This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
New York Times: Some May Carry Ebola Without Showing Any Symptoms
The New York Times reported in 2000:
The Ebola virus, which has caused deaths from high fever and bleeding in African outbreaks, can also infect without producing illness, according to a new finding by African and European scientists.
The possibility of asymptomatic infection was only suggested in earlier studies, they said in last week’s issue of The Lancet, a medical journal published in London. Now they said they had documented such infections for the first time. They found that the Ebola virus could persist in the blood of asymptomatic infected individuals for two weeks after they were first exposed to an infected individual. How much longer the virus can persist is unknown.
***
If people can be carriers without showing symptoms, it means control might be more difficult.
“This degree of containment would be virtually impossible if symptom-free carriers posed a significant threat of infection,” Dr. Alan G. Baxter of Newtown, Australia, wrote in an editorial in the same issue of The Lancet.
***
An immediate effect is to raise the need to reassess health policy about one of the most virulent viruses known and to determine how often healthy carriers transmit it, said the scientific team headed by Dr. E. M. Leroy of Franceville, Gabon.
***
Dr. Leroy’s team studied 25 individuals who never developed symptoms although they lived with family members and cared for them without using gloves and other precautions in two outbreaks in Gabon in 1996.
Using standard virologic techniques, the scientists from Gabon, Germany and France said they could not detect the virus in the blood of the healthy contacts. But Dr. Leroy’s succeeded by using a technique known as polymerase chain reaction to grow the tiny amount of virus present.
Here is the study published in Lancet. And here is the editor’s comment.
The Lancet study does not warn of an apocalyptic scenario where any casual contact could cause infection. It is more focused on contagion through sex or blood transfusions.
But Western governments and scientists have repeatedly said that Ebola carriers can only infect others if they are showing symptoms. So they need to adjust their strategies to account for potential contagion from people who aren’t showing any symptoms.
Aerosol Transmission
Two national experts on infectious disease transmission – both professors in the School of Public Health, Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, at the University of Illinois at Chicago – report that Ebola can be transmitted by aerosols … i.e. fluids mixed with air (footnotes omitted):
We believe there is scientific and epidemiologic evidence that Ebola virus has the potential to be transmitted via infectious aerosol particles both near and at a distance from infected patients, which means that healthcare workers should be wearing respirators, not facemasks. [Aerosols are liquids or small particles suspended in air. An example is sea spray: seawater suspended in air bubbles, created by the force of the surf mixing water with air.]
The important points are that virus-laden bodily fluids may be aerosolized and inhaled while a person is in proximity to an infectious person and that a wide range of particle sizes can be inhaled and deposited throughout the respiratory tract.
***
Being at first skeptical that Ebola virus could be an aerosol-transmissible disease, we are now persuaded by a review of experimental and epidemiologic data that this might be an important feature of disease transmission, particularly in healthcare settings.
***
Many body fluids, such as vomit, diarrhea, blood, and saliva, are capable of creating inhalable aerosol particles in the immediate vicinity of an infected person. Cough was identified among some cases in a 1995 outbreak in Kikwit, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and coughs are known to emit viruses in respirable particles. The act of vomiting produces an aerosol and has been implicated in airborne transmission of gastrointestinal viruses. Regarding diarrhea, even when contained by toilets, toilet flushing emits a pathogen-laden aerosol that disperses in the air.
***
There is also some experimental evidence that Ebola and other filoviruses can be transmitted by the aerosol route. Jaax et alreported the unexpected death of two rhesus monkeys housed approximately 3 meters from monkeys infected with Ebola virus, concluding that respiratory or eye exposure to aerosols was the only possible explanation.
Zaire Ebola viruses have also been transmitted in the absence of direct contact among pigsand from pigs to non-human primates, which experienced lung involvement in infection. Persons with no known direct contact with Ebola virus disease patients or their bodily fluids have become infected.
***
Experimental studies have demonstrated that it is possible to infect non-human primates and other mammals with filovirus aerosols. [Ebola is a type of filovirus]
Altogether, these epidemiologic and experimental data offer enough evidence to suggest that Ebola and other filoviruses may be opportunistic with respect to aerosol transmission. That is, other routes of entry may be more important and probable, but, given the right conditions, it is possible that transmission could also occur via aerosols.
In other words, these two infectious disease experts believe that Ebola is already – in its current form – transmissible via aerosols. They therefore urge all doctors and nurses working with Ebola patients to wear respirators.
We need to understand how Ebola is really spread, and then take appropriate counter-measures.
Ebola Is Mutating
In addition, Ebola is mutating. The discoverer of the disease (Dr. Peter Piot) said last week:
It is clear that the virus is mutating.
Indeed, top doctors say that - unless contained - it could eventually mutate to become airborne.
And the Washington Post notes that terrorists could use Ebola as a bio-weapon. The longer the outbreak rages, the more likely such a scenario becomes.
We Need a World War 2, Marshall Plan or Moon Landing Level Effort to Stop This
According to American nurses, the U.S. healthcare system is woefully unprepared to handle Ebola. Even the best Ebola tests can give false negatives, meaning that people with Ebola can be released into the community.
We need an effort on the scale of World War 2, the Marshall Plan or the moon shot to contain and eradicate this modern plague.
»
- advertisements -
Amen kchrisc...this is a jump straight to the comments thing. How can ZH routinely claim that the MSM is biased about, say, the "economic recovery", yet buy the MSM version of Ebola presentation hook line and sinker without so much as checking under the hood? Click bait? Must be buying views...
Yup, quite sad.
I read here day after day about the lies and bullshit perpetrated against the American people and the world. However, when the propaganda media mixes in a little FUD, those that should know better can't wait to believe it and repeat it.
Sure, I could see a sheeple that thinks Sandy Hook really happened, and doesn't know of all of the economic lies produced by the corrupt ones, believing it, but those in the know shouldn't. At least not be so willing to accept it at face value. One would think that there would be just a bit of skepticism or something.
Just amazing.
An American, not US subject.
"I see dead sheeple."
"Sure, I could see a sheeple that thinks Sandy Hook really happened"
The FBI still thinks no one was murdered in Newtown, Conn in 2012. I'd have to agree.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-...
Ebola Test Gives False Negatives
George, you really shouldn't attempt to write about things that are so far beyond your mental level. All you do is upset people with your ignorant ranting.
It might be helpful if people stopped running around with their hair on fire for 2 minutes and read the following article by Jon Rappoport...
The Ebola test: let the test’s inventor speak
Amidst the hysteria about Ebola, one stubborn fact sits like a rock: everything depends upon being able to accurately diagnose Ebola in each patient.
And then it follows: you must examine the test that is being used to diagnose Ebola. Is it accurate? Does it have flaws? Is it being applied correctly?
Because, if there is a serious problem with the test, the whole house of cards collapses. The entire narrative about Ebola is fatally flawed.
Last week, when a man was admitted to a hospital in Dallas, the CDC held a press conference. CDC Director Tom Frieden stated that this patient had been diagnosed with Ebola—with a test that is “highly accurate. It’s a PCR test of blood.” (see the 2m06s mark in the video of the press conference.)
This is, indeed, the test of choice for Ebola.
However, as I’ve written, the PCR test has problems. It is open to errors. One of those errors occurs right at the beginning of the procedure:
Is the sample taken from the patient actually a virus or a piece of a virus? Or is it just an irrelevant piece of debris?
Another problem is inherent in the method of the PCR itself. The test is based on the amplification of a tiny, tiny speck of genetic material taken from a patient—blowing it up millions of times until it can be observed and analyzed.
Researchers who employ the test claim that, as a result of the procedure, they can also infer the quantity of virus that is present in the patient.
This is crucial, because unless a patient has millions and millions of Ebola virus in his body, there is absolutely no reason to think he is sick or will become sick.
So the question is: can the PCR test allow researchers and doctors to say how much virus is in a patient’s body?
Many years ago, journalist John Lauritsen approached a man named Kary Mullis for an answer.
Source-1: For a brief excerpt from John Lauritsen’s article about Kary Mullis, see Frontiers in Public Health, 23 September, 2014, “Questioning the HIV-AIDS hypothesis: 30 years of dissent,” by Patricia Goodson. (See also this.)
Source-2: For John’s 1996 article in full, see “Has Provincetown Become Protease Town?”
Kary Mullis is a biochemist. He is also a Nobel Prize winner (1993, Chemistry).
And oh yes, one other thing.
Mullis invented the PCR.
That’s why he won the Nobel Prize.
Mullis’ answer was succinct: “Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.”
Translation: the PCR test can’t be used to say how much virus is in a person’s body.
Dr. Kary Mullis
Therefore, the CDC’s gold standard for testing Ebola patients says nothing about whether they are sick or will become sick. It says nothing about why some patients do become sick.
And the other problems with the test are significant as well: errors in carrying out the highly sensitive procedure; lab contamination of the sample taken from the patient; choice of a sample that is not a virus at all, or is the wrong virus.
And upon this foundation of sand, the whole “Ebola epidemic” is being foisted on the public.
In analyzing so-called epidemics and their causes for 27 years now, I have often pointed out that the diagnostic test is the key—unless people want to jump to conclusions and spread fear and walk down the wrong road, while patients die for reasons other than the stated causes—including misdirected and highly toxic medical treatment.
Again, I point that out now.
Jon Rappoport
Your post is unusual because it refers to facts and asks the time wasters on here to go out and learn something; it says a lot about the population on here that you got downvoted for providing this service. I will say think you for providing a window into reality.
"In some cases wrongly". HIV care in two clinics for four years; the viral load(HIV PCR) seemed to always match the patients condition. I trust it. I had a few outliers as you always do with any bell curve. This poster is selling smoke.
So you know more about PCR than Kary Mullis ? All the poster did was quote Dr. Mullis; who is in my IQ distribution in the population; which means in the course of your normal life, even if you're a clinical medical professional, means that you've never met anyone of our level of intelligence. Read the post again. What Dr. Mullis is trying to tell you is that the procedure was never designed, (He designed it !!), to quantisize anything. It can and does multiply to detectable levels, "pocket lint"; and random RNA sequences. And we're supposed to ignore this because in your opinion the "viral load", (actually not measurable by any means), seemed to match the patients condition. Ridiculous. Your ability to think is bordering on zero.
If the Ebola test does not detect Ebola properly, then
the patient may have Ebola
without being detected, and
helping to spread the disease.
Every test is going to yield some small percentage of false positives and false negatives. First, because testing for viruses is a test for antibodies or other agents, not the virus itself. Viruses are only visible under electron microscopes. The existence of antibodies or similar telltale signs of a virus do not always indicate the presence of a virus. Second, because there will always be human error in laboratories, there always exists the possibility of sample contamination, improperly calibrated equipment, and other human errors.
This is not unique to Ebola. It is another reason, however, that government officials and virologists should be cautious when claiming ebola is no risk to "developed" countries full of beautiful people.
Do yourself a favor and go research the subject of false positives; some of the most popular "tests" produce 40% false positives; in plain english, they're useless. This is not publicized, but you can find it if you look.
There are two testing technologies. One is to look for a reaction to an antibody; which basically means nothing. If you were exposed to TB bacteria when you were 20 years old, you're going to test positive to TB Bacteria for the rest of your life; even tho you were never "sick" a day in your life from TB, and didn't die from any condition related to it. The presence of the antibody means that your body dealt with something in the past; and usually, it means, in the absence of diagnostic symtoms, that that is now a closed matter. The other testing technology is the one referred to in the post above ref; Dr. Kary Mullis; PCR. This is a test for genetic sequences that are identifiable as being part of the organism you're testing for. All these tests are pretty bad. The AIDS test is ridiculous; and virus tests in general, are very difficult. What you want for a RNA virus is a vaccine; which is doable; but very difficult under the present control and regulations of the government. For instance Polio was wiped out by a vaccine; but we probably couldn't do it now; as the government would make it too difficult for anyone to actually make any progress. The polio vaccine was created entirely without government "help", by private sector initiative. eg: "The Mother's march of Dimes".
The problem with government is that while it is possible for it to do 'something right'..it almost never does because it's goals are usually not the stated goals. There is usually some selfserving goal that is not stated (acrue individual wealth, expand authority, punish enemies) but which is built into the 'solution' offered. Global Warming (or whater it is being called this month) is a good example. While there may have been good intentions at first as time passed this was seen as a vehicle for raising taxes andcontrolling industry. This purpose persisted long after the science underlying the initial concern was proven false (or at least seriously questioned.)
If we are dependent upon government many will die. After that occurs we may see some horrible intrusive effort (mass arrests, camps, isoloation) that gets the job done: government will never do the job efficiently.
Can you say 'CONTAGENOIA'?
Contagenoia + Terrornoia + GovCorp = Goodbye Individual/Rights/Liberty/Freedom (life).
Have no way of knowing the veracity of the research contained herein, but along with Jon Rappaport's 'contrarian' offerings, recommend these links to the conversation. I too would like to know more about why the US bio-warfare researchers were there, and which corporations get to make the most out of Ebola Inc. Clearly the best way to lock down a country, force everybody to submit to 'testing' (collect DNA and/or other biometrics, recieve implant as 'proof of test' etc) is Contagen/Pandemic psyop.
http://truthsector.net/2014/09/20/final-nails-in-the-ebola-scam-coffin-t...
http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/what-are-us-biowar-research...
http://www.naturalnews.com/046259_Ebola_outbreak_drug_treatments_Monsanto.html
Before you die from a bio-weapon, Fukugeddon, or Methane Bomb, a good topic for study is Natural Law, and the Creator/s. Mark Passio's 'street wise' sprituality research is loaded with non-biblical 'Revelations', and KoG's research on the inherent slave status of a 'LEGAL' name is another subject worth digesting. Think 'money' rules? Check out the other tools:
Mark Passio - New Age Bullshit Revisited - Religion, &Control of Knowledge. Asheville, NC - Part 1 of 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_iyHnGHQaI&list=PLnzMmEt4pIb9z7E6yhQn8m...
Mark Passio YouTube page:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTqcKb3T1QVbOHT8LIFs3xg
Your LEGAL name, and the story of who 'owns' you (until you withdraw consent):
http://kateofgaia.wordpress.com/
http://nonamesheremate.wordpress.com/
By The 'Consent of the Governed' - Steve Bates film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMjPbbM5fPU&feature=youtu.be
Facts and Lies of the US 'democratic constitutional republic'
http://worldtruth.tv/40-outrageous-facts-most-people-dont-know/
Century of Enslavement: The History of The Federal Reserve
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IJeemTQ7Vk
Peace
CDC is incompetent and, as a result, doctors and nurses will not be given the correct information and equipment to deal with a, potentially, genocidal situation. We are, all, between a rock and a hard place. One estimate said that, if an Ebola epidemic happened, it would take 3 years, wave after wave, to run it's course.
Maybe it won't happen. Maybe it will happen. One thing you know is that your own government considers you expendable. Whether it's Ebola or something else, it's only a matter of time before the culling starts. CYA.
The CDC is fraud on stilts. Again, from Jon Rappoport...
Q: Speaking of the CDC, a long-term scientist with the agency, William Thompson, recently admitted he committed fraud, when he co-authored a 2004 study that claimed the MMR vaccine had no connection to autism.
A: Thompson had several co-authors from the CDC on that study. They all committed fraud. Consider the conversations that must have taken place at the CDC to arrange that fraud.
Q: Do you think the fraud went all the way to the top of the CDC?
A: In 2004, whistleblower Thompson wrote a letter to Julie Gerberding, the head of the CDC. He warned her he was about to present troubling and sensitive data about the vaccine at an upcoming conference on vaccines and autism. His meaning was clear. He had found a vaccine-autism connection.
Q: What did Gerberding do?
A: She never answered Thompson’s letter, and his presentation at the conference was canceled.
Q: Is Gerberding still the head of the CDC?
A: No. She left the CDC in 2009.
Q: Where is she now?
A: She’s the president of Merck vaccines.
Q: What vaccine do they manufacture?
A: The MMR.
Q: The same vaccine Thompson found had a connection to autism?
A: Yes.
Q: And for 10 years, from 2004 to now, Thompson and his co-authors sat on the knowledge that the MMR vaccine has a connection to autism?
A: Yes.
Q: And this is the same CDC that now wants us to believe that there is an Ebola epidemic?
A: Yes. As I was saying, I have a lovely condo for you on the dark side of the moon. Swimming pool, outdoor grill, playground for the kiddies, nine-hole golf course. Interested?
Q: No comment. But since we’ve come this far, perhaps you could explain why the tests for diagnosing Ebola are unreliable and useless.
A: Let’s start with the antibody test. Two problems. First, the test is notorious for what’s called “cross-reactions.” That means the test isn’t really registering, in this case, the presence of Ebola. It’s registering one of a whole host of other factors. For example, the patient received a vaccine, and that triggers a falsely positive reading.
Q: What’s the second problem?
A: The antibody test doesn’t say whether a person was sick, is sick, or will get sick. At best, if there are no cross-reactions, it merely says the person had contact with the virus in question. So a positive antibody test for Ebola is far from saying “this person has Ebola.” That’s a lie. In fact, before 1985, the general conclusion from positive antibody tests was: this is a good sign; the patient’s immune system contacted the germ and threw it off, defeated it.
Q: What about the PCR test for Ebola?
A: This test is prone to many mistakes, starting with the tiny, tiny sample of material taken from the patient. Is it really genetic material, and is that material really a piece of a virus, or is it just a piece of general and irrelevant debris? The test itself takes that tiny sample and amplifies it millions of times so it can be observed. Assuming it is actually Ebola virus, or a fragment of Ebola virus, there is no indication there is enough of the virus in the patient’s body to make him sick. There have to be millions upon millions of active virus in the patient’s body to begin to say that virus is causing problems. The PCR test says nothing about that. In fact, why was it necessary to do the PCR test at all? If the patient had enough Ebola virus in his body to cause illness, there was no need to search for a tiny fragment of a hoped-for Ebola virus, to start the PCR test. The virus would have been everywhere.
Jon Rappoport
Half Right
Half Wrong
i'm sure we'll get better ebola info from nyt., when a dozen cases show up in nyc., instead of dallas tx..
I hope all the FEAR gets the border closed finally.
Ebola is a big challenge -- telling the truth figures to be the way to go.
Let's begin by ending these massive deceptions by omission:
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1223928
"Postscript to anti-statists who don't think the gov can do anything helpful: Please let us know a free market solution. If you have a good one, I will shout it from the rooftops."
#1. Who do you think the 'government' is?
#2. Off whose (private) backs are $Tax Dollars peeled that $$$FUND your omnipotent 'government'...?
#3. There are quite a few private labs I'm certain, that have already been working on a treatment protocol for Ebola and like hemorrhagic diseases.
#4. I have yet to hear or read Anyone posturing about 'Free-market' solutions vs. government ones, vis-a-vis this disease, Smart-Ass, so take the Straw man Crap and give yourself an enema with it...
Consuelo, I was NOT trying to be sarcastic! And I'm not a statist ... I'm for whatever WORKS, whether it's from the gov or the private sector.
I am asking HUMBLY and SINCERELY ... especially since CDC, WHO and all of the other agencies have royally screwed up the Ebola response.
Also, ZH regular mnewn has previously criticized my Ebola posts by calling me a statist.
Mnewn the 9/11 denier is calling you a statist?? Pot-kettle-black. Mnewn sucks dog dick. The video's out on YouTube. Google mnewn-dog-dick. Its trending right now.
xxxxxx New: bad news. This is getting serious .
A new Black Death :
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-06/new-york-times-some-may-carry-ebola-without-showing-any-symptoms
See http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2010/10/epidemics-without-pathogen-transmission.html
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Previous
The time to panic is before the Titanic has left the harbour .See
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2014/08/ebola-friendly-reaper_6.html
If the Triffids don't get you, Ebola will : seehttp://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2014/08/deader-guide-to-ebola.html
Plants have been breeding humans . See
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2011/05/ebola-and-chocolate.html
Further examples of the Plant-Herbivore Wars :
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2011/04/garlic-and-plant-herbivore-wars.html
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2013/07/rabies-alzheimers-and-formic-acid.... Notice the cute trick to penetrate skin barriers . Reminiscent of hemorrhagic diseases like Ebola and Especially SuperEbola .
SuperEbola is Ebola on steroids , then add some . The Fifth Horseman on a Harley ! : see
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2013/01/training-immune-system.html
for the desperate . : See
http://andreswhy.blogspot.com/2006/03/training-immune.html
Good luck !
...think of the various knock-on effects of widespread ebola. Thailand and other Asian countries economies would go into freefall.
Stock anbd trade of a city like Pattaya is EXACTLY the exchange of bodily fluids. Tai Army would shutter Pattaya withint hours.
Massive social dislocation, panic and terror.
Plants are breeding humans...
I knew it!
When you have a central gov't attempting to control every movement and breath the nation takes, it's hard to prioritize. No sarc...
It is quite easy to prioritize. Get rid of the government. They are interested only in keeping their power, not doing their job. Been heading that way here, since the Civil War.
Obama just put the final touches on it. The Secret Service trying to become like Disney. Seriously. Took 13 months for somebody to figure it out????
The entire government is a shill at this point. Don't see anybody actually trying to do their job properly, if at all. Interested only in Abosulute Power over The People. That is all.
What "government?"
All I see is a "pen" and a "phone."
And a Dicktaster.
Just bend over and take the chip and you'll be approved to travel. Moo.
If it is like almost any other virus this is true, there will be human carriers who show no symptoms.
And a reservoir species outside of humans to carry the virus such as bats. If it gets into mice/rats even worse.
Dogs.
"Together, these findings strongly suggest that dogs can be infected by Ebola virus, and that some pet dogs living in affected villages were infected during the 2001-2002 human Ebola virus outbreak. No circulating Ebola antigens or viral DNA sequences (tested by PCR) were detected in either positive or negative serum specimens, and attempts to isolate virus from these samples failed. These findings indicate either old, transient Ebola infection of the tested dogs, or antigenic stimulation."
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Ebola+virus+antibody+prevalence+in+dogs+an...
Probably not infective.
They are known to lick up vomit and worse. That could be a problem, depending on what they lick in the next little while.
What about rats? Ticks, mosquitos, body lice? If this is a blood borne disease, why are these things equally transmission capable.
Most viruses have a "reservoir" or host in nature that is not human: in the case of bubonic plague, it seems clear that it was groundhogs in the Ruso-Mongolian steppe, for example, who held the disease, which was, from time to time, passed to humans by fleas from the rodents. From these reservoirs come the waves of infections that periodically strike human beings. Scientists have yet to find a reservoir for Ebola in the wild. I submit to you that it is possible that the reason they have not found a reservoir in the wild is because the reservoir may be human beings. The recent evidence of non-symptomatic carriers of the disease would lend a great deal of credence to this theory. If this is so... we should all be very afraid, very afraid, despite what our arrogant, overconfident government officials say.
Interesting. Another possible explanation for this is that Ebola is a man-made or -modified virus, and as such, doesn't have a natural reservoir.
Yup, possible, and this article at Stanford suggests insects could be a reservoir or vector:
https://web.stanford.edu/group/virus/filo/insects.html
Rest assured, Obola will find the best delivery system his pen and phone can find!
As you can see in the history of previous ebola outbreaks before this one (6,000?) they have been rather small and local...
http://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/assets/4673037/Ebola_outbreaks.png
And each and every human host is a replicating machine for producing literally billions of viruses with multiple mutations. At some point in time a much more virulent strain that is more lethal and transmissible and with a longer incubation period will evolve. We have got to get this outbreak contained ASAP before that inevitable mutation occurs and starts to spread ebola rapidly.
What you will witness when this event occurs will be a doubling of new cases faster than the current 3 weeks. At some point in time it will likely be too late to stop it. We need to throw everything at it NOW.
I completely agree. I'd sure like to see a more of a sense of urgency among those responsible for handling this.
Time is NOT the issue...viruses spread "like wildfire." Nuff said.
You have to READ THE FRIGGIN MANUAL.
I simple way of dealing with the "communication issues" is to show on television or YouTube "here is the manual" and "we'll make adjustments accordingly." I wish I could say this is complicated...bit it is not unfortunately.
Leaders cannot afford honesty and transparency. If they tried it with anything from economics to public health there would be riots in the streets. No, sometimes, almost at all times, they must lie, lest their head end up on a spike.
If i get it, I might do a road trip to Washington DC. Puke in the halls of Congress or the Senate, as they leave for their free drinks after a day of "work".
By the time you realize you are getting sick, it will be too late to drive to Washington. Unless you are close by.
Nah, not if it's your goal.
Go to Liberia. Roll around in some corpses. Use a couple toothbrushes to scrape up some viscera.
Go to the airport. Drop toothbrushes in people's luggage as they travel all over the place (probably their laptop bags, as laptops are guaranteed to never get cleaned thoroughly, and are handled all the time).
Arrive in America. Shit blood into the public toilet (for the first time). Flush a million times, to aerosolize the particles to infect everyone in the bathroom.
Travel to D.C. Puke on something that people have to touch (door handles, trash can lids, anything you can think of; again, for the first time).
Watch for the big wigs to get into their cars to go to special functions. Jump in front of their car, infecting every papparazzi that will soon be flooding the affected congressman.
Bingo, you've just caused a pandemic in 3 days or less!
Luckily we don't have extremist groups around the world willing to kill themselves for the opportunity to kill millions of nonbelievers. No one would spread this disease deliberately....surely.
You brought up a real interesting dilemma with your last sentence George: should governments throughout the world work together to address and defeat this menace? If so, does that set a precedent, and mean more surrender of individual freedoms? If it weren't for such high stakes, I'd say keep governmental meddling to a minimum. If government can lock down all of West Africa, could they lock down any and all foreign travel, for any health reason?
I've got to think about this a little more, before I denigrate anyone's opinion on this subject......
Governments " working together" means ENHANCING your freedoms...not detracting from them.
Goring annihilated the conspiracy charge at Nuremberg...even under Anglo Saxon law, let alone Franco/German.
If we have some type of "Andromeda Strain" here none of us...certainly individually but also obviously collectively...have no way of knowing.
As in "there is no knowledge that can attained here PERIOD" other than through following the protocols of dealing with an outbreak (which we are not doing AT ALL) and then OBSERVING.
Doesn't appear we have an outbreak in Kentucky.
Yet.
COMMUNICABLE DISEASE CONTROL ORDER (state of Texas)
http://cryptome.org/2014/10/texas-ebola-order-nyt-14-1002.pdf
The Texas Department of State Health Services and the Local Health Authority for Dallas County, Texas have reasonable cause to believe that you have been exposed to a communicable disease: Ebola.
Under the authority of Texas Health and Safety Code § 81.083 you are hereby ordered to implement the following control measures effective immediately, that are reasonable and necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, and spread of this disease in this state:
? Remain at [ ]. You will not be permitted to leave [ ] without the prior approval of the Department of State Health Services or Dallas County Health and Human Services.
? You are not to allow or otherwise permit any visitors at [ ] without the prior approval of the Department of State Health Services or the Dallas County Health and Human Services.
? Monitor yourself for symptoms such as a fever above 100.5 degrees Fahrenheit, headache, nausea, diarrhea or abdominal pain and report any of these symptoms immediately to the Dallas County Health and Human Services at (214) 819-2004 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. and after 4:30 p.m. at (877) 605-2660.
? Make yourself available to representatives of the Department, U. S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and/or Dallas County Health and Human Services for diagnostic testing, providing them with blood and other samples or any other measures, monitoring or tests required by any of the entities above, to prevent the spread of a communicable disease, on request by any of the entities listed above.
If you do not comply with these control measures you may be subject to criminal prosecution under Texas Health and Safety Code §81.087, or civil court proceedings under Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 81, Subchapter G, entitled “Court Orders for Management of Persons with Communicable Diseases.”
This Order will remain in effect until you are notified in writing that (1) the incubation period has passed and you are no longer suspected of having the above-stated communicable disease; or...
Absolute must read...
..to whom it may concern..
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/07/31/executive-order-re...
Yep Barry is all over this one.