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

[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?

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.

Screw your deflection. You made a stupidly false statement and it blew it out of the water. Deflection ignored.

 

[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

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?

If you want to know how travel bans affect economies, all you need do is analyze the economy of North Korea.

 

[orogenicman]

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.

Screw your deflection. You made a stupidly false statement and it blew it out of the water. Deflection ignored.

Better yet, please provide us with the name of one country that has instituted a travel ban that has successfully prevented the spread of Ebola (or any other disease).

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

 

[PredFan]

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?

If you want to know how travel bans affect economies, all you need do is analyze the economy of North Korea.

You are one dumb assed lefty.

 

[PredFan]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[PredFan]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? Seriously?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? Seriously?

I'd rather not give it a change to test NY City rats as a host

Is that understandable?

Level IV protocols are two-fold: to keep the medical professionals safe AND TO KEEP THE VIRUS FROM VECTORING OUT INTO IMMEDIATE AREA

Was that too hard to understand?

 

[PredFan]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? Seriously?

I'd rather not give it a change to test NY City rats as a host

Is that understandable?

Level IV protocols are two-fold: to keep the medical professionals safe AND TO KEEP THE VIRUS FROM VECTORING OUT INTO IMMEDIATE AREA

Was that too hard to understand?

It's not hard to understand, it's just not a real concern. They have rodents in Africa, but it is not carried by them. You think rats are going to get into the hospital's bio-containment suites? Highly doubtful.

 

[TooTall]

Which would you rather have, Ebola or diarrhea?

It doesn't matter. Both are deadly, but the latter has killed far more people.

So? Does that mean we want to introduce a deadly disease into the US? If we can prevent more people from getting sick here in the US, why wouldn't we take the appropriate precautions?

Why are people fighting against perhaps restricting travel from certain Ebola hot spots around the world? What exactly is the issue with that? If it would prevent even 1 United States citizen from dying from Ebola, it would be worth the effort, no?

I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

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.

I think you know that's a pipe dream. The next best thing is to restrict travel. Besides, I'm quite sure that a lot of our money already goes to Africa for various causes, not to mention the money people donate through various charities. I don't things in Africa could ever be like they are here in America not matter how much money we throw at them.

It isn't a pipe dream at all. Small pox was eradicated. The measles is all but a thing of the past. Vaccines are in the pipeline for Ebola. Fighting this disease at the source is the ONLY answer. But let's look at this idea of restricting travel. To who does it apply? France had a case. Let's stop all travel from France. Germany had a case. Shut them down. UK? Not yet. Stay tuned. Nigeria had it, but they've stopped it in its tracks. Never the less, they present a risk in your view, so they can't come either. That, of course, fucks up Chevron's American employees who work there and travel back and forth all the time (as well as many others). The simple fact is that it will never work, will never prevent someone with the disease from getting through, will not prevent someone with the disease from traveling to a country without such restriction and then traveling on to the U.S.: But it WILL kill business for Africans, for Americans, and for many others.

I could be wrong, but I believe a VISA has to be issued by the US Embassy to anyone that wants to travel to the US. Stop issuing them except for an emergency. American Chevron employees are relatively safe since they most certainly did not have anything to do with a West African that was dead or dying from Ebola.

 

[TooTall]

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.

I think you know that's a pipe dream. The next best thing is to restrict travel. Besides, I'm quite sure that a lot of our money already goes to Africa for various causes, not to mention the money people donate through various charities. I don't things in Africa could ever be like they are here in America not matter how much money we throw at them.

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.

Once they crossed the border are they going to swim to the US?

 

[Vigilante]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Doctor who treated Ebola patients rushed to NYC hospital New York Post

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? Seriously?

I'd rather not give it a change to test NY City rats as a host

Is that understandable?

Level IV protocols are two-fold: to keep the medical professionals safe AND TO KEEP THE VIRUS FROM VECTORING OUT INTO IMMEDIATE AREA

Was that too hard to understand?

It's not hard to understand, it's just not a real concern. They have rodents in Africa, but it is not carried by them. You think rats are going to get into the hospital's bio-containment suites? Highly doubtful.

Honestly you're a fucking dope. There's just no nice way to say it

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

 

[orogenicman]

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?

If you want to know how travel bans affect economies, all you need do is analyze the economy of North Korea.

You are one dumb assed lefty.

Since I am not the one proposing we become another North Korea, try again. Or not. Either way, I don't give a shite.

 

[orogenicman]

It doesn't matter. Both are deadly, but the latter has killed far more people.

So? Does that mean we want to introduce a deadly disease into the US? If we can prevent more people from getting sick here in the US, why wouldn't we take the appropriate precautions?

Why are people fighting against perhaps restricting travel from certain Ebola hot spots around the world? What exactly is the issue with that? If it would prevent even 1 United States citizen from dying from Ebola, it would be worth the effort, no?

I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

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.

I think you know that's a pipe dream. The next best thing is to restrict travel. Besides, I'm quite sure that a lot of our money already goes to Africa for various causes, not to mention the money people donate through various charities. I don't things in Africa could ever be like they are here in America not matter how much money we throw at them.

It isn't a pipe dream at all. Small pox was eradicated. The measles is all but a thing of the past. Vaccines are in the pipeline for Ebola. Fighting this disease at the source is the ONLY answer. But let's look at this idea of restricting travel. To who does it apply? France had a case. Let's stop all travel from France. Germany had a case. Shut them down. UK? Not yet. Stay tuned. Nigeria had it, but they've stopped it in its tracks. Never the less, they present a risk in your view, so they can't come either. That, of course, fucks up Chevron's American employees who work there and travel back and forth all the time (as well as many others). The simple fact is that it will never work, will never prevent someone with the disease from getting through, will not prevent someone with the disease from traveling to a country without such restriction and then traveling on to the U.S.: But it WILL kill business for Africans, for Americans, and for many others.

I could be wrong, but I believe a VISA has to be issued by the US Embassy to anyone that wants to travel to the US. Stop issuing them except for an emergency. American Chevron employees are relatively safe since they most certainly did not have anything to do with a West African that was dead or dying from Ebola.

American Chevron employees travel all over west Africa. So tell me again how you know they are safe.

 

[PredFan]

I have no problem with our doctors and our citizens who chose to go to help, getting treated here in the US. I think that is reasonable.

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? Seriously?

I'd rather not give it a change to test NY City rats as a host

Is that understandable?

Level IV protocols are two-fold: to keep the medical professionals safe AND TO KEEP THE VIRUS FROM VECTORING OUT INTO IMMEDIATE AREA

Was that too hard to understand?

It's not hard to understand, it's just not a real concern. They have rodents in Africa, but it is not carried by them. You think rats are going to get into the hospital's bio-containment suites? Highly doubtful.

Honestly you're a fucking dope. There's just no nice way to say it

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

Honestly, I know more about viruses and infectious diseases than you or anyone else on this board. Out of respect for a fellow conservative I'll do you the favor of not returning the insult.

 

[PredFan]

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?

If you want to know how travel bans affect economies, all you need do is analyze the economy of North Korea.

You are one dumb assed lefty.

Since I am not the one proposing we become another North Korea, try again. Or not. Either way, I don't give a shite.

No one is saying we become another North Korea you fucking imbecile.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

NOT IN NEW YORK FUCKING CITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why not? Seriously?

I'd rather not give it a change to test NY City rats as a host

Is that understandable?

Level IV protocols are two-fold: to keep the medical professionals safe AND TO KEEP THE VIRUS FROM VECTORING OUT INTO IMMEDIATE AREA

Was that too hard to understand?

It's not hard to understand, it's just not a real concern. They have rodents in Africa, but it is not carried by them. You think rats are going to get into the hospital's bio-containment suites? Highly doubtful.

Honestly you're a fucking dope. There's just no nice way to say it

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

Honestly, I know more about viruses and infectious diseases than you or anyone else on this board. Out of respect for a fellow conservative I'll do you the favor of not returning the insult.

I'm at a loss to deal with the "Ebola -- no biggie" attitude from you, Friden and Obama. It's insane. Obama and Frieden are bioterrorists looking to wipe out large portions of the US population.

The NY Doctor is POSITIVE for Ebola!

He was roaming the biggest city in the USA carrying a Level IV pathogen. It's shocking, staggering. CDC should have isolated him in Africa and never allowed him on a plane.I don't much respect either your knowledge or Frieden's knowledge, or anybody who says it's safe to fly when infected with a Slate Cleaning virus.

Sorry for the insult, but I'd go at this a whole different way and not take a chance on letting Ebola find an American host.

Infuckingsanity

 

[bripat9643]

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?

If you want to know how travel bans affect economies, all you need do is analyze the economy of North Korea.

You are one dumb assed lefty.

Since I am not the one proposing we become another North Korea, try again. Or not. Either way, I don't give a shite.

There's a big difference between restricting visas to the citizens of Ebola nations and becoming North Korea.