So you heard someone who was near an infected person might have it but turns out he was not even infected, that in turn translates to 5 people wearing hazmat suits getting infected. You are such a dumb ass you can't even keep track of your own bullshit.
Don't know if this is dumb or not but have they done studies to see if ebola remains in your system for life with the possibility of manifesting as something else? IE. chicken pox -> shingles?
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/texas-...s-hospitals-readiness-treat/story?id=26140892 Obviously a bunch of ignorant, intellectually lazy fear mongering conspiracy theorists at work here.
The Ebola virus is not particularly lysogenic; it is highly, highly lytic. i.e. it does not incorporate itself into the human genome and remain dormant... it infects cells, reproduces, and destroys the cell in the process. Shingles is the lysogenic aftermath of chicken pox, and usually requires a number of intracellular triggers to re-start the lytic cycle. The cycle for Ebola is very fast (which is why it is so destructive). How about scientific journal publications? Just to clarify the issue I have with your questions, and to give you a bit of background... I have worked with a number of people who have devoted their lives to finding a cure for horribly deadly diseases like Ebola. They work in BSL4 facilities. They quite literally put their lives on the line every day to understand how this (and other) viruses work... what is the optimal mode of operation, what is the burst rate, what is the primary receptor, what is the means of transmission, what is the infectivity, etc. For someone - with apparently ZERO knowledge of the topic -to then come in and say, you know, I'm just not confident these people know enough about this virus because [insert ignorant question that ignores all basic research here]... I find that slightly insulting to the work that is being done by these people. I don't know what you do, but I'm going to pretend it's car repair. If someone with no knowledge of cars said, "You know, I understand you think that that the problem is in the transmission, but what do we really know about transmissions and cars?" you'd probably be annoyed. Granted, cars are well understood because they are manmade, but the point remains... It'd be one thing if people took the time/effort to learn a little something about the topic and then raised meaningful questions about the current body of knowledge (because believe me, there are plenty of gaps in it); it's something else to just play the role of "skeptic" and "raise questions" about things that are already very well documented. It does a disservice to the work that these people do and to society as a whole. I get it. It's a horrible virus. It's scary. There are plenty of people and TV news stations who make money by playing up the fear factor. But that is no reason to spread disinformation. This is not the time nor place to excuse ignorance under the guise of "being skeptical." If you want to be extra-careful for yourself, fine. But don't pooh pooh the work that researchers in the medical community have done and are doing simply because it feeds into your worldview. If you have a problem with how the patients were treated/contained, fine. If you have a problem with the protocols in place and feel they aren't strict enough, fine. That is a legitimate concern, and accounts for the undeniable presence of human folly/error. But when you say you aren't convinced that "we" don't know enough about how Ebola is transmitted... you're part of the problem.
wtf are you talking about me spreading misinformation? if you dont like me questioning things feel free to ignore me or smd. otherwise, it's unfortunate you haven't yet contracted ebola.
"I wonder how many patients this woman dealt with in the meantime." You can question all you want. Inquire from a place of curiosity, though, instead of fear. And wishing Ebola on other people? How old are you? Sixteen?
so me asking a question is "spreading misinformation" in your genius mind. Got it buddy. go eat some ebola.
Come on. You were not just "asking a question," and you flat-out know it. The clear implication was that the nurse might be infecting other patients, despite that having no basis in how this virus works. When confronted with that, you said you're not confident that "we" know how the virus works... despite apparently not knowing anything yourself about how the virus works, and so not being in any position to judge the validity of what informed people say about the risks surrounding this nurse. Look, I'm sorry your ego is hurt to the point that you want to tell another human being to go eat some ebola. That can't be a good mental space. But the main point is that Ebola is scary enough in its own right... it doesn't need ignorant opinions muddying up the water and spreading more fear.
Why should I just accept what is said as truth? I'm sure you accept without question that there was a breach of protocol that caused her infection. It must feel all warm and fuzzy for you to just accept what people tell you is truth. I'll wait to see what plays out first before I'm a believer. ebola in your mouth.
I think you hit on the crux of the disagreement here. I don't just accept what people tell me as truth. I am comfortable with what is "truth" because - in this case - I have firsthand experience and know how to interpret secondhand information (from the journals). I don't accept without question that there was a breach of protocol... I don't know what the "truth" is there. I just know that a breach of protocol is far, far more likely to be the case than a mutation that has caused Ebola to become pneumonic, and will await more information before getting all paranoid about how many patients this nurse might have had contact with. That is where I differ from you. By all means, wait to see what plays out. We are all doing the same. But one other way you and I differ is that on the occasions where I am ignorant with respect to a given topic (and it happens many, many times), I withhold my opinions and try to learn more. If I ask a question, the question is focused on decreasing my ignorance instead of indirectly planting my opinion. In your case, instead of asking how Ebola is known to spread or if there is a risk with this nurse, you bypass all of that and go right to how many patients she may have had contact with, with the clear implication being that she may have infected them. Never let it be said that you handled this disagreement with anything but the utmost of class. Do you have children? I'm sure they must be proud of you.
You never let your ignorance to who I am prevent you from planting your opinion. here's the fun thing about arrogant pricks like you ... you put your pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us. if only one leg were soaked with Ebola vomit tomorrow we'd all be a little better off.
All I have to go on is what you said. I don't think my "opinion" about your posts is really that incredulous. Given your harsh responses, I can only assume I've hit the nail on the head with regard to your intent, and you don't like it. Alas. If I were incorrect, I'd assume you'd have better responses than ad hominem attacks. In any case, I'm off to bed. Despite your nastiness, I wish you a pleasant morrow and hope you find a more constructive outlet for your troubles.
Not too much trouble here. Something about this life feels a lot like winning to me. don't forget to brush your teeth and say your prayers!
They're already saying Tom Brady likely isn't straight.... oh wait Ebola. Yeah they're saying it's unlikely.
The situation in Connecticut right now is that if a patient comes in with flu-like symptoms you ask them if they have been in West Africa or have an acquaintance that has been in West Africa recently. If they answer either question with a "yes" you take them into an isolated office (with accessible private bathroom if possible), you lock them in and you call the health department. Doctors have been told that the health department will be there with the same response time as a 911 call.
