Ebola. Now she has it, now she doesn't?

Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 6 months ago to Politics
76 comments | Share | Flag

When will the truth be made public?
This is one more example of hiding the truth about Ebola.
No explanation whatsoever, but now the Dallas nurses are "cured."


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by Tbird7553 10 years, 6 months ago
    I saw an interview with one of the doctors who received the experimental drug that "cured" the first two doctors that returned here with the virus and he said he had given blood to others in the U. S. Infected with the virus. That might be the answer?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    We should hope that "Mary" has infected the administration, the con-gress, and all the parasites in the Dark Center with terminal honesty. Transport the rest of the banksters from NY to DC and lock it down.

    Seriously, will Pham be involved in a fatal "accident" sooner, or later?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "They concealed that animals (including dogs and pigs) are known to be secondary reservoirs of ebola. "
    Saturday they stated that Pham is going to play with her dog. The dog is supposed to be in quarantine. Were they planning to dress her in full protective garb and to use proper procedures to protect her and clean up afterward? Who will be paying the thousands of dollars for this cute idiotic photo-op?
    Dallas city officials apparently overruled that idiocy on Saturday, but the Dallas judge still continued his happy talk:
    Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins issued a statement Friday saying Pham would be able to see her dog Saturday but City officials supervising the dog’s care said no and Jenkins acknowledged Saturday that experts decided it would be a bad idea.

    “There’s no risk to her to be around the dog, but the top veterinarians in the state say the regimen we have the dog on, on monitoring, needs to not be interrupted and that the excitement of seeing her, and the separation anxiety when she would leave the quarantine area would be detrimental to their monitoring,” Jenkins said.

    La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la-la.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 6 months ago
    we have become inured to lies from the feds, to the
    point that even good news is suspect. it's like the
    turd in the punchbowl principle -- you just lose
    your appetite for the whole buffet. -- j

    p.s. we are soooooo glad that Nina and Amber
    are doing well == this is not negative about
    them, in any way at all !!!

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    They concealed that animals (including dogs and pigs) are known to be secondary reservoirs of ebola. They are still concealing that the Reston strain of ebola (which is not pathogenic to humans...and may indeed serve as a foundation for a vaccine) is suspected of having an airborne mode of transmission. They have advised against quarantine measures on arrival from W Africa, and then reluctantly initiated a pretty pathetic self-monitored self-quarantine period (which does not seem to be being well heeded). They apparently did not provide any direction to hospitals with ebola patients on the kind of quarantine precautions that were necessary. They specifically released a nurse (who should have been in quarantine) to travel...until she came down with symptoms.

    These guys are supposed to be the top in the world and instead of speaking accurately about ebola they have been making vague reassuring statements (that have been subsequently shown to be false or inaccurate). (eg the assurance that any US hospital had SOP's that would allow it to handle ebola patients safely.)

    I feel that they are subscribing to the "do not tell the little people anything that will scare them" philosophy. The result of this is that their own reputation is being trashed. Ebola is not a 'bad' disease insofar as transmission is concerned, but their behavior increases the danger as the public looses confidence in the medical system. Plagues are a numbers game and they must be handled correctly. We know how to do this; it is no secret. What we are now doing is a great job of botching this.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 10 years, 6 months ago
    The photo op with the "cured" nurse was pure staged propaganda. First they scare us to death with the contagion peril and FEMA coffins, then it's all hugs and roses, Obama showing fearlessness in the presence of a potential Typhoid Mary. I would expect health workers to have stronger immune systems to begin with. So should we now relax, with things under control, or should we continue to gear up for a pandemic? What are we being distracted from with this exaggerated crisis? Paranoia may well raise its fevered head.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "That is the problem they don't want to spread panic but people should be able to know everything that's going on"
    Giving people information and means to act on it prevents panic. Panic comes from lack of information and/or feeling trapped.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "That being said, I am REALLY UPSET with the CDC. "
    I have not followed this. I don't have high expectations of gov't. What is CDC doing wrong at this time?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by fivedollargold 10 years, 6 months ago
    The NIH guy was on TV today reiterating the Party line that quarantines are NOT needed because Ebola can't be transmitted if the exposed person isn't showing symptoms. True. HOWEVER, if you wait until the exposed person DOES show symptoms, then it may be too late. Utter fallicy in logic.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't trust the gov't either. I just don't think there's a conspiracy here, just a lot of people who are unhappy and looking for a disaster to blame it on. It's unlikely Ebola will give them their disaster, but sooner or later bad things in some form happen to everyone; I'm okay with it not being Ebola.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    freedomforall -

    We are not sheep. I have spent the 39 years between 1975 and now in the medical industry - the first 17 of those years working at the bench in laboratories. The CDC was god to us. Now I am going around shouting, "Feet of clay! Feet of CLAY!"

    The CDC has some of the top brains in clinical pathology in the world. Now they are acting like brainless adolescent politicians (maybe a redundant phrase). What I am seeing from my seat is the philosophy, "The little people are too dumb to handle the real facts. We will tell them just what they 'need' to know so that they will react in the manner we think they should." and then "Woops. The 'little people' are literate and the internet is ubiquitous. Hey - they keep turning up with inconvenient facts that we had intended to conceal!"

    Big Loss of Veracity time for the CDC! They are going to have to work very hard to salvage their reputations after this. Or not.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Robbie -

    I interpreted CircuitGuy's email to mean that the probability of survival of someone who has already survived is "1". We have (fortunately) a very small sample volume and two people surviving can be just the luck of the odds.

    Jan, not a mathematician
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by fivedollargold 10 years, 6 months ago
    Nice coincidence that she happened to be vacationing in DC immediately after recovery from a deadly illness. Apparently, she didn't want to get stiffed for her ticket. And while taking a White House tour, another cheerful happenstance. She runs into BHO and he happens to recognize her. Perfectly understandable given how much he learns from television.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    How do you get 100%? For a set of 2 with 50% chance each, the outcomes would be HH, HT, TH, TT - thus only one chance in 4 is both survive, 50% that one survives, and 25% that both perish. Really, for an engineer you don't know your math.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 6 months ago
    The death rate was established in an environment of lower health individuals, with lower care capability, and an environment of ignorance of infectious disease that doesn't respect sanitation and modern healthcare.

    For healthy people, who identify infection early in the cycle, who are cared for and have modern techniques used (evidently, Nina Pham had a blood transfusion from the doctor who had earlier survived, thus enhancing her own body's ability to fight the infection), then survival seems to be rather high.

    The real issue is not survival, but initial infection. Since it has a relatively long incubation period, then a very virulent form of contagion, keeping the outbreak contained to a level where proper care can be given is the key. This makes quarantining those at risk of exposure for a time period longer than the incubation period, essential. Otherwise we risk the situation where the medical resources would be overwhelmed, and survival rates would skyrocket.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo