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.
Your previous link (Ebola virus detected in Guinea fever outbreak) showed this image:
This is an image that could be anything but was labeled Ebola when it was previously used for a page on bacteria.
From the caption to the photo in the link:
"A micrograph image of human liver tissue infected with the Ebola virus, the cause of Ebola hemorrhagic fever."
That is a photo of liver tissue infected with Ebola.
You now cite another link with an image (claiming it is again from 1976) of this:
Do those look remotely similar? This image is also a stock photo as the caption states and has been used/purchased for use over 4000 times. The very first incidence was in a 2007 report here: Ebola: No more 'kissing' - Worldnews.com
However this is a cultured image not from actual human tissue... How I know? From the article itself... "The tubes containing the blood and specimens of infected patients had shattered, but Patricia Webb, a CDC virologist, put on gloves and managed to squeeze a drop of the fluid from cotton that had been surrounding the specimens into a tube of monkey kidney cells. A few days later, the monkey cells looked damaged, and Webb gave Murphy a drop of the fluid to process under the microscope."
The patients blood mixed with monkey cells (a supposed reservoir for Ebola) and suddenly it is discovered as the cause of the patients symptoms???
Again not from a human... The monkey likely carried it in the first place and it had nothing to do with the samples that shattered. Try again.
The photo in the "no more kissing" link is indeed a stock photo. It is, however, virus obtained from a human infected with Ebola.
Vero cell culture lines are derived from kidney obtained in the 1960s. The cultured virus photographed came from human blood, not the cell culture. If the cell culture already contained virus, the cells would be visibly damaged and would not even be used to culture the blood sample.
Ebola was subsequently cultured from other patients, too.
"Virological studies were limited. Ebola virus was isolated in African green monkey kidney cells (Vero)
from blood specimens in 8 of 10 cases attempted. These specimens were taken 2-13 days after onset of
symptoms. Of interest was the simultaneous detection of virus and IFA Ebola antibodies to a titre of
1: 32 in one patient. This man was in the 13th and penultimate day of his illness. Ebola virus particles
were also visualized in 3 of 4 postmortem liver biopsies obtained from clinically suspect cases."
If it can be found in animals then it can be isolated from them to use in diagnostic tests such as antibody or PCR but if it was never isolated in humans then it actually may not exist or at the very least doesn't appear to replicate enough to cause harm..
Ebola was isolated from humans back in the 70s. The first samples of Ebola were all isolated from humans. The virus was immediately recognizable due to its unique appearance, similar to that of Marburg as well. Not sure what you're going on about here.
Read about the experiences of Peter Piot, one of the first doctors to come into contact with Ebola.
All she is doing on here is preaching to the choir. Proof is in the pudding. Has she changed anybody's minds even just here on CD with quoting science until pigs fly?
My personal vote for myself is flat out NO. If anyone else cares to comment? Has your mind been changed regarding vaccinations by the science quoting "medical professionals"?
Everyone here is preaching to the choir. No anti-vaxers have changed any minds, either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
So you have the obligation under the Constitution to put your OWN LIFE at risk purely to save others? Since when? Quote the passage to me.
Don't bother citing Jacoboson because there is no World Wide PANDEMIC of anything; not measles, chicken pox, FLU, or EBOLA!
Jacobson v Mass was broader than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts
"More broadly, Harlan ruled that the State of Massachusetts was justified in mandating vaccination, as “there are manifold restraints to which each person is necessarily subject for the common good".
Harlan's decision supported both police power and limits on said power, and his decision would be invoked to support both in later cases. He stated his nuanced opinion on the limits of government power by saying that “general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression or absurd consequence.” [3] . . . The Supreme Court reaffirmed its decision in Jacobson in Zucht v. King (1922), which held that a school system could refuse admission to a student who failed to receive a required vaccination.[5]"
Jacobson was most recently upheld in 2015. I'm not at my regular computer now, when I do get back on it, I'll post some supporting links.
Ebola was isolated from humans back in the 70s. The first samples of Ebola were all isolated from humans. The virus was immediately recognizable due to its unique appearance, similar to that of Marburg as well. Not sure what you're going on about here.
Read about the experiences of Peter Piot, one of the first doctors to come into contact with Ebola.
Ebola was isolated from humans back in the 70s. The first samples of Ebola were all isolated from humans. The virus was immediately recognizable due to its unique appearance, similar to that of Marburg as well. Not sure what you're going on about here.
Read about the experiences of Peter Piot, one of the first doctors to come into contact with Ebola.
As I proved in a previous post... it wasn't a human disease tissue but a blood sample from a human grown on animal tissue... whether the animal already had the disease and the human lacked it is not established. Can you find me an image of Ebola or H1N1 that was isolated in human tissue? There is controversy that states H1N1 has never been isolated from human tissue just like Ebola and HIV.
As I proved in a previous post... it wasn't a human disease tissue but a blood sample from a human grown on animal tissue... whether the animal already had the disease and the human lacked it is not established. Can you find me an image of Ebola or H1N1 that was isolated in human tissue? There is controversy that states H1N1 has never been isolated from human tissue just like Ebola and HIV.
I presume if you needed a blood transfusion you would be quite happy to receive blood from someone with HIV or Ebola?
I showed you pictures of human liver containing Ebola virus.
Measuring the amount of HIV in blood is a basic test for infected people:
The cell lines used to isolate Ebola are indeed known not to already contain Ebola. Those cells are themselves cultured; the animal they originally came from lived in the 1960s. No new monkeys are being used to create cells for viral culture.
As I proved in a previous post... it wasn't a human disease tissue but a blood sample from a human grown on animal tissue... whether the animal already had the disease and the human lacked it is not established. Can you find me an image of Ebola or H1N1 that was isolated in human tissue? There is controversy that states H1N1 has never been isolated from human tissue just like Ebola and HIV.
Quote:
The samples were treated like numerous others the lab had tested before, but when the scientists placed some of the cells under an electron microscope they saw something they didn't expect.
"We saw a gigantic worm like structure - gigantic by viral standards," says Piot. "It's a very unusual shape for a virus, only one other virus looked like that and that was the Marburg virus."
Quote:
Piot and his team suspected the unknown illness to be yellow fever. The Institute of Tropical Medicine was qualified to handle yellow fever. Little did they know that the as yet to be named Ebola virus was lurking inside the thermos. In those days biosafety protocols were not as strict as they are today. Wearing only thin latex gloves, the scientists removed a sample of blood from the undamaged vial and carried out standard tests on it. The blood sample was screened for known microbes, yellow fever, and several hemorrhagic-fever viruses such as Lassa, Marburg, and dengue. None of potential microbes or viruses were found in the blood. Piot also injected mice with samples of the nun's blood. After a weeks time all of the mice were dead.
When the scientists examined the blood under a microscope they were surprised by what they saw. "We saw a gigantic worm like structure- gigantic by viral standards," explains Piot.
The agent was isolated from the blood of 8 of 10 suspected cases using Vero cell cultures. Titrations of serial specimens obtained from one patient disclosed persistent viraemia of 106.5-104.5 infectious units from the third day of illness until death on the eighth day
I don't necessarily believe that this death did not occur but the timing of the announcement, the sensationalistic coverage and the lack of any details whatsoever along with the surveillance stats remaining contradictory raises questions.
The public was given all pertinent details. Anything else we do not need to know. What if the patient who died had HIV and her family does not want that shared with the world?
Perhaps you need to contact the Washington State department of health and tell them you are unhappy with the way they maintain their stats and that you want to know what they are covering up.
Quote:
Weeks? She died in April, the announcement was made in early July. Try months.
"How long does it take to receive an autopsy report?
Most autopsy reports are completed and ready for release within 6 - 8 weeks. In certain cases, additional tests may need to be performed which will delay completion of the report for several additional weeks."
Quote:
The only thing that I have insisted upon is that no one yet knows what the cause of deaths was. It could be improper handling, the wrong substance injected all together or it could have been the vaccine itself. The only thing I've insisted on is that people should not jump to conclusions.
The OP jumped to the conclusion that it was the vaccine.
The evidence available in the news reports points to it not being the vaccine, since children who received vaccine from the same lot did not get sick. Only children in one location, all vaccinated by someone who is not a trained healthcare worker, got sick.
Everyone here is preaching to the choir. No anti-vaxers have changed any minds, either.
Jacobson v Mass was broader than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts
"More broadly, Harlan ruled that the State of Massachusetts was justified in mandating vaccination, as “there are manifold restraints to which each person is necessarily subject for the common good".
Harlan's decision supported both police power and limits on said power, and his decision would be invoked to support both in later cases. He stated his nuanced opinion on the limits of government power by saying that “general terms should be so limited in their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression or absurd consequence.” [3] . . . The Supreme Court reaffirmed its decision in Jacobson in Zucht v. King (1922), which held that a school system could refuse admission to a student who failed to receive a required vaccination.[5]"
Jacobson was most recently upheld in 2015. I'm not at my regular computer now, when I do get back on it, I'll post some supporting links.
Pandemic has to be declared. Were there quarantines or forced vaccinations during the 2009 Flu PANDEMIC? Yes, the White House officially declared a National State of Emergency in 2009.
You can bank your own blood. This is what people were doing in the early 80's (Aids) in NYC, who needed future surgery and were worried about contaminated blood supply.
I was not given a blood transfusion after my ruptured ectopic, which hospital wanted me to have, because my OB/GYN in 1982 NYC did not trust the blood supply. He did not even want my own husband (same blood type) to donate blood to me. "Build up your own blood" was what he said.
You can still do this today if you choose to do so. Again to quote what my OB/GYN said back then, "The safest blood you can ever receive is your own."
By today's medical standards, this doctor would now probably be considered a Holistic doctor.
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.
