Why the fuck aren't we stopping all passengers from IBOLA infected regions?

[LoneLaugher]

I refer you to the link that's already been posted in this thread. New Scientist laid it out pretty explicitly.

Unlike you guys, I don't pretend to know what I'm talking about here, instead I listen to the experts who do.

In other words, you have no explanation of your own and are not capable of independent critical thinking. Like I said, the WHO and the CDC (who also have expert epidemiologists on staff) made mistakes and underestimated this virus, as they have already admitted to!

I am actually very capable of "critical thinking" - it's how I recognize your panicky bullshit as panicky bullshit.

Part of "critical thinking" is understanding the limits of your knowledge.

It's not "panicky bullshit." It's plain old common sense that you don't allow people from a place that is suffering from a disease that is contagious and causes death and serious illness to come here!!!

I don't want an Ebola czar and I don't want a stupid Ebola team. All I want is some basic common sense precautionary measures to be taken when there are such situations.

No flights out of Texas. Simple.

Texas is not an Ebola hot spot, genius. Keep trying to act as if you are clever though. It's amusing.

I am clever. You are simple. You ought to be more contrite.

 

[ChrisL]

In other words, you have no explanation of your own and are not capable of independent critical thinking. Like I said, the WHO and the CDC (who also have expert epidemiologists on staff) made mistakes and underestimated this virus, as they have already admitted to!

I am actually very capable of "critical thinking" - it's how I recognize your panicky bullshit as panicky bullshit.

Part of "critical thinking" is understanding the limits of your knowledge.

It's not "panicky bullshit." It's plain old common sense that you don't allow people from a place that is suffering from a disease that is contagious and causes death and serious illness to come here!!!

I don't want an Ebola czar and I don't want a stupid Ebola team. All I want is some basic common sense precautionary measures to be taken when there are such situations.

No flights out of Texas. Simple.

Texas is not an Ebola hot spot, genius. Keep trying to act as if you are clever though. It's amusing.

I am clever. You are simple. You ought to be more contrite.

You think you're clever. Clearly you are not though.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I am actually very capable of "critical thinking" - it's how I recognize your panicky bullshit as panicky bullshit.

Part of "critical thinking" is understanding the limits of your knowledge.

It's not "panicky bullshit." It's plain old common sense that you don't allow people from a place that is suffering from a disease that is contagious and causes death and serious illness to come here!!!

I don't want an Ebola czar and I don't want a stupid Ebola team. All I want is some basic common sense precautionary measures to be taken when there are such situations.

No flights out of Texas. Simple.

Texas is not an Ebola hot spot, genius. Keep trying to act as if you are clever though. It's amusing.

I am clever. You are simple. You ought to be more contrite.

You think you're clever. Clearly you are not though.

Clearly? Explain.

 

[bripat9643]

The people "who know what they are talking about" are political hacks who would sell their own mothers for gold it that would keep them in Obama's good graces.

You think that every single epidemiologist in the world are "political hacks"?

No, just the ones who claim travel bans don't work.

Which epidemiologists have said that they do work?

Epidemiologist says US must stop all flights from Ebola-stricken West Africa to prevent outbreaks Daily Mail Online​

A top epidemiologist is speaking out to say the US must stop all commercial flights from Ebola-stricken West African nations in order to prevent more outbreaks on American soil.

David Dausey, a Yale-educated academic who has been nationally recognized for his research on the spread of infectious diseases, says the bungling public health response to US Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan proves that the country cannot afford another case.

Duncan had contact with 100 people in his short time in the US before he was admitted to a hospital. Nearly half of them are still under observation.

Writing in the Washington Post, Dr Dausey argues: 'The human errors in this single case highlight why it is urgent that we ban all commercial flights from the impacted countries to all non-affected countries until the outbreak is contained.'


Read more: Epidemiologist says US must stop all flights from Ebola-stricken West Africa to prevent outbreaks Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook​

Well, I guess you guys now have one on your side.

And you have a gaggle of ass-kissing politically correct hacks on your side.

 

[orogenicman]

If you want to prevent deadly diseases from arriving here, there is only one solution: Stop it at the source. This minor issue here has taken attention from the real issue - fighting the disease where it can actually do good, in Africa.

Nothing prevents us from working to stop the disease at its source if we ban travel to the US from these countries. It is possible for us to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Importing Ebola carriers into this country is not a minor issue. For one thing, it costs $500,000 to treat each one. If Ebola became widespread it would devastate our economy. It's already having severe economic effects.

Okay, here is how your travel ban works. We send workers there to treat Ebola patients. Now our people can't get back. Who is going to agree to go there and not come back? To say nothing of the fact that travel bans are rather easily defeated. You simply buy a plane ticket to a country that doesn't have the travel ban and then buy a ticket in that country to the states. If you think the economic effects are bad now, wait until your travel ban takes effect.

It would be a temporary travel ban from hot spots. Not permanent. Good grief!!!

Right. So a guy got exposed, and cannot travel to the states. So what? He travels to Belgium or some country that doesn't impose the travel ban, and then catches a connecting flight to the states. His problem is solved. A travel ban is ridiculous, and will NEVER work. But hey, maybe if you wrapped yourself with cellophane, you won't catch any disease, and will save the rest of us a lot of money.

This has already been explained to you about a dozen times, but apparently you're too stupid to get it. No matter how he plans on getting to the U.S., he is still going to have a passport from a West African country. The minute he displays it, he's on a plan back to West africa.

If you believe that is going to stop the spread of the disease, I've got a bridge I can sell you for a song and dance.

 

[orogenicman]

So . . . it seems that people are actually SO delusional as to believe that quarantining and isolation (which is the MAIN protocol for treating Ebola patients) does not help to prevent spread of the disease. Unreal and sadly pathetic how stupid and lacking common sense some Americans have become.

A travel ban is not a quarantine. It does not prevent the spread elsewhere. You have to do that at the source, as I've said a half a dozen times now.

 

[orogenicman]

Non-sequitur. But then, you knew that.

Not at all. I don't buy it. End of story. I'm sure you know that it's just common sense to not invite people into your country who are diseased, but you're a dumb arse, and would probably just die. We call that "culling the herd." Perhaps you should go hug an Ebola victim today. Then you can feel all warm and fuzzy inside, like you're doing something grand.

Just because you are a coward doesn't mean that the rest of us have to be that way. Good grief.

So you think we should expose ourselves to a fatal disease to show how brave we are? You're serious?

Why should I be exposed to a fatal disease because you're a foolhardy moron?

Have you ben exposed to a fatal disease?

About 1000 people in this country have. If they contract Ebola and die, are you going to cough up several million in compensation to their families?

The people who contracted the disease and exposed those 1000 people were Americans, not Africans. Next.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Because liberals love the idea of disease ridden illegals infesting America... it's rather simple.. See Mass Amnesty, hidden illegals and an Administration who refuses to tell where they housed them.. OH, THE MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION..

 

[bodecea]

Because liberals love the idea of disease ridden illegals infesting America... it's rather simple.. See Mass Amnesty, hidden illegals and an Administration who refuses to tell where they housed them.. OH, THE MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION..

How many Americans have died of Ebola this week?

 

[ChrisL]

So . . . it seems that people are actually SO delusional as to believe that quarantining and isolation (which is the MAIN protocol for treating Ebola patients) does not help to prevent spread of the disease. Unreal and sadly pathetic how stupid and lacking common sense some Americans have become.

A travel ban is not a quarantine. It does not prevent the spread elsewhere. You have to do that at the source, as I've said a half a dozen times now.

It does not prevent the spread elsewhere.

Of course it does. What is wrong with you?

 

[PredFan]

Democrats think that money is the answer to everything. If they throw money at a problem, and it doesn't fix it, it must be because they didn't throw enough money at it and they need to throw more.

Correction, not just any money, someone else's money.

Oh really? How much do you think it would cost to restrict travel as opposed to vaccinating people in the countries of origin?

It quite obviously would cost much more to vaccinate people in the countries of origin. It would cost next to nothing to prevent travel to the US from those countries. We don't yet have a vaccine, you know that right?

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

...experts are unanimous that a ban on outward air travel would be disastrous. Privately, UN officials warn that such a move could lead to a panicked rush of people across land borders, where unlike air passengers their movements cannot be traced. It could also cause further economic damage to the countries, threatening the civil order essential to fighting the disease.

That entire article bases it's claim on two obviously bogus points:

1. That bans didn't work before
2. That bans would cause much needed supplies and aid to the countries to stop.

1. They claim that bans on HIV patient's travel did not stop it from spreading, never mind that it had spread to almost every country in the world before anyone knew what it was.

2. NO ONE is saying don't allow supplies and aid to go in. We are only asking to stop commercial flights.

It's politics, not common sense that prevents a travel ban.

1) Name one instance in modern times (or at any other time, for that matter) when a travel ban led to the eradication of a disease vector.

2) It does worse than that. It disrupts commerce and destabilizes entire regions affected by the ban.

1 (3) Erm, what ban on HIV, where?

2 (4) Not going to happen.

1. No one is saying that a travel ban will eradicate the disease vector.

2. The disease itself has already disrupted commerce and destabilized the region.

3. The HIV ban that they used as an example in the article that YOU linked to. Did you even read it?

4. You are correct, it probably isn't going to happen, but that is irrelevant.

 

[PredFan]

It quite obviously would cost much more to vaccinate people in the countries of origin. It would cost next to nothing to prevent travel to the US from those countries. We don't yet have a vaccine, you know that right?

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

...experts are unanimous that a ban on outward air travel would be disastrous. Privately, UN officials warn that such a move could lead to a panicked rush of people across land borders, where unlike air passengers their movements cannot be traced. It could also cause further economic damage to the countries, threatening the civil order essential to fighting the disease.

I said "yet", did you miss that?

I've read that article and it is wrong, blatantly so. It's the politics and politicians that are writing it, not anyone who knows wtf they are talking about.

Then I'm sure you can post a link to an actual "expert" that agrees with you, right?

Because so far, no one has.

I don't trust the "common sense" of paniced morons on the internet anymore than I trust my plumber to do brain surgery.

I AM the expert. I'm an expert because I'm trained in healthcare, microbiology, and Isolation procedure, and I have common sense.

Really?

So where did you get your PhD in epidemiology? Have you published?

Let's hear you CV, "expert".

You don't have to have a PhD moron, all you need is knowledge and common sense. I have the training and the knowledge, and I have the common sense. Everything I have stated fits in with the facts as we know them.

You want my CV dumbass? 32 years training and practice in isolation procedures, caring for and treating diseases patients with all manner of communicable diseases, many of them more contagious than Ebola. Yearly testing and classes in infectious diseases, isolation protocol, and even biological terrorism.

 

[PredFan]

It quite obviously would cost much more to vaccinate people in the countries of origin. It would cost next to nothing to prevent travel to the US from those countries. We don't yet have a vaccine, you know that right?

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

...experts are unanimous that a ban on outward air travel would be disastrous. Privately, UN officials warn that such a move could lead to a panicked rush of people across land borders, where unlike air passengers their movements cannot be traced. It could also cause further economic damage to the countries, threatening the civil order essential to fighting the disease.

I said "yet", did you miss that?

I've read that article and it is wrong, blatantly so. It's the politics and politicians that are writing it, not anyone who knows wtf they are talking about.

Then I'm sure you can post a link to an actual "expert" that agrees with you, right?

Because so far, no one has.

I don't trust the "common sense" of paniced morons on the internet anymore than I trust my plumber to do brain surgery.

I AM the expert. I'm an expert because I'm trained in healthcare, microbiology, and Isolation procedure, and I have common sense.

Okay, Mr. Expert. Can you cite any of the scientific findings you have published that supports your argument?

Hey nit wit, I already explained it to you. I'm an expert because of my training. I'm too busy actually caring for and treating patients with infectious diseases to bother writing a paper on it. There are those that do, and those that teach. I'm a doer.

 

[PredFan]

It quite obviously would cost much more to vaccinate people in the countries of origin. It would cost next to nothing to prevent travel to the US from those countries. We don't yet have a vaccine, you know that right?

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

...experts are unanimous that a ban on outward air travel would be disastrous. Privately, UN officials warn that such a move could lead to a panicked rush of people across land borders, where unlike air passengers their movements cannot be traced. It could also cause further economic damage to the countries, threatening the civil order essential to fighting the disease.

I said "yet", did you miss that?

I've read that article and it is wrong, blatantly so. It's the politics and politicians that are writing it, not anyone who knows wtf they are talking about.

Then I'm sure you can post a link to an actual "expert" that agrees with you, right?

Because so far, no one has.

I don't trust the "common sense" of paniced morons on the internet anymore than I trust my plumber to do brain surgery.

I AM the expert. I'm an expert because I'm trained in healthcare, microbiology, and Isolation procedure, and I have common sense.

"Common sense" is fucking meaningless in this context, as are your college bio classes.

Find me a single published epidemiologist who agrees with you, or concede that you have no idea what you're talking about.

If you weren't some left wing hack, I'd care what you thought. You are and I don't. You want to stay stupid, be my guest. I'm right for the exact reasons I stated and all of the facts support my statements. You do not matter. The OP asked a question, I answered it. You disagree, I don't give a shit.

 

[orogenicman]

So . . . it seems that people are actually SO delusional as to believe that quarantining and isolation (which is the MAIN protocol for treating Ebola patients) does not help to prevent spread of the disease. Unreal and sadly pathetic how stupid and lacking common sense some Americans have become.

A travel ban is not a quarantine. It does not prevent the spread elsewhere. You have to do that at the source, as I've said a half a dozen times now.

It does not prevent the spread elsewhere.

Of course it does. What is wrong with you?

Nothing is wrong with me. I'm fine. You?

Banning people from the affects African countries from entering the U.S. does not prevent them from traveling to other countries, where they can infect the populations of those countries, who can then travel to the states. The only way to stop the spread of the disease is to treat the effected populations. Period. Which is what we are trying to do.

 

[orogenicman]

Oh really? How much do you think it would cost to restrict travel as opposed to vaccinating people in the countries of origin?

It quite obviously would cost much more to vaccinate people in the countries of origin. It would cost next to nothing to prevent travel to the US from those countries. We don't yet have a vaccine, you know that right?

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

...experts are unanimous that a ban on outward air travel would be disastrous. Privately, UN officials warn that such a move could lead to a panicked rush of people across land borders, where unlike air passengers their movements cannot be traced. It could also cause further economic damage to the countries, threatening the civil order essential to fighting the disease.

That entire article bases it's claim on two obviously bogus points:

1. That bans didn't work before
2. That bans would cause much needed supplies and aid to the countries to stop.

1. They claim that bans on HIV patient's travel did not stop it from spreading, never mind that it had spread to almost every country in the world before anyone knew what it was.

2. NO ONE is saying don't allow supplies and aid to go in. We are only asking to stop commercial flights.

It's politics, not common sense that prevents a travel ban.

1) Name one instance in modern times (or at any other time, for that matter) when a travel ban led to the eradication of a disease vector.

2) It does worse than that. It disrupts commerce and destabilizes entire regions affected by the ban.

1 (3) Erm, what ban on HIV, where?

2 (4) Not going to happen.

1. No one is saying that a travel ban will eradicate the disease vector.

2. The disease itself has already disrupted commerce and destabilized the region.

3. The HIV ban that they used as an example in the article that YOU linked to. Did you even read it?

4. You are correct, it probably isn't going to happen, but that is irrelevant.

1) Right, then you are admitting that your only purpose in supporting such a travel ban is a racist attitude having nothing to do with the epidemic. Glad we got that straightened out.

2) And if you institute a travel ban, the disruption and destabilization will be orders of magnitude worse.

3) Yes

4) Right, then you are going to stop this nonsense, right?

 

[PredFan]

So . . . it seems that people are actually SO delusional as to believe that quarantining and isolation (which is the MAIN protocol for treating Ebola patients) does not help to prevent spread of the disease. Unreal and sadly pathetic how stupid and lacking common sense some Americans have become.

A travel ban is not a quarantine. It does not prevent the spread elsewhere. You have to do that at the source, as I've said a half a dozen times now.

It does not prevent the spread elsewhere.

Of course it does. What is wrong with you?

Nothing is wrong with me. I'm fine. You?

Banning people from the affects African countries from entering the U.S. does not prevent them from traveling to other countries, where they can infect the populations of those countries, who can then travel to the states. The only way to stop the spread of the disease is to treat the effected populations. Period. Which is what we are trying to do.

You are a simple minded fool. It's amazing that you can actually use the Internet.

When someone from the effected countries travels to one of the very few remaining countries that don't have a ban, and the infects people in those countries, we will know it and then block travel feomthose countries as well.

Do you think at all?

 

[orogenicman]

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

I said "yet", did you miss that?

I've read that article and it is wrong, blatantly so. It's the politics and politicians that are writing it, not anyone who knows wtf they are talking about.

Then I'm sure you can post a link to an actual "expert" that agrees with you, right?

Because so far, no one has.

I don't trust the "common sense" of paniced morons on the internet anymore than I trust my plumber to do brain surgery.

I AM the expert. I'm an expert because I'm trained in healthcare, microbiology, and Isolation procedure, and I have common sense.

Okay, Mr. Expert. Can you cite any of the scientific findings you have published that supports your argument?

Hey nit wit, I already explained it to you. I'm an expert because of my training. I'm too busy actually caring for and treating patients with infectious diseases to bother writing a paper on it. There are those that do, and those that teach. I'm a doer.

What training, where? Where did you receive your training? What certifications do you possess? If you are too busy "actually caring for and treating patients with infectious diseases to bother writing a paper on it", how do you manage to find the time to post your nonsense on this forum?

 

[orogenicman]

So . . . it seems that people are actually SO delusional as to believe that quarantining and isolation (which is the MAIN protocol for treating Ebola patients) does not help to prevent spread of the disease. Unreal and sadly pathetic how stupid and lacking common sense some Americans have become.

A travel ban is not a quarantine. It does not prevent the spread elsewhere. You have to do that at the source, as I've said a half a dozen times now.

It does not prevent the spread elsewhere.

Of course it does. What is wrong with you?

Nothing is wrong with me. I'm fine. You?

Banning people from the affects African countries from entering the U.S. does not prevent them from traveling to other countries, where they can infect the populations of those countries, who can then travel to the states. The only way to stop the spread of the disease is to treat the effected populations. Period. Which is what we are trying to do.

You are a simple minded fool. It's amazing that you can actually use the Internet.

When someone from the effected countries travels to one of the very few remaining countries that don't have a ban, and the infects people in those countries, we will know it and then block travel feomthose countries as well.

Do you think at all?

As if countries that don't have a travel ban make up the minority of countries. NOT! since you brought it up, how about you providing us with a list of countries that have instituted said travel ban.

 

[PredFan]

It quite obviously would cost much more to vaccinate people in the countries of origin. It would cost next to nothing to prevent travel to the US from those countries. We don't yet have a vaccine, you know that right?

Actually, there are several vaccines being fast tracked, and several, medications that work on the virus that are being used. But hey, as far as restricting travel goes, don't just take my word for it:

Why closing borders won t stop Ebola s rampage - health - 21 October 2014 - New Scientist

...experts are unanimous that a ban on outward air travel would be disastrous. Privately, UN officials warn that such a move could lead to a panicked rush of people across land borders, where unlike air passengers their movements cannot be traced. It could also cause further economic damage to the countries, threatening the civil order essential to fighting the disease.

That entire article bases it's claim on two obviously bogus points:

1. That bans didn't work before
2. That bans would cause much needed supplies and aid to the countries to stop.

1. They claim that bans on HIV patient's travel did not stop it from spreading, never mind that it had spread to almost every country in the world before anyone knew what it was.

2. NO ONE is saying don't allow supplies and aid to go in. We are only asking to stop commercial flights.

It's politics, not common sense that prevents a travel ban.

1) Name one instance in modern times (or at any other time, for that matter) when a travel ban led to the eradication of a disease vector.

2) It does worse than that. It disrupts commerce and destabilizes entire regions affected by the ban.

1 (3) Erm, what ban on HIV, where?

2 (4) Not going to happen.

1. No one is saying that a travel ban will eradicate the disease vector.

2. The disease itself has already disrupted commerce and destabilized the region.

3. The HIV ban that they used as an example in the article that YOU linked to. Did you even read it?

4. You are correct, it probably isn't going to happen, but that is irrelevant.

1) Right, then you are admitting that your only purpose in supporting such a travel ban is a racist attitude having nothing to do with the epidemic. Glad we got that straightened out.

2) And if you institute a travel ban, the disruption and destabilization will be orders of magnitude worse.

3) Yes

4) Right, then you are going to stop this nonsense, right?

1. No, but with your limited mental capacity and your left wing but blinders on, I'm sure that that was all you could get from that.

2. Complete bull shit. How much of those nations economy depends on their people leaving the country? You're a moron.

3. Then why the fuck did you ask me: "what HIV travel ban?"

4. Do you know what "irrelevant" means dumbass?