example is this news article - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/15/obama-ebola-nurses-atlanta_n_5990584.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592. the article should also make it clear whether the nurses that got infected knew the patient had ebola or not. did they take protective measures but still got infected? the article did say the "the sick nurses may have contracted ebola by caring for duncan without wearing the right protective gear". but there is no need to speculate. the infected nurses are still alive just ask them. if they make it clear that the nurses did not know for sure the patient had ebola or they knew but did not know how to protect themselves at that time, then there really is nothing to worry about. it's possible the nurses that treated the patient before they knew the patient had ebola got lucky and did not get infected. which is still bad because luck is not a strategy. another very important information is how the nurses got infected. did the patient sneeze on them?
obama did say one of the nurse did not follow protocol by traveling on a commercial flight a plane even if she had ebola. but did she know she had ebola? did everyone in that flight get tested for ebola? thanks anyways for letting us know the partial or incomplete information about the protocol. it would benice though if we are given the complete information. the most important of which is how not to get infected when you go out to the public and mingle with other people.
obama also said there is nothing to worry about because if we just follow the protocols the chances of the disease spreading is very very low. but the government also said there was no housing bubble in 2007. it's ok to give opinions as long as they substantiate them with known facts that will properly educate the public. this prevents false worries and if there are risks the public can take necessary precautions. the information won't go against any political agenda and the information is easy for them to find out. i understand fear mongering to accomplish a political goal. it's wrong but i understand it's part of the game. but i don't see what they will accomplish here. maybe they are trying to cause false hysteria to increase TV ratings?
are they afraid it would offend the people of west africa if they reveal it's very easy to contain ebola? because if it's easy to contain and ebola outbreak, how come west africa is having difficulty containing the outbreak? to me it's stupid that they can't just give us details on how the american aid workers in western africa got infected with ebola. i'm sure they were wearing protective gear. but why did they still get infected? was there an accident meaning the worker tripped and fell and their gear got torn and the blood vial broke or spilled and they touched the blood? did the patient sneeze on their face while they temporarily took off their mask to scratch an itch? or is the virus mutating so now it's airborne?
----------------------------
follow up facebook posts the next day:
http://news.yahoo.com/report-texas-ebola-nurses-had-no-protective-gear-200612423.html
finally !!! PROJECTILE VOMITTING !!! EXPLOSIVE DIARRHEA !!! nurses unaware that duncan had ebola. ZERO PROTECTIVE GEAR. this puts to rest our ebola fears. the government should be bombarding the public with this information and this information only. but i still think they should give details on how the 2 nurses got infected. DID DUNCAN VOMIT ON THE NURSES? DID DUNCAN SNEEZE ON THEIR FACES? WAS DUNCAN SWEATING PROFUSELY AND THEY WIPED HIS SWEAT WITHOUT WEARING GLOVES? i'm willing to accept that people are too stupid to realize how important these details are. at least this article supports my theory that ebola outbreak is a question of competence and competent societies including the philippines can easily contain ebola.
-------------------------------
http://www.inquisitr.com/1541821/ebola-is-airborne-university-of-minnesota-cidrap-researchers-claim/#Cao1ARJOGvpvBzTS.99
OMG another one. inquistr news site is such a big joke. what's amazing is many of my smart and highly educated facebook friends easily fell for it. they don't see the fallacy or flaws in logic. i even had to debate them to make them realize the flaw, the flaw here is the title claims ebola is airborne. the right title should emphasize that it's only a small possibility and that there's no documented case yet. but the title is trying to mislead you into thinking that ebola is already airborne. the university of minnesota is just advising that it's better for health workers to take more conservative measures in treating ebola", which i actually agree with. also the questions at the end of the article is downright moronic - "Do you think about airborne Ebola? Should flight restrictions and mandatory quarantines be enacted in order to prevent an Ebola pandemic in America?".
of course - http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/279361722.html
it's amazing how there were no extra precautions to deal with passengers from west africa. at least advice people on the flights to make sure to immediately go to a hospital if they develop fever and make sure to inform the hospital or doctors that you came from west africa. or at least send a advisory to all hospitals that if any new patient with fever should be asked if they came from west africa.
--------------------------------------------
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/15/shepard-smith-ebola_n_5992510.html
2 days ago i was the only one in the world lambasting the media and US government for creating a false hysteria on ebola. today, top media personalities are starting to follow my lead. if you read my facebook posts, i'm the only one providing a clear concrete logic and hard evidence on why we should not panic. shepard smith made a mistake in this video saying the 2 nurses died but that's forgivable because it's just a mistake similar to locking your keys in the car. but he should not be accusing the media of causing mass hysteria without giving specific details and examples. he should do something similar to my earlier posts about this topic.
-----------------------------------------------
it would really be useful if someone analyzes the difference between 2014 ebola outbreak and past outbreaks. what makes the 2014 outbreak more massive?
---------------------------------------------
now we know it's just a question of competency, are filipinos competent enough to prevent an ebola outbreak? the key is to compare filipinos with africans. i came across this article about too many africans not being able to understand the concept of time or they just know morning noon and night. of course there would be outrage towards whoever made this racist statement. but then the only rebuke to the racist statement is - SOME TREATMENTS ONLY REQUIRE 2 PILLS IN THE MORNING AND 2 PILLS AT NIGHT. so in essence they were really agreeing to the racist statement. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/11/opinion/in-america-refusing-to-save-africans.html
a strain of ebola originated from mindanao philippines but those who were infected did not die. hopefully, maybe there is something in our diet that makes us more immune to ebola. but HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY. https://web.stanford.edu/group/virus/filo/history.html
(for more of my knowledge bombs, click the "ian's knowledge bombs" banner at the top of this article and choose any article in the table of contents that piques your interest)
No comments:
Post a Comment