Second Ebola patient in Dallas?

This is like fucking groundhog day.

How many 'groundhog days' have you fucked and do you give discounts for multiple days?

You were Ebola before there was Ebola....started on aspd....shitting and word vomit. Originally Posted by WTF

I hate shitting and throwing up at the same time! Originally Posted by WTF

But you still keep doing it.

Class dismissed. Originally Posted by thathottnurse

Oh, God. Another self-proclaimed, self-anointed "teacher."

The last one of any consequence ended up nailed to a cross.

Of course, we now have a "Constitutional Law Professor" ... err...

.......... playing golf while playing President.

I was talking to JL. I didn't realize he had a WK. My bad. Maybe you can help him out. He says he practices law but can't comprehend the context of the word "became" or how it's used in a sentence to modify "asymptomatic" when discussing the signs of Ebola in a patient.

I'm no teacher, sir. I was just trying to help him since the cranial pressure from sharing rectal space with Bestman seems to be effecting his memory and reading comprehension.

Bet you fuckers are on her DNS list...LOL

NOT true.

You are trying to use the fact that we cannot obtain absolute protection as an excuse not to do anything.

Here is a counter-example. Take two Liberians.

The first Liberian is infected with Ebola. He wants to come to the US, but cannot. We don't have to worry about him infecting Americans in the US.

The second Liberian travels to Greece and infects a Greek. The infected Greek then travels to the US. This Greek can infect an American.

However, even though we don't have perfect protection, we have reduced by 50% the danger the two Liberians pose to us.

Stop making the perfect be the enemy of the good. Originally Posted by ExNYer

What?
Where in any of my posts have I said we should not do anything? I love how some of you try to tell me what I think.
Timothy H. Tebow! Some of you fucktards can distort an anvil. Get off of your fucking political agenda for a moment and read what I write. It's not cryptic.

Yeah, you've reduced the danger by 50% but anything less than 100% is ineffective in reality. This disease is highly contagious and extremely deadly and we're not 100% sure how it can be transmitted.

I think we should probably do most all of the things mentioned in previous posts plus some. Fact is we're not really doing anything and the head of the CDC has pretty much admitted it.

Not to get all political myself but where is the leadership? This is a perfect example of what Leon Panetta was talking about. Some hard decisions need to be made. Decisions that are going to probably piss off some other countries.

What's more important, keeping us all from shitting ourselves? Or, not offending some of our closest allies who would shut us off in a heartbeat if this was coming from here?

Imagine the public crisis we would have if this gets out of hand here. Overloaded hospitals & clinics. Doctors and nurses unable to do anything much more than protect themselves. Riots, martial law. Think it can't happen? Not to mention the economic impact it could have.

But we aren't getting out in front and we probably won't start making the hard decisions until it's too late for them to do any good. In other words we will be governing, once again, from crisis mode.

I feel ebola will be contained successfully here at the moment but that this is somewhat of an inadvertant practice run for something bigger down the road be it flu, ebola or otherwise.

Like a faint, distant whistle before the horn blows.

What?

Yeah, you've reduced the danger by 50% but anything less than 100% is ineffective in reality.

In other words we will be governing, once again, from crisis mode. Originally Posted by boardman

Apparently, "we" are suffering from a "failure to communicate" effectively.

Right now, the only one I see posting in this forum who clings to the notion of fighting a war (any war) at our borders is "WTF" .... If one perceives the Ebola "problem" as a "war" then it should be approached as an enemy of this country.

For over 200 years the policy in this country has been to engage the enemy on their own turf, but establish a perimeter to protect the "Homeland" and organize sectors of the interior of the perimeter to deal with an intrusion, if the perimeter is not 100% (none are!!!!).

If your "boat" is leaking (and beaching it is not an option), then one bails, but also attempts to patch the leak to slow the incoming, reduce the bailing, and prevent a widening failure of the hull from increasing pressure.

Unfortunately for this administration approaching a problem from multiple directions with "multi-tasking" is too challenging and too "multi-dimensional"!

I suppose that's why he "prefers" golf ... one hole and one club at a time!

I was talking to JL. I didn't realize he had a WK. Originally Posted by thathottnurse

He doesn't need a White Knight. Just because he doesn't understand you, doesn't mean HE has the deficiency. (You must be a liberal.)

You were addressing me?

... I also feel that nurses in general do great work for our society, I respect her for that, and I truly feel bad for the nurse at Presby who got infected taking care of what should have been some other country's problem. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Last night on BloombergTV they spoke of the reluctance of US hospital personnel in treating ebola patients. This is gotta be the medical equivalent of a fireman running into a burning building.

In this list of ebola outbreaks, many of the victims are the nurses and doctors who are treating the patients.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ebola_outbreaks

What?
Where in any of my posts have I said we should not do anything? I love how some of you try to tell me what I think.
..... Originally Posted by boardman

You realize this is your third "What I think" clarification post in this thread? If you ooze, you snooze.

I feel ebola will be contained successfully here at the moment but that this is somewhat of an inadvertant practice run for something bigger down the road be it flu, ebola or otherwise.

Like a faint, distant whistle before the horn blows. Originally Posted by thathottnurse

To me that's the million dollar question: "Do we contain it in West Africa or just wait until is gets out of hand and becomes a pandemic?"

This is what the "Doctors Without Borders" head says:

http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g6151

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), the humanitarian medical charity, has been on the front lines of the Ebola epidemic since it began. It has had a major role in the international effort to control the outbreak, caring for two thirds of the 8000 people in Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia who have been infected. But in early September, after six months of battling Ebola in vain, and with the death toll mounting exponentially, MSF effectively admitted defeat and said that it would take major military mobilisation by wealthy countries with biohazard expertise, not just international aid, to stop the disease. The charity had doubled its staff, MSF’s president, Joanne Liu, told the UN members, but it still was overwhelmed.

Liu, a Canadian paediatrician who has worked for MSF in war zones and natural disasters for the past 18 years, called upon UN members to dispatch their disaster response teams, backed by the full weight of your logistical capabilities. “Without this deployment, we will never get the epidemic under control,” she said.1

Peter Piot, director of the London School of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene and the microbiologist who first identified the Ebola virus in 1976, also called in September for a “quasi military intervention.” He suggested that a major UN peacekeeping force should be deployed to Sierra Leone and Liberia, with huge donations of beds, ambulances, and trucks as well as an army of clinicians, doctors, and nurses.

The message came as the numbers of deaths from Ebola began to spiral, particularly in Liberia. There have been over 3800 reported deaths in the region, according to the latest World Health Organization figures, 40% of which have been recorded since September.2 WHO has estimated that there could be 20 000 infections before the outbreak is brought under control, and the US Centers for Disease Control has predicted that, in a worst case scenario, as many as 1.4 million may be infected by the end of January.3 As the economies and health infrastructures of the three countries, home to over 22 million people, risk total collapse, the UN Security Council declared the outbreak was a threat to international peace and security.
============================== ========================

Eventually some type of vaccine or very effective treatment will be found, until then its important that we keep the disease in West Africa.

The neighboring countries of the hot zones have been very effective at keeping Ebola out.

Anyone care to discuss why? I will check back later I gotta get to work.

Yeah, you've reduced the danger by 50% but anything less than 100% is ineffective in reality. This disease is highly contagious and extremely deadly and we're not 100% sure how it can be transmitted. Originally Posted by boardman

Where do you get the idea that anything less than 100% is ineffective? Do you have a link for that?

If there are half as many Liberians in the US, there are half as many opportunities for them to infect others. This means there will be a smaller number of people that need to be isolated and less contacts to be traced.

No quarantine or travel ban is 100% effective, but they still work because they slow down the rate at which the disease spreads. Essentially, people die or recover faster than the disease spreads, so the disease stops.

Because Liberia has essentially CLOSED IT'S BORDERS!

Only a few points of entry are operating!

As well as other African states.

Question: Why won't Obama funnel all arriving flights from hot zones into a single location; a minimal step to isolating and containing Ebola here?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/22/health/ebola-outbreak/

More importantly why won't the CDC tell Obama to limit incoming flights to a single location?

The neighboring countries of the hot zones have been very effective at keeping Ebola out.

Anyone care to discuss why? I will check back later I gotta get to work. Originally Posted by thathottnurse

And do you know how Ebola has spread so quickly, this time around?

Ebola first appeared in 1976 during twin outbreaks in Zaire (now Democratic Republic of Congo) and South Sudan, likely spread by bats from nearby jungles. Since then, there have been 20 further outbreaks, but they have usually occurred in isolated rural areas and died out quickly. The countries involved — DRC, Gabon, Sudan — have experience in stamping out the virus before it spreads.

In December of last year, the virus is believed to have first turned up in the body of a child in Guéckédou, a rainforest region in southeastern Guinea. That geography was unfortunate: Guéckédou happens to share a very porous border with Sierra Leone and Liberia, where people travel in and out every day to go to the market or conduct business.

Are you seeing the connection here: Open porous borders enables the spread of Ebola !

http://www.vox.com/cards/ebola-facts...africa-and-its

Where do you get the idea that anything less than 100% is ineffective? Do you have a link for that?

If there are half as many Liberians in the US, there are half as many opportunities for them to infect others. This means there will be a smaller number of people that need to be isolated and less contacts to be traced.

No quarantine or travel ban is 100% effective, but they still work because they slow down the rate at which the disease spreads. Essentially, people die or recover faster than the disease spreads, so the disease stops. Originally Posted by ExNYer

A pandemic starts somewhere with as few a one person does it not?