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.

 

CDC Now Claims Ebola is "Transmittable" by Coughing - Sneezing ??

page: 6
46
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: BeefNoMeat

Did you read the pamphlet from the OP?


Ahh, no I didn't. I am a newbie here and didn't realize the hyperlink - I thought it was different font/text for whatever purpose - was for the pamphlet laying out the answer to the very question I was asking. My bad (still learning to navigate myself around this site). Thanks for pointing that out!




posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: BeefNoMeat

No worries, happens to all of us



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
Your a doom porn blocker. Every time I'm getting my doom lotion, you come around and doom block me. Booooo



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

OMG, dude. Stop. Just stop. It isn't airborne, and it can't travel into air vents. It doesn't have the capability of attaching to small enough droplets and would have to mutate orders of magnitude to be able to do that.

www.zerohedge.com...–-and-survive-longer-–-when-it’s-col

Might as well be 'airborne' . Viruses don't have the machinery for biotic processes independent of host cells like bacteria do. But still transmission can be localized airborne in nature. It might as well be airborne in colder climates since it can survive for longer periods on surfaces and lead to high probability of contact by another prospective host.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Biotech2024

Riiiight. Again, people are using MIT's sneeze research which includes ALL AEROSOLS that escape the body in a sneeze. Ebola can't attach to the smaller aerosols so the study on sneezes does not apply to Ebola. Also, your link was broken however it has been used before:

Your Link

Ebola also cannot attach to small enough aerosols to be carried into air vents...

Also, the CDC says 3-6 feet, not just 3. So one would assume the minimum safe distance is 6 feet, not 3.

Also, the zero hedge makes this claim:


However, since MIT has recently shown that sneeze droplets travel much farther than previously thought – and can enter into ventilation systems – Ebola protocols need to take these realities into account.


And points to this article as the source of that:

Source

However that article says NOTHING about Ebola making it into air vents. It is a misunderstanding by the blogger on zero hedge.

Here is what the study from MIT has to say:


A novel study by MIT researchers shows that coughs and sneezes have associated gas clouds that keep their potentially infectious droplets aloft over much greater distances than previously realized.“When you cough or sneeze, you see the droplets, or feel them if someone sneezes on you,” says John Bush, a professor of applied mathematics at MIT, and co-author of a new paper on the subject. “But you don’t see the cloud, the invisible gas phase. The influence of this gas cloud is to extend the range of the individual droplets, particularly the small ones.”


So as you can see, it is not the larger droplets (Like what Ebola can attach too), but the smaller aerosols that form the invisible cloud. Those are the ones that make it into air vents, and Ebola can't attach to them. Diseases like the Flu and TB however can very well be in that gas cloud.

Pertaining to:


originally posted by: Biotech2024
It might as well be airborne in colder climates since it can survive for longer periods on surfaces and lead to high probability of contact by another prospective host.


You just said it might as well be airborne, then described contact transmission...
edit on 29-10-2014 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: CJCrawley

No association with HIV was stressed a lot, and I'd like you to source where you got that from...

You are absolutely wrong.


I can't find the progs that referenced AIDS, but there has been a ton of stuff on UK telly that soft-soaped the whole thing.

Here's a little snapshot of all the great advice we've been treated to:


0:05 "It's actually quite difficult to catch Ebola, it is close contact, it is skin-to-skin contact, it is contact with body fluids so it's sweat, urine, vomiting, diarrhoea, it's those fluids that you have to touch to catch this virus."




0:32 "Ebola is an extremely hard disease to contract. It is transmitted only through contact with an infected person's blood or other bodily fluids, not through casual contact."




1:04 "The virus is far less contagious than Flu, for example, or SARS, you need to be very close to victims to become infected."



1:54 "The greatest risk is from actually touching blood, vomit, or diarrhoea. But Ebola is quite hard to catch, it's not carried invisibly in the air."


Nowhere do these vids state, or even imply, that you can get infected by someone simply sneezing on you.





posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

First I read the journals, then the news, then ATS. Ready to face the day! Can't get any crazier


Ebola and the Toilet Seat

Internal Memo Pushing to Bring EV Victims to US for Treatment



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
Doctors in West Africa have been saying all along that Ebola can be transmitted just by being in the same room as an Ebola patient without a Hazmat suit Western doctors say Ebola is a low risk, low transmission rate disease, which is NOT what African doctors are saying.


originally posted by: MysterX
These tiny droplets can contain millions of viruses in each one and the micro droplets can range out quite a distance because they are so small and can float on air currents tens of feet, and the scary part, can persist for up to 20 minutes suspended in air...

So, if you are in your local mall, or supermarket and an infected person has just coughed or sneezed, the infected droplet pattern can cover two aisles and linger for up to 20 minutes before falling out of the air and onto surfaces (like tins of beans or bags of pasta..for example), you come along 10 or 20 minutes after the infected cough and you are breathing the virus right into your lungs via the droplets.

3 feet my arse!


Just like I said in other threads, there is actually a segment of canines and humans, that have been potentially exposed to the disease, from the very start of this outbreak, that NO ONE is looking at and likely won't be anytime soon...

ALL personnel working with military dogs, working police dogs, the DHS Beagle brigade and contraband detection canines stationed at airports AROUND THE WORLD!

These dogs are on the FRONT LINES, inspecting cargo and passengers whom could be carrying Ebola. In fact these noted, very expensive, working dogs and their handlers have potentially had the longest period between their first exposure, YET, they CONTINUE to interact with the public on a daily basis and not ONE government official has thought to examine, euthanize or quarantine these cohort of dogs.

Who is currently caring for the military and police dogs that have screened bags and passengers at the airports? Could these "high value" dogs have been exposed to Ebola? Possibly, but I doubt they would be euthanized as quickly, but hey, according to government officials, its ok to euthanize "low value" civilian dogs with FAR LESS exposure potential to the disease.

If government officials had spared that Spanish civilian dog, much would have been learned, assuming the right steps were taken.

BUT, make no mistake the handlers of military dog, working police dogs, the DHS Beagle brigade and and contraband detection canines stationed at airports ARE FAR MORE LIKELY to have been exposed to Ebola at this point and are the REAL potential carriers. FAR more than ANY civilian owned dog, but EVERYONE wants to focus on dogs that have been exposed to individuals, whom have not always proven to be carriers yet.

People who supported euthanizing these dogs keep asking, "Are you willing to bet your life and your love ones for a dog?". Well, military and police dog handlers are already doing that and since they are in the public, both their handlers and administrators, are betting the lives of the general population without anyone's consent.

I make the above statement solely to point out HYPOCRISY, not to lay out a realistic transmission scenario. FYI, this thought comes from experience I had working with academic epidemiologists who studied the SARS outbreak a decade ago. My roles was the GIS mapping and yes, working dogs and handlers exposed at airports were included in the scenarios we mapped.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Ebola is only transmitted via bodily fluids of a infected person if and only if the infected fluid comes in contact with a orifice of another. That's why they say Ebola can be transmitted through an infected persons cough or sneeze (the saliva).



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Common sense should tell you this could be possible to begin with.Horrible incompetent Obama admin are ridiculous bad leaders.Why don't you people drink a glass of spit from an ebola infected person.Same thing as a sneeze getting down in you and saliva.Where is common sense at?
edit on 29-10-2014 by Jobeycool because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
If Ebola doesn't disappear in a mysterious there will be a lot of dead people in Various places.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Mercury, the messenger of the gods, guide of the dead and protector of (merchants, shepherds, gamblers, liars, and thieves)

No mystery whats taking place. $$



One Greek myth of origin of the caduceus is part of the story of Tiresias,[17] who found two snakes copulating and killed the female with his staff. Tiresias was immediately turned into a woman, and so remained until he was able to repeat the act with the male snake seven years later. This staff later came into the possession of the god Hermes, along with its transformative powers.
The ancient association of Mercury with Wednesday is still visible in the names of Wednesday in various modern languages of Latin descent, e.g. mercredi in French, miércoles in Spanish, or miercuri in Romanian. The names of the days of the week were, in late classical times, all related to the names of the seven bodies that were then considered to be planets.


The ear hears and the eye sees but does not understand.


I wouldn't worry about it because all of it is engineered thus can be stopped if they choose to.
relax
edit on 29-10-2014 by superluminal11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: clenz
Let's talk about this one more time for good measure, it will be fun.


It certainly will, because deniers will now see that even the CDC says "It Is Possible".



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: eNaR

When has it ever been claimed its not droplet spread?
Ive never seen any guidelines, research or official statements that have suggested it cant be spread by droplet?



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: eNaR

Nobody has ever denied it. The OP is just being deceptive.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:16 PM
link   
a reply to: CJCrawley




Nowhere do these vids state, or even imply, that you can get infected by someone simply sneezing on you.

You depend on TV news for health information?
If you are really concerned, that isn't a very good idea.

edit on 10/29/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Did like five to six people on ATS already state this fact. I know I did, and the CDC needed a 27 person team to figure this out. I didn't think we were in great hand with the CDC already with how they handle things. But this really does not help them look any better in my eyes.



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ObjectZero

Only the CDC has always said this and the OP is just being deceptive.

This is just a condensed pamphlet for distribution. Did you read it?



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Whether I depend on TV news or not is neither here nor there.

If major TV networks like the BBC are putting out false information, or creating a false impression, on the transmission of a deadly disease, which could yet go global and kill millions, it's a cause for concern.

Alarm, even.

Why aren't they saying what the CDC are saying?

Everyone should be singing from the same hymn sheet on this one.



posted on Oct, 30 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: CJCrawley




Why aren't they saying what the CDC are saying?

Good question. I don't know why they often have a hard time presenting factual information. But they do. That's why I don't pay a lot of attention to TV news.
edit on 10/30/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
46
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join