Happy Jack

Are you worried about Ebola coming here?

Recommended Posts

Well, now that we'll shortly be Republican led - so they can remove the funding for the criminally negligent CDC.

 

We don't need no stinkin science. We can use 18th century approaches. Hell, it worked for great-great-grandad. Should be good enough for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ebola Quarantines Ignore Experience and Trample Freedoms

 

Back in 2002 and 2003, a virus called Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) infected more than 8,000 people, mostly in Asia, and killed 774. Even though it could be spread through the air, had a high mortality rate and infected 27 people in the United States, the CDC didn't recommend mandatory quarantines. So it makes sense that the agency would not advise that approach for Ebola, which is much harder to contract.

Well, it's clear that Ebola is uber-scary cause we have a Black President who wants to punish America for Slavery. And those Asians are really smart, but not so scary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, now that we'll shortly be Republican led - so they can remove the funding for the criminally negligent CDC.

 

We don't need no stinkin science. We can use 18th century approaches. Hell, it worked for great-great-grandad. Should be good enough for us.

 

Why rely on ancient practices when we have modern remedies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody said Ebola was anything but a terrible disease. I'm just not worried about it coming here. It's been here. People come here for treatment, and not a single person has identified anyone who contracted Ebola in the US who was not providing care or otherwise in direct contact with an Ebola patient.

 

Soon, the time windows will close for Dallas and NY, and we can all crack open a Yoo Hoo and relax a bit. I'll be serving up a few.

 

Until then, we need some human sacrifice to keep the sun fed so that it will continue to provide light. Science is librul hooey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, now that we'll shortly be Republican led - so they can remove the funding for the criminally negligent CDC.

 

We don't need no stinkin science. We can use 18th century approaches. Hell, it worked for great-great-grandad. Should be good enough for us.

 

Why rely on ancient practices when we have modern remedies?

Holy Shit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Well, now that we'll shortly be Republican led - so they can remove the funding for the criminally negligent CDC.

 

We don't need no stinkin science. We can use 18th century approaches. Hell, it worked for great-great-grandad. Should be good enough for us.

 

Why rely on ancient practices when we have modern remedies?

Holy Shit!

 

Love this one -- "We should put Wendy Davis' vagina in charge of the Ebola outbreak. It will kill all of them without mercy and go to Nordstrom's afterwards."

 

If you have a couple minutes, you should read this guy's Tweets - https://twitter.com/Todd__Kincannon

 

Some very funny stuff. Off color, but funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm not sure who to vote for for Ebola Czar. I haven't heard a thing from the one in office now. Does he think Ebola is airborne or borne through the air?

 

I'm pretty sure he thinks what he's told to think by Obama.

 

Maybe we haven't heard from the Ebola Czar because he's having difficulty passing Yes-Man 101.

 

He doesn't have to say anything, especially if saying nothing works to pipe the media away from the people who actually have to get shit done as well as saying something does.

 

RNI3QEz.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.who.int/trade/glossary/story092/en/

8m deaths and 1.3m new cases each year - confidence that it's airborne, no ambiguity on control or treatment protocols.

But no writhing in agony while spewing body fluids, so no headlines, no global reaction.

The issue is, for me, less about the disease itself, and more about the Experts coming across as inept and unsure, behind a facade of arrogance. Fess up. "We don't know for sure, and as a result more, not less, caution in treatment settings would be advisable." What's so hard about that?

Do you always make that much sense?

:-)

Caught me on a good day. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This epidemic seems to be far less pressing here in the US, now that the election is over. Is this no longer the Death Plague of Modern American Times?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This epidemic seems to be far less pressing here in the US, now that the election is over. Is this no longer the Death Plague of Modern American Times?

 

Who ever suggested it was, drama queen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whew. Plague over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whew. Plague over.

We still have to wait 21 days to be sure. Don't break out the Yoo Hoo just yet. There will be plenty to go around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebola Panic Control

After a judge rejected Maine's attempt to quarantine Kaci Hickox, the state's attorney general said she was "very pleased," while the state's governor called the decision "unfortunate." The difference between these two reactions is the difference between a rational, scientifically informed response to Ebola and a demagogic response that sacrifices liberty to a popular panic.

 

Last week Charles LaVerdiere, chief judge of the Maine District Courts, ruled that any potential threat posed by Hickox, a nurse who returned to the U.S. on October 24 after treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, could be adequately addressed by "direct active monitoring" aimed at detecting the onset of symptoms should she become ill.

 

...

 

Hickox, mindful of her neighbors' discomfort, nevertheless says she does not plan to go into town until after the incubation period ends on November 10, three weeks after she finished her work in Sierra Leone. If so, why did she bother challenging LePage's attempted quarantine?

 

"Sometimes we fight for our rights," Hickox told the Portland Press Herald, "but it doesn't mean we have to act on them." By showing that the routine quarantine of health care workers returning from West Africa does not satisfy the constitutional test typically applied in such cases, Hickox's case may help promote a more levelheaded approach in other states.

 

 

It's nice when people take an interest in defending rights, even ones they don't wish to exercise. You can never really get your dogs out of that fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebola Panic Control

 

After a judge rejected Maine's attempt to quarantine Kaci Hickox, the state's attorney general said she was "very pleased," while the state's governor called the decision "unfortunate." The difference between these two reactions is the difference between a rational, scientifically informed response to Ebola and a demagogic response that sacrifices liberty to a popular panic.

 

Last week Charles LaVerdiere, chief judge of the Maine District Courts, ruled that any potential threat posed by Hickox, a nurse who returned to the U.S. on October 24 after treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, could be adequately addressed by "direct active monitoring" aimed at detecting the onset of symptoms should she become ill.

 

...

 

Hickox, mindful of her neighbors' discomfort, nevertheless says she does not plan to go into town until after the incubation period ends on November 10, three weeks after she finished her work in Sierra Leone. If so, why did she bother challenging LePage's attempted quarantine?

 

"Sometimes we fight for our rights," Hickox told the Portland Press Herald, "but it doesn't mean we have to act on them." By showing that the routine quarantine of health care workers returning from West Africa does not satisfy the constitutional test typically applied in such cases, Hickox's case may help promote a more levelheaded approach in other states.

 

 

It's nice when people take an interest in defending rights, even ones they don't wish to exercise. You can never really get your dogs out of that fight.

 

I'm that way with the 2nd. I appreciate that Hickox has taken that position. I think it would have been much better if she had made that point at the outset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Whistling in the graveyard. The threat is real. Attacking the message because you hate the messenger is childish.

Imagine if somebody was doing that! Imagine it!

 

I'll stick with the CDC and what the Canadians have to say about it, and pay less attention to the fear mongers, thanks just the same. I realize that for some, science is librul hooey, but some of us defer to people who know about the topic. But I promise to remember this thread in the future. Like so many Simple Jack threads, it will be the gift that keeps on giving. Keep following the Pied Piper of Morons.

 

Ask Moe and see what he says privately if he's willing to say anything to you. There are many others including the WHO who are freaked about this and rightly so.

I could take if more seriously if you really want me to. Are you sure you want that?

Well, it was a good thing that I turned my thinking around and started taking Ebola seriously. As a result, we have a thread that has resulted in a lower incidence of Ebola infection among our membership here on SA than in the US (though we have the same success rate as the general population that was not involved in direct contact/care with/of an Ebola patient). We set the standard by which all others will be judged.

 

Be proud...and Vigilant!

 

 

Time for a Yoo Hoo in Spain. (This message brought to you by PETA).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ebola Panic Control

 

After a judge rejected Maine's attempt to quarantine Kaci Hickox, the state's attorney general said she was "very pleased," while the state's governor called the decision "unfortunate." The difference between these two reactions is the difference between a rational, scientifically informed response to Ebola and a demagogic response that sacrifices liberty to a popular panic.

 

Last week Charles LaVerdiere, chief judge of the Maine District Courts, ruled that any potential threat posed by Hickox, a nurse who returned to the U.S. on October 24 after treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, could be adequately addressed by "direct active monitoring" aimed at detecting the onset of symptoms should she become ill.

 

...

 

Hickox, mindful of her neighbors' discomfort, nevertheless says she does not plan to go into town until after the incubation period ends on November 10, three weeks after she finished her work in Sierra Leone. If so, why did she bother challenging LePage's attempted quarantine?

 

"Sometimes we fight for our rights," Hickox told the Portland Press Herald, "but it doesn't mean we have to act on them." By showing that the routine quarantine of health care workers returning from West Africa does not satisfy the constitutional test typically applied in such cases, Hickox's case may help promote a more levelheaded approach in other states.

 

 

It's nice when people take an interest in defending rights, even ones they don't wish to exercise. You can never really get your dogs out of that fight.

 

I'm that way with the 2nd. I appreciate that Hickox has taken that position. I think it would have been much better if she had made that point at the outset.

 

I thought Christie made the point pretty clear by sticking her in a tent for a few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Ebola Panic Control

 

After a judge rejected Maine's attempt to quarantine Kaci Hickox, the state's attorney general said she was "very pleased," while the state's governor called the decision "unfortunate." The difference between these two reactions is the difference between a rational, scientifically informed response to Ebola and a demagogic response that sacrifices liberty to a popular panic.

 

Last week Charles LaVerdiere, chief judge of the Maine District Courts, ruled that any potential threat posed by Hickox, a nurse who returned to the U.S. on October 24 after treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, could be adequately addressed by "direct active monitoring" aimed at detecting the onset of symptoms should she become ill.

 

...

 

Hickox, mindful of her neighbors' discomfort, nevertheless says she does not plan to go into town until after the incubation period ends on November 10, three weeks after she finished her work in Sierra Leone. If so, why did she bother challenging LePage's attempted quarantine?

 

"Sometimes we fight for our rights," Hickox told the Portland Press Herald, "but it doesn't mean we have to act on them." By showing that the routine quarantine of health care workers returning from West Africa does not satisfy the constitutional test typically applied in such cases, Hickox's case may help promote a more levelheaded approach in other states.

 

 

It's nice when people take an interest in defending rights, even ones they don't wish to exercise. You can never really get your dogs out of that fight.

 

I'm that way with the 2nd. I appreciate that Hickox has taken that position. I think it would have been much better if she had made that point at the outset.

 

I thought Christie made the point pretty clear by sticking her in a tent for a few days.

 

I thought he was following CDC protocols. Is the purpose of airport screening to simply go through the motions and not react when someone has a temperature based on CDC methods? Is the CDC's mandatory screening political theater?

 

I'm sure that more effective and consistent practices will be put in place that protect the public as well as individual rights as soon as an Ebola Czar is appointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDC methods do not say you must exclusively rely on a forehead scan. They will probably admit that several days of normal readings on an oral thermometer are a pretty good indication of no fever. She had no symptoms besides the "fever" and even that one was almost immediately shown by more reliable means to be inaccurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDC methods do not say you must exclusively rely on a forehead scan. They will probably admit that several days of normal readings on an oral thermometer are a pretty good indication of no fever. She had no symptoms besides the "fever" and even that one was almost immediately shown by more reliable means to be inaccurate.

 

Then the CDC methodology is flawed? What does the CDC say should be relied on before putting someone in quarantine vs. letting them catch an airport cab?

 

There's a reason why we have the CDC, and I don't think it would be practical for every state to determine the best method for determining whether someone is a threat to the general public or not. That's a job best left to the experts in Atlanta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

CDC methods do not say you must exclusively rely on a forehead scan. They will probably admit that several days of normal readings on an oral thermometer are a pretty good indication of no fever. She had no symptoms besides the "fever" and even that one was almost immediately shown by more reliable means to be inaccurate.

Then the CDC methodology is flawed? What does the CDC say should be relied on before putting someone in quarantine vs. letting them catch an airport cab?

Symptoms. The "fever" was verified not to be a fever before she entered the tent, and several times per day while she was there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

CDC methods do not say you must exclusively rely on a forehead scan. They will probably admit that several days of normal readings on an oral thermometer are a pretty good indication of no fever. She had no symptoms besides the "fever" and even that one was almost immediately shown by more reliable means to be inaccurate.

Then the CDC methodology is flawed? What does the CDC say should be relied on before putting someone in quarantine vs. letting them catch an airport cab?

Symptoms. The "fever" was verified not to be a fever before she entered the tent, and several times per day while she was there.

 

What is the CDC protocol for a situation like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

CDC methods do not say you must exclusively rely on a forehead scan. They will probably admit that several days of normal readings on an oral thermometer are a pretty good indication of no fever. She had no symptoms besides the "fever" and even that one was almost immediately shown by more reliable means to be inaccurate.

 

Then the CDC methodology is flawed? What does the CDC say should be relied on before putting someone in quarantine vs. letting them catch an airport cab?

Symptoms. The "fever" was verified not to be a fever before she entered the tent, and several times per day while she was there.

What is the CDC protocol for a situation like that?

For a person without symptoms? I'm not sure. They seem to change frequently. What would be a common-sense protocol for asymptomatic people? A tent for a few weeks, just in case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honeymoon suite at the 4 seasons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

CDC methods do not say you must exclusively rely on a forehead scan. They will probably admit that several days of normal readings on an oral thermometer are a pretty good indication of no fever. She had no symptoms besides the "fever" and even that one was almost immediately shown by more reliable means to be inaccurate.

Then the CDC methodology is flawed? What does the CDC say should be relied on before putting someone in quarantine vs. letting them catch an airport cab?

Symptoms. The "fever" was verified not to be a fever before she entered the tent, and several times per day while she was there.

What is the CDC protocol for a situation like that?

For a person without symptoms? I'm not sure. They seem to change frequently. What would be a common-sense protocol for asymptomatic people? A tent for a few weeks, just in case?

 

She was symptomatic based on CDC protocol at the airport. Once that happened, I would think that CDC guidelines would dictate what protocols be followed from that point forward. I don't think it makes sense for the CDC to determine someone with symptoms who had direct contact with Ebola patients should simply call a local ambulance and pat themselves on the back for a job well done - do you?

 

What if she also threw up and then didn't barf again for an hour? Hail her a cab because she's become asymptomatic?

 

I feel for the nurse, but I don't think NJ or Maine should take hit for how she was dealt with. We have a bunch of experts in Atlanta who's job it is to deal with this kind of situation, and they didn't appear to provide much input or direction.

 

A common sense protocol would be based on CDC guidelines du jour that would take into account exceptions, assumptions and anomalies.

 

The CDC is fortunate to have guinea pigs like Hickox, Christie, LePage, and a judge in Maine so they can develop a strategy for dealing with similar situations in the future....assuming they are taking notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not "symptoms" but one symptom, and she did not have it at the airport according to the oral thermometer.

 

I'm still waiting for one of our docs to weigh in on which is more reliable, a thermometer or a scan.

 

To me, the scan justifies taking her temp with a more accurate thermometer, nothing more.

 

If the oral thermometer had shown a fever, putting her in a tent would make a bit more sense.

 

But it didn't, so it doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not "symptoms" but one symptom, and she did not have it at the airport according to the oral thermometer.

 

I'm still waiting for one of our docs to weigh in on which is more reliable, a thermometer or a scan.

 

To me, the scan justifies taking her temp with a more accurate thermometer, nothing more.

 

If the oral thermometer had shown a fever, putting her in a tent would make a bit more sense.

 

But it didn't, so it doesn't.

 

If the CDC protocol says to check for fever using a different method and ignore the forehead scan if the other method results in a normal temperature, I get your point.

 

My assumption is that the CDC protocol threw up a flag based on forehead scan + exposure to Ebola patients. Once that flag went up - what were the CDC guidelines?

 

Edit - That we are even having this conversation is reason enough to ask the CDC - "Have you considered this and developed appropriate protocols?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know and am more inclined to follow common sense than ever-changing guidelines anyway.

 

If a government agency demands one test, I might just decide a more accurate one makes more sense. I'm ornery that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know and am more inclined to follow common sense than ever-changing guidelines anyway.

 

If a government agency demands one test, I might just decide a more accurate one makes more sense. I'm ornery that way.

 

I agree, but I do think that this is a situation that needs consistency applied from state to state. That's why we fund the CDC - to handle situations just like this one....instead of leaving it up to a judge in Maine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/

 

Ebola virus disease is not an airborne infection. Airborne spread among humans implies inhalation of an infectious dose of virus from a suspended cloud of small dried droplets.

This mode of transmission has not been observed during extensive studies of the Ebola virus over several decades.

Common sense and observation tell us that spread of the virus via coughing or sneezing is rare, if it happens at all. Epidemiological data emerging from the outbreak are not consistent with the pattern of spread seen with airborne viruses, like those that cause measles and chickenpox, or the airborne bacterium that causes tuberculosis.

Theoretically, wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently, could transmit the virus – over a short distance – to another nearby person.

This could happen when virus-laden heavy droplets are directly propelled, by coughing or sneezing (which does not mean airborne transmission) onto the mucus membranes or skin with cuts or abrasions of another person.

WHO is not aware of any studies that actually document this mode of transmission. On the contrary, good quality studies from previous Ebola outbreaks show that all cases were infected by direct close contact with symptomatic patients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/

 

Ebola virus disease is not an airborne infection. Airborne spread among humans implies inhalation of an infectious dose of virus from a suspended cloud of small dried droplets.

This mode of transmission has not been observed during extensive studies of the Ebola virus over several decades.

Common sense and observation tell us that spread of the virus via coughing or sneezing is rare, if it happens at all. Epidemiological data emerging from the outbreak are not consistent with the pattern of spread seen with airborne viruses, like those that cause measles and chickenpox, or the airborne bacterium that causes tuberculosis.

Theoretically, wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently, could transmit the virus – over a short distance – to another nearby person.

This could happen when virus-laden heavy droplets are directly propelled, by coughing or sneezing (which does not mean airborne transmission) onto the mucus membranes or skin with cuts or abrasions of another person.

WHO is not aware of any studies that actually document this mode of transmission. On the contrary, good quality studies from previous Ebola outbreaks show that all cases were infected by direct close contact with symptomatic patients.

 

WHO does a great job using plain language. Very clear and concise.

 

Is that copyrighted, or could our own CDC cut-and-paste from that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama just requested $6 billion for Ebola. Targeted for international and domestic control of the virus. Good for him and I hope it passes quickly.

 

The article from Fox NBC quotes the request in part -

 

"Specifically, the request includes resources for domestic hospital and State and local preparedness..." (link)

 

It appears as though a macro approach is coming together. I guess the Ebola Czar is working diligently behind the scenes to reassure us that we can do our part at the source and here at home - at the same time.

 

Please excuse the link that brings you to the garish Fox News NBC link -"EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK - 830 STORIES".

 

I wouldn't be so presumptive as to suggest the timing of the request was based on political considerations. I'm sure there are practical reasons why the request wasn't made on Monday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama just requested $6 billion for Ebola. Targeted for international and domestic control of the virus. Good for him and I hope it passes quickly.

 

The article from Fox NBC quotes the request in part -

 

"Specifically, the request includes resources for domestic hospital and State and local preparedness..." (link)

 

It appears as though a macro approach is coming together. I guess the Ebola Czar is working diligently behind the scenes to reassure us that we can do our part at the source and here at home - at the same time.

 

Please excuse the link that brings you to the garish Fox News NBC link -"EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK - 830 STORIES".

 

I wouldn't be so presumptive as to suggest the timing of the request was based on political considerations. I'm sure there are practical reasons why the request wasn't made on Monday.

 

I was fairly sure the 6 billion was to be broken down as 100 million DOD, 3 billion State and the remainder to the CDC.

 

Since it's the military they are sending in why does State need 3 billion and what do they contribute to a solution. This is the same department that was the ONLY one to object to the Keystone Pipeline after the other government agencies had studied the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Obama just requested $6 billion for Ebola. Targeted for international and domestic control of the virus. Good for him and I hope it passes quickly.

 

The article from Fox NBC quotes the request in part -

 

"Specifically, the request includes resources for domestic hospital and State and local preparedness..." (link)

 

It appears as though a macro approach is coming together. I guess the Ebola Czar is working diligently behind the scenes to reassure us that we can do our part at the source and here at home - at the same time.

 

Please excuse the link that brings you to the garish Fox News NBC link -"EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK - 830 STORIES".

 

I wouldn't be so presumptive as to suggest the timing of the request was based on political considerations. I'm sure there are practical reasons why the request wasn't made on Monday.

 

I was fairly sure the 6 billion was to be broken down as 100 million DOD, 3 billion State and the remainder to the CDC.

 

Since it's the military they are sending in why does State need 3 billion and what do they contribute to a solution. This is the same department that was the ONLY one to object to the Keystone Pipeline after the other government agencies had studied the problem.

 

I'm impressed there's a comprehensive approach that doesn't say we either fight the virus at the source or protect ourselves at home - which has been the mantra from the WH. It is nice to see Obama admit that we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

I am surprised that NBC posted the story, which brings them up to 831 stories about the "EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK". Those guys at Fox need to ratchet things up a bit.

 

I'll assume the State money is to hand out cash to educate and help prop up the economies of impacted countries. I don't have a problem with that, even though they are black people without massive oil deposits.

 

Sol will be along any minute to ask how we are going to pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's ok, Auntie Fed will pick up the tab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we know Congress won't pay for it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Obama just requested $6 billion for Ebola. Targeted for international and domestic control of the virus. Good for him and I hope it passes quickly.

 

The article from Fox NBC quotes the request in part -

 

"Specifically, the request includes resources for domestic hospital and State and local preparedness..." (link)

 

It appears as though a macro approach is coming together. I guess the Ebola Czar is working diligently behind the scenes to reassure us that we can do our part at the source and here at home - at the same time.

 

Please excuse the link that brings you to the garish Fox News NBC link -"EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK - 830 STORIES".

 

I wouldn't be so presumptive as to suggest the timing of the request was based on political considerations. I'm sure there are practical reasons why the request wasn't made on Monday.

 

I was fairly sure the 6 billion was to be broken down as 100 million DOD, 3 billion State and the remainder to the CDC.

 

Since it's the military they are sending in why does State need 3 billion and what do they contribute to a solution. This is the same department that was the ONLY one to object to the Keystone Pipeline after the other government agencies had studied the problem.

 

I'm impressed there's a comprehensive approach that doesn't say we either fight the virus at the source or protect ourselves at home - which has been the mantra from the WH. It is nice to see Obama admit that we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

I am surprised that NBC posted the story, which brings them up to 831 stories about the "EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK". Those guys at Fox need to ratchet things up a bit.

 

I'll assume the State money is to hand out cash to educate and help prop up the economies of impacted countries. I don't have a problem with that, even though they are black people without massive oil deposits.

 

Sol will be along any minute to ask how we are going to pay for it.

 

Lotsa them governments will like the hand out cash part. Yup, they sure will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking A you guys are pissy today. You'd think you'd be in a better mood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Obama just requested $6 billion for Ebola. Targeted for international and domestic control of the virus. Good for him and I hope it passes quickly.

 

The article from Fox NBC quotes the request in part -

 

"Specifically, the request includes resources for domestic hospital and State and local preparedness..." (link)

 

It appears as though a macro approach is coming together. I guess the Ebola Czar is working diligently behind the scenes to reassure us that we can do our part at the source and here at home - at the same time.

 

Please excuse the link that brings you to the garish Fox News NBC link -"EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK - 830 STORIES".

 

I wouldn't be so presumptive as to suggest the timing of the request was based on political considerations. I'm sure there are practical reasons why the request wasn't made on Monday.

 

I was fairly sure the 6 billion was to be broken down as 100 million DOD, 3 billion State and the remainder to the CDC.

 

Since it's the military they are sending in why does State need 3 billion and what do they contribute to a solution. This is the same department that was the ONLY one to object to the Keystone Pipeline after the other government agencies had studied the problem.

 

I'm impressed there's a comprehensive approach that doesn't say we either fight the virus at the source or protect ourselves at home - which has been the mantra from the WH. It is nice to see Obama admit that we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

I am surprised that NBC posted the story, which brings them up to 831 stories about the "EBOLA VIRUS OUTBREAK". Those guys at Fox need to ratchet things up a bit.

 

I'll assume the State money is to hand out cash to educate and help prop up the economies of impacted countries. I don't have a problem with that, even though they are black people without massive oil deposits.

 

Sol will be along any minute to ask how we are going to pay for it.

 

Lotsa them governments will like the hand out cash part. Yup, they sure will.

 

And I don't have a problem with that. Why spend billions to deal with the virus problem at the source and ignore that the very fabric of their society is going to shit there and there economies are ruined? Because it is in our best interest at home to keep this at bay, and the right thing to do.

 

If we can embed an occupying force anywhere, it should be in West Africa. Not military, but doctors and nurses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't you a bleeding heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't you a bleeding heart.

 

No. I'm a realist who appreciates that Obama has finally accepted that Ebola needs to be fought on two fronts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBC, a funny picture --

 

_76790060_76790059.jpg

 

 

Sol? You have any "the nigger gets it" humor to lighten things up here?

 

Edit - Sol? Not funny here right now. Back me, Sol....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody else get it in Dallas or NYC? Not yet? That's why I'm not worried about Ebola coming here.

 

When you have to try to change the definition of something to make it fit your opinion, there's something wrong with your opinion. But hey, if the team needs you, do what you gotta do, right?

 

Still not worried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody else get it in Dallas or NYC? Not yet? That's why I'm not worried about Ebola coming here.

 

When you have to try to change the definition of something to make it fit your opinion, there's something wrong with your opinion. But hey, if the team needs you, do what you gotta do, right?

 

Still not worried.

 

Who's opinion was the CDC working with when they changed their definitions?

 

Your team of one needs you, Sol. Levity, Purell and Smurf posters to supplement the official, and ever changing, CDC posters.

 

Yoo Hoo! Only 5,000 dead so far! You are one funny, fucking guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebola might be declining in Liberia

 

Or not...

 

 

It's possible that at least some of the decline is because cases are being hidden — a phenomenon that has plagued the response to the outbreak since the beginning, said Ella Watson-Stryker, a health promotion manager for Doctors Without Borders in Liberia.

 

She said her team has heard of people doing their own burials in order to avoid a government order that Ebola victims in Monrovia be cremated; the government has also cited fear of cremation, a practice deeply at odds with Liberian tradition, as a reason beds are empty in treatment centers. Watson-Stryker added that people may be staying away from such centers because they are still confused about what kind of care is given at them.

 

Meanwhile, Obama is putting boots, presumably safely wrapped and taped, on the ground.


President Obama has assured Americans that none of the nearly 4,000 U.S. troops heading to Liberia will treat Ebola patients, but 70 uniformed officers of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps will.

 

The corps, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, will open a clinic outside the Liberian capital, Monrovia, this weekend and is tasked with treating Liberian doctors and nurses who contract the deadly disease. It is the first time U.S. government personnel have been given that assignment, although all volunteered.

 

I salute those brave people. If you're supposed to salute them. I don't know military etiquette.

 

I also think that if they come home with no symptoms, we probably shouldn't put them in a tent for a few weeks, just in case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebola might be declining in Liberia

 

Or not...

 

 

It's possible that at least some of the decline is because cases are being hidden — a phenomenon that has plagued the response to the outbreak since the beginning, said Ella Watson-Stryker, a health promotion manager for Doctors Without Borders in Liberia.

 

She said her team has heard of people doing their own burials in order to avoid a government order that Ebola victims in Monrovia be cremated; the government has also cited fear of cremation, a practice deeply at odds with Liberian tradition, as a reason beds are empty in treatment centers. Watson-Stryker added that people may be staying away from such centers because they are still confused about what kind of care is given at them.

 

Meanwhile, Obama is putting boots, presumably safely wrapped and taped, on the ground.

 

 

>

President Obama has assured Americans that none of the nearly 4,000 U.S. troops heading to Liberia will treat Ebola patients, but 70 uniformed officers of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps will.

 

The corps, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, will open a clinic outside the Liberian capital, Monrovia, this weekend and is tasked with treating Liberian doctors and nurses who contract the deadly disease. It is the first time U.S. government personnel have been given that assignment, although all volunteered.

 

I salute those brave people. If you're supposed to salute them. I don't know military etiquette.

 

I also think that if they come home with no symptoms, we probably shouldn't put them in a tent for a few weeks, just in case.

 

I salute them as well. I'm not sure if HHS personnel will have a forced, 3 week layover in Italy like DOD folks, but I can only assume they knew the exit protocols before volunteering.

 

Good on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 3 week beach vacation seems appropriate. There are some nice beaches in west africa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very happy that now that the Republicans are in-charge that we don't have to worry about Ebola anymore. Just like when the Liberals were in-charge they took care of the gun problem for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very happy that now that the Republicans are in-charge that we don't have to worry about Ebola anymore. Just like when the Liberals were in-charge they took care of the gun problem for us.

 

Which state are you talking about? There are plenty of GOP governors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

see my link above - we have 100+ under observation in NYC alone for Ebola.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Texas Ebola Outbreak has ended. http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/its-over-texas-ebola-outbreak-has-ended-n242931

 

That's why I am not worried about ebola coming here. It can be controlled here. Science can handle that.

 

 

Fearbola spreads through ignorance, via carriers seeking to scare people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34q5u2x.png

 

 

Of course this could never happen here.

 

 

2hfuzjs.png

I still don't see a mechanism for dealing with waste when public services go to shite. Do you have an outhouse on the property? I actually have a 1/2 size kids play house that could be converted. Would need to dig the hole...

 

I also spent a lot of time in the Philippines. We had a cistern on the roof as the city water only ran intermittently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

34q5u2x.png

 

 

Of course this could never happen here.

 

 

2hfuzjs.png

I still don't see a mechanism for dealing with waste when public services go to shite. Do you have an outhouse on the property? I actually have a 1/2 size kids play house that could be converted. Would need to dig the hole...

 

I also spent a lot of time in the Philippines. We had a cistern on the roof as the city water only ran intermittently.

 

I have three septic systems Main House , Guest House and Stable/Barn. Private Well and Solar Farm that is being expanded. Not because I'm a prepper but because I'm rural and there is no Public water/sewer and the power is unreliable in a storm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what does the be-prepared guide say about waste? I always find it interesting they focus on the clean part, but not the nasty part, which maybe be even more important. Waste disposal after a disaster always seems to be the problem area for disease and death. Not starvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Texas Ebola Outbreak has ended. http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/its-over-texas-ebola-outbreak-has-ended-n242931

 

That's why I am not worried about ebola coming here. It can be controlled here. Science can handle that.

 

 

Fearbola spreads through ignorance, via carriers seeking to scare people.

Isn't it wonderful how the Kenyan has saved us once again. I am truly amazed by what he accomplishes. He must be double jointed since he seems to pat himself on the back on a daily basis.

 

I think he has an undiagnosed mental illness. His emotions just seem out of whack. There is a personality disorder there for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what does the be-prepared guide say about waste? I always find it interesting they focus on the clean part, but not the nasty part, which maybe be even more important. Waste disposal after a disaster always seems to be the problem area for disease and death. Not starvation.

 

Compost and burn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that works in rural areas. not so much urban. most folks live in urban/suburbam locales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebola has made it to the U.S., and everyone is freaking out. They shouldn’t be—at least not until they’ve sufficiently freaked out about these 104 things that, according to nationwide data, are even more likely to kill them.

∙ Walking to work

∙ Stroke

∙ Hunting accidents

∙ COPD

∙ Drawstrings on your jacket

∙ Wrong-site surgery

∙ Alligators

∙ Lower respiratory infections

∙ Cycling

∙ Trachea bronchus, lung cancers

∙ Drinking too much

∙ Not wearing your seatbelt

∙ HIV/AIDS

∙ Falling off the roof

∙ Flying in airplanes

∙ Smoking

∙ Kitchen fire

∙ Falling in the shower

∙ Diarrhoeal diseases

∙ Diabetes

∙ Choking

∙ Car accidents

∙ Snake bites

∙ Heart disease

∙ Riding a motorcycle

∙ Bunk bed accidents

∙ Cheerleading

∙ Chewing tobacco

∙ Hypertensive heart disease

∙ Unintentional injuries

∙ High cholesterol

∙ Cleaning a gun

∙ Snowboarding

∙ Mowing the lawn

∙ Homicide

∙ White water rafting

∙ High blood pressure

∙ Influenza

∙ Scooter mishaps

∙ Pneumonia

∙ Dog attacks

∙ Electrocution

∙ Fishing

∙ Medication errors

∙ Nephritis

∙ Industrial fans

∙ Drug use

∙ Hernia

∙ Motorcycle accidents

∙ Playing on the playground

∙ Hospital-acquired infections

∙ Mudslides

∙ Allergic reactions

∙ Fire

∙ Your wife, husband, or lover

∙ Taking a cab

∙ Liver disease

∙ Suicide

∙ Skin cancer

∙ Hurricanes

∙ Multiple sclerosis

∙ Jet skiing

∙ Bacterial sepsis

∙ Carbon monoxide

∙ Tornadoes

∙ Blood disease

∙ Driving drunk

∙ Alzheimer’s disease

∙ Drinking too much water

∙ Epilepsy

∙ Crossing the street

∙ Pregnancy

∙ Food poisoning

∙ Septicemia

∙ Flood

∙ Parkinson’s disease

∙ Skiing

∙ Childbirth

∙ Falling

∙ Malnutrition

∙ Tooth infection

∙ Riding a train

∙ Colon cancer

∙ Taking the bus

∙ Fatigue

∙ Roller coasters

∙ Kidney failure

∙ Bone density disorder

∙ Bouncy houses

∙ Prostate cancer

∙ Renal failure

∙ Trampolines

∙ Breast cancer

∙ Swimming

∙ Cancer of the pancreas

∙ Urinary system disorders

∙ Bee sting

∙ Oral cancer

∙ Avalanches

∙ Diabetes

∙ Stomach ulcers

∙ Shark attacks

∙ Diseases of the male genitals

∙ Boating accidents

∙ Flesh-eating bacteria

∙ Getting hit by a train

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't. That is what happens when normally smart people get pressured into paying attention to morons, because an election is approaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

best one I heard today is, the plague of Bouncy House accidents. We need a Czar to protect us from evil Bouncy Houses (and, of course, those fucking Clowns)

 

clowns-zombieland-Favim.com-233666.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still not worried about Ebola here. If anything, events have demonstrated why I should not worry. I have a better chance of getting a stale Yoo Hoo than getting ebola here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ebola has made it to the U.S., and everyone is freaking out. They shouldn’t be—at least not until they’ve sufficiently freaked out about these 104 things that, according to nationwide data, are even more likely to kill them.

∙ Walking to work

∙ Stroke

∙ Hunting accidents

∙ COPD

∙ Drawstrings on your jacket

∙ Wrong-site surgery

∙ Alligators

∙ Lower respiratory infections

∙ Cycling

∙ Trachea bronchus, lung cancers

∙ Drinking too much

∙ Not wearing your seatbelt

∙ HIV/AIDS

∙ Falling off the roof

∙ Flying in airplanes

∙ Smoking

∙ Kitchen fire

∙ Falling in the shower

∙ Diarrhoeal diseases

∙ Diabetes

∙ Choking

∙ Car accidents

∙ Snake bites

∙ Heart disease

∙ Riding a motorcycle

∙ Bunk bed accidents

∙ Cheerleading

∙ Chewing tobacco

∙ Hypertensive heart disease

∙ Unintentional injuries

∙ High cholesterol

∙ Cleaning a gun

∙ Snowboarding

∙ Mowing the lawn

∙ Homicide

∙ White water rafting

∙ High blood pressure

∙ Influenza

∙ Scooter mishaps

∙ Pneumonia

∙ Dog attacks

∙ Electrocution

∙ Fishing

∙ Medication errors

∙ Nephritis

∙ Industrial fans

∙ Drug use

∙ Hernia

∙ Motorcycle accidents

∙ Playing on the playground

∙ Hospital-acquired infections

∙ Mudslides

∙ Allergic reactions

∙ Fire

∙ Your wife, husband, or lover

∙ Taking a cab

∙ Liver disease

∙ Suicide

∙ Skin cancer

∙ Hurricanes

∙ Multiple sclerosis

∙ Jet skiing

∙ Bacterial sepsis

∙ Carbon monoxide

∙ Tornadoes

∙ Blood disease

∙ Driving drunk

∙ Alzheimer’s disease

∙ Drinking too much water

∙ Epilepsy

∙ Crossing the street

∙ Pregnancy

∙ Food poisoning

∙ Septicemia

∙ Flood

∙ Parkinson’s disease

∙ Skiing

∙ Childbirth

∙ Falling

∙ Malnutrition

∙ Tooth infection

∙ Riding a train

∙ Colon cancer

∙ Taking the bus

∙ Fatigue

∙ Roller coasters

∙ Kidney failure

∙ Bone density disorder

∙ Bouncy houses

∙ Prostate cancer

∙ Renal failure

∙ Trampolines

∙ Breast cancer

∙ Swimming

∙ Cancer of the pancreas

∙ Urinary system disorders

∙ Bee sting

∙ Oral cancer

∙ Avalanches

∙ Diabetes

∙ Stomach ulcers

∙ Shark attacks

∙ Diseases of the male genitals

∙ Boating accidents

∙ Flesh-eating bacteria

∙ Getting hit by a train

 

Did your read the OP? Why do you think this thread is about Ebola being a serious health threat to America. I believe the OP refers to the panic Ebold can create. And we have seen just how right I was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Did your read the OP? Why do you think this thread is about Ebola being a serious health threat to America. I believe the OP refers to the panic Ebold can create. And we have seen just how right I was.

dolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Did your read the OP? Why do you think this thread is about Ebola being a serious health threat to America. I believe the OP refers to the panic Ebold can create. And we have seen just how right I was.

dolt

 

Wait. This thread isn't about Ebola? Really?

 

Why, there was a poster who commented in this very thread, who reminded us it was about Ebola.

 

Now, who was that poster?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Did your read the OP? Why do you think this thread is about Ebola being a serious health threat to America. I believe the OP refers to the panic Ebold can create. And we have seen just how right I was.

dolt

 

Wait. This thread isn't about Ebola? Really?

 

Why, there was a poster who commented in this very thread, who reminded us it was about Ebola.

 

Now, who was that poster?

 

Hmmmmm.....the guy that changed his name to include "Ebola"? No..... Could it be the guy who started the most Ebola threads here on PA?.......

 

I don't know, BD. Who's the one here on PA who is Ebola's attention whore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still fear mongering Malarkey? You would be funny if you weren't so sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Did your read the OP? Why do you think this thread is about Ebola being a serious health threat to America. I believe the OP refers to the panic Ebold can create. And we have seen just how right I was.

dolt

 

Wait. This thread isn't about Ebola? Really?

 

Why, there was a poster who commented in this very thread, who reminded us it was about Ebola.

 

Now, who was that poster?

 

Hmmmmm.....the guy that changed his name to include "Ebola"? No..... Could it be the guy who started the most Ebola threads here on PA?.......

 

I don't know, BD. Who's the one here on PA who is Ebola's attention whore?

 

No, no, no. Wasn't that guy. Was another.

 

You know, started a thread with Ebola in the title, then said it wasn't about Ebola, then reminded us it WAS about Ebola, then it wasn't (again). I am sure you know who I'm talking about.

 

(psssst) Check Post #45.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites