who was on his plane did.



posted on Oct, 26 2014 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft




The most prudent approach is elimination of risk, a fundamental of which is to eliminate individuals from leaving the country of the diseases' origin.

How do we prevent people from leaving their countries?
You want to sentence health care workers to remain in Liberia?


In this instance, the human rights of the collective far outweigh the human rights of the individual.
In this case fear and ignorance is the prime motivation. Ebola is epidemic in west Africa not because it is easily transmitted but because of the low level of health care and certain cultural practices. Practices which would encourage the spread of any disease spread by contact with the body fluids of infected individuals.

edit on 10/26/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
29
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join