GaryPinC Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 The obvious focus is on people who present with symptoms that want to be cured. What we haven't seen are infected people who are suicidal and want to spread mayhem. The authorities aren't considering that scenario... yet. Wow, how 1980's of you. Maybe ISIS is sending jihadists over to West Africa right now to become infected and hop a plane to the States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Wow, how 1980's of you. Maybe ISIS is sending jihadists over to West Africa right now to become infected and hop a plane to the States. I get that you disagree with him, but what is it about jihadists, ebola, or terrorism in the continental US that you find to be reminiscent of the 80's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 WAIT, WHAT? You Can’t Cure Ebola With Money. I support government spending on basic research. But I really do not support the wrongheaded idea that medical research is like ordering groceries from Peapod: Just dial up what you want, and if you’re willing to pay the cost, you can have the goodies. In fact, it’s more like a lottery: if you don’t play, you can’t win, but at best, you still lose an awful lot. An Ebola vaccine is entering trials right now, and if it succeeds, that will be incredible news. But it could fail in many ways, and acting as if it’s a guarantee is grossly irresponsible. Francis Collins is smarter than I am, and he has dedicated his life to furthering the advancement of human knowledge, one of the noblest causes there is. He’s also a Washington bureaucrat, and while he’s wearing that hat, his job is to get more money for his agency. I suspect he let his good judgment get a bit carried away in the zealous pursuit of that mission. Raising unreasonable expectations very likely to be dashed is bad for public policy, and ultimately, bad for the scientific research that Collins has done so much to promote. That’s putting it kindly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) Duck why the hell do you respond to my post then delete it? I know you never have anything worth saying but don't bother responding only to delete it. I can still see that you respond The only threat is the imagination. The only worry with this right now is the Gov letting people in who are infected and they are stupid enough to do that! I decided not to waste my time with ignorance farm boy. Edited October 25, 2014 by Donald Duck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I decided not to waste me ignorance with time farm boy. Smart move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Duck Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) Many folks like to use the numbers argument along with comparisons to other diseases on why people shouldn't be concerned. The way I feel If one person dies a needless death it concerns me. I'm concerned for the poor and homeless, the ones who can't run to the doctor when becoming ill. I'm also concerned with the possible spread of Ebola If it was to reach the right demographics here in the US. Wow, how 1980's of you. Maybe ISIS is sending jihadists over to West Africa right now to become infected and hop a plane to the States. With all due respect Gary, this was actually one of my 1st thoughts on the Ebola situation as it became headline news. Edited October 25, 2014 by Donald Duck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 The obvious focus is on people who present with symptoms that want to be cured. What we haven't seen are infected people who are suicidal and want to spread mayhem. The authorities aren't considering that scenario... yet. Yes, they are. They're just not talking about it. But trust me, living bio-kamikazes has been a threat under consideration for a long time. Many folks like to use the numbers argument along with comparisons to other diseases on why people shouldn't be concerned. The way I feel If one person dies a needless death it concerns me. I'm concerned for the poor and homeless, the ones who can't run to the doctor when becoming ill. I'm also concerned with the possible spread of Ebola If it was to reach the right demographics here in the US. There's not going to be an epidemic in this country. The public health measures required to stop or prevent an Ebola outbreak are well known and work very well, and we have more than enough ability to implement them. The destitute and the homeless are at risk, but not nearly as much as they are at risk from many other problems that would be better addressed first. The single biggest problem inhibiting a proper public health response to any epidemic in this country is that your average American is a dumb, panicky, histrionic idiot who, thanks to the establishment of a ridiculously sterile "zero risk" society, grossly overestimates their educational level and is completely incapable of properly judging risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yes, they are. They're just not talking about it. But trust me, living bio-kamikazes has been a threat under consideration for a long time. There's not going to be an epidemic in this country. The public health measures required to stop or prevent an Ebola outbreak are well known and work very well, and we have more than enough ability to implement them. The destitute and the homeless are at risk, but not nearly as much as they are at risk from many other problems that would be better addressed first. The single biggest problem inhibiting a proper public health response to any epidemic in this country is that your average American is a dumb, panicky, histrionic idiot who, thanks to the establishment of a ridiculously sterile "zero risk" society, grossly overestimates their educational level and is completely incapable of properly judging risk these people then expect the government to protect them then cry hysterically at the slightest thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 these people then expect the government to protect them then cry hysterically at the slightest thing. meanwhile some folks who complain about an expansive federal gov't are whining that Obama isn't doing enough to stop Ebola Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 meanwhile some folks who complain about an expansive federal gov't are whining that Obama isn't doing enough to stop Ebola LOL................what a simplistic comparison. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 meanwhile some folks who complain about an expansive federal gov't are whining that Obama isn't doing enough to stop Ebola Mostly pandering, politically biased simpletons. That's a level of dumbassery worse that "Bush isn't dropping pallets of water on people in New Orleans!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 meanwhile some folks who complain about an expansive federal gov't are whining that Obama isn't doing enough to stop Ebola And those that have been exposed to it and could come down with it, are saying they are doing too much.... http://abcnews.go.com/Health/nurse-blasts-ebola-quarantine-feds-push-back-state/story?id=26466975 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 And those that have been exposed to it and could come down with it, are saying they are doing too much.... http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=26466975 The key difference being that those complaining the government are doing too much are generally much more knowledgeable about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 How can they do "too much" when it comes to isolating a virus? I agree, the people being held in isolation should get better digs. A tent and a porta-potty is pretty low. But what's another 21 days living in conditions that are probably still better than where they served? "Treated like a criminal." Where the heck is this coming from? I figured these attitudes would be expressed. Just tack on the 21 days to the time they serve overseas. Is it really that much of a bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 The key difference being that those complaining the government are doing too much are generally much more knowledgeable about it. ....and have to, simply have to, beat Kent's Kegglers at any cost. Even if there is no risk of infecting someone until you show symptoms, these geniuses like Dr. Bowling don't know when they are going to get symptoms. And even if the first symptoms allow the sick some time to get themselves isolated and there is no real threat; the panic you mention is still a reality. And everyone knows the panic is a reality. And the panic can end up dangerous. So the bottom line is that it was more important for this douche to go bowling and to his hip music club than it was to avoid throwing NYC into a panic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 There's not going to be an epidemic in this country. The public health measures required to stop or prevent an Ebola outbreak are well known and work very well, and we have more than enough ability to implement them. The destitute and the homeless are at risk, but not nearly as much as they are at risk from many other problems that would be better addressed first. I'm still trying to picture how the homeless of America would even go about getting ebola in the first place. They're not going to be hopping onto a plane to Africa any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Yeah, I'm guessing that we won't hear much about this............... Those Ebola Vaccines in Testing Now? You Can Thank Dick Cheney for That by Melissa Quinn Democrats looking to blame Republicans for the lack of an Ebola vaccine may owe Dick Cheney an apology. It turns out that as vice president, Cheney was the driving force behind more funding for the National Institutes of Health that helped lead to the development of Ebola vaccines being tested today. From the time scientists first discovered the deadly virus in 1976 to 2012, two dozen outbreaks of Ebola claimed the lives of roughly 1,500 people–far less than the nearly 5,000 killed in the current outbreak in West Africa. Bloomberg News reports that little money had been available to scientists to work on finding a cure to the disease. But after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Cheney, anticipating the potential for bioterrorist attacks, became the Bush White House’s point man advocating more spending to protect the nation from deadly pathogens. Cheney told Bloomberg: It has ramifications when the source of the problem you’re dealing with is something like an outbreak of Ebola, but our prime motivation was to make certain we were prepared to deal with an attempt to use those substances in an attack. >>> Why Budget Cuts Have Nothing to Do with Developing an Ebola Vaccine Since 2001, the National Institutes of Health’s budget to study biodefense measures has increased from $53 million to $1.6 billion. Of the drugs now in testing phases, including some to help Americans diagnosed with Ebola, seven were developed because of the additional resources made available after 9/11. In 2004, Congress passed Project Bioshield, legislation that allocated $5.6 billion for purchasing, developing and storing drugs that could be used in the event of a bioterrorist attack. When President George W. Bush signed the bill into law, he commended Cheney for his role in its passage. More at the link: http://dailysignal.com/2014/10/24/democrats-looking-blame-republicans-lack-ebola-vaccine-may-owe-dick-cheney-apology/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Yeah, I'm guessing that we won't hear much about this............... More at the link: http://dailysignal.c...m_medium=social Yeah but, Cheney shot an old guy in the face and used a weather machine to kill black people in New Orleans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Yeah but, Cheney shot an old guy in the face and used a weather machine to kill black people in New Orleans We don't joke about HAARP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Someone correct my timeline if I'm off On Saturday, NY & NJ Governors enact a mandatory quarantine for any returnees exposed to Ebola On Sunday, the White House publicly slaps both governors' actions calling them extreme On Monday, WSJ reports that CDC recommends home isolation for travelers exposed to Ebola and monitoring for those at moderate risk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts