Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Massively" misinformed like Dr Buetler? Like Australia? Like the US military?
Massively misinformed and driven by a mob mentality.
Dr Buetler's perspective is, IMO, skewed by his immersion in pure science.
The US Military is bowing to public opinion, because it makes little difference to them. The servicemen are still on duty, still working, still being paid. They already have a support system in place to address their everyday obligations in their absence, because absence is a way of life.
Australia...I have no idea what's driving their policy decisions.
She co-wrote an anti-pharmaceutical industry op-ed for the Baltimore Sun and advocated against policies that would have developed life-saving drugs.
How does this make an sense at all? A 'nurse' who supposedly works to save people in 3rd World countries and she advocates AGAINST developing Life-Saving Drugs. I would hustle to remove such information also .... especially since the Lawsuit of MONEY is on the front burner now.
The Ideology Driven Far Leftists are unbelievable. I don't know if the Leftist driven CDC even has anything to do with "Disease Control" anymore - their focus appears to be more Political than Medical.
She is being used to sway the public to NOT quarantine.
The administration will not come out and override states here. That would show their true agenda.
Instead they "suggested" and that fell on deaf ears.
Now they take it to the public with this poor nurse who is "locked up" for 20 days.
There have been several papers on the topic. I'll see if I can find them.
Dr Buetler, IMO, is coming to his conclusions from a pure-science perspective, not an applied science perspective. And medicine is very much an applied science field. When it comes to pure science, virtually nothing is 100% known. But in terms of applied science, or medicine, in terms of Ebola, this virus has been studied for several decades, there have been numerous outbreaks, and this outbreak, the largest outbreak, has not diverged from what we did know about how the virus is transmitted.
Dr Buetler's pure science viewpoint, for instance, would say it's possible for the virus to mutate to become airborne. You would have to dig deeper with him to realize that such a mutation has never happened, and would be a fundamental mutation, meaning that the virus would no longer be Ebola. Because how we identify a virus is in part how it attaches to its hosts, what cells it attacks. If Ebola became airborne, it would have to attack entirely different cells, in an entirely different way. So it would no longer be Ebola. And no virus has ever done that that we know of. Dr Buetler's pure science perspective does not deal with likelihoods, or probabilities. Pure science is more black and white, possible or not possible. And in pure science, almost everything is possible.
I appreciate that you are airing very real concerns, and I appreciate your outrage over blaming Pham and Vinson for getting ill. But I don't blame them in any way, and really, while the CDC's remarks may have sounded like blame, I think the CDC was well aware that the CDC was the point guard for our defense, and that their focus was so narrow, that they forgot that hospitals, even top-tier hospitals, have a much broader focus. The CDC wasn't wrong on its facts about Ebola. They were wrong in their expectations about how prepared American hospitals were to deal with Ebola.
I think the CDC head knew exactly what he was saying. And there's an old saying about apologizing, that "you can't un-say something". I'm not willing to cut him some slack on his ignorant remark. If he didn't think that health care workers in the thick of things would not object to him saying they screwed up, either because they didn't know any better or what, he was very wrong.
I'm not seeing Dr. Buetler's arguments as pure science vs applied. I'm not debating about the possibilities of Ebola becoming airborne. I have not said ONE WORD about that. I'm debating this notion that Ebola is not contagious until the patient shows symptoms. If true, it's one of the few viral disease where that happens, and even Frieden ought to know that, and question it a bit.
I don't think the CDC is wrong, I think they just don't know everything but they won't admit that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
Here's one article where it talks about viral load's relationship to the severity of the infection.
She co-wrote an anti-pharmaceutical industry op-ed for the Baltimore Sun and advocated against policies that would have developed life-saving drugs.
How does this make an sense at all?
It doesn't, because it's weapons-grade BS. The Op-Ed has to do with the way publicly funded research at Johns Hopkins is appropriated to generate income for privately-owned companies. She has argued in favor of making generic versions of medicine more widely available in developing countries. The pharmaceutical industry, of course, hates this.
I am absolutely fascinated with the way people refuse to listen to actual experts on the Ebola issue. From a nation that used to pride itself on having nothing to fear but fear itself, the massive fear-driven overreaction is - befuddling.
Massively misinformed and driven by a mob mentality.
Dr Buetler's perspective is, IMO, skewed by his immersion in pure science.
The US Military is bowing to public opinion, because it makes little difference to them. The servicemen are still on duty, still working, still being paid. They already have a support system in place to address their everyday obligations in their absence, because absence is a way of life.
Australia...I have no idea what's driving their policy decisions.
The military can assign their personnel as they see fit and it is not infringing on their constitutional rights to freedom of movement as is happening with health care workers. You can't put uninfected civilians behind bars in the absence of any medical need (or benefit) to do so.
So are you saying that her having the Ebola was a sham ?
That she didn't have it but said she had it and so the Obola Administration could used her as a puppet to show the public that people infected with ebola are okay to be around.
But things went wrong when the governors said they would quarantine her and others coming from an Ebola zone.
The military can assign their personnel as they see fit and it is not infringing on their constitutional rights to freedom of movement as is happening with health care workers. You can't put uninfected civilians behind bars in the absence of any medical need (or benefit) to do so.
Imagine that..a CDC worker who just came back from Africa balking at the thought of a 21 day quarantine.
So she thinks her rights are more important then taking an extra precautionary measure to keep America safe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
