Will Ebola become a major outbreak here?

Will Ebola become a major outbreak (100+ deaths) in the US in the next 12 months?

  • Yes

    Votes: 39 40.2%

  • No

    Votes: 58 59.8%
  • Total voters
    97
  • Poll closed .
As someone who sees people who are not in the best shape daily for work.

You're more likely to be killed due to being a fatty. Al la heart attack, stroke, diabetes etc

Catch hepatitis, AIDs, etc somehow.

Die from "the common cold"

Die from cancer

Drink, smoke, inject, pill pop, or snort yourself to death

Die changing lanes or crossing a intersection in your car

Slip and fall

Die due to poor breeding (bad genetics)

Heck, you're more likely to be falsely shot to death by a cop.



I'm not worried about Ebola, "terrorists" or the boogie man, nor should you be.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
Much too sensible a reply. Fox News is really getting the lemmings nervous.
Click to expand...


Hmmm, last I heard Shepherd Smith of Fox News was telling people not to worry, and not panic, nor sensationalize.

Here's a report from your own Huffpo. Now who's the lemming again?

Fox News' Shepard Smith railed against the media's Ebola hysteria on Wednesday.

"You should have no concerns about Ebola at all. None. I promise," stated Smith. He went on to tell viewers, "Do not listen to the hysterical voices on the radio and the television or read the fear-provoking words online. The people who say and write hysterical things are being very irresponsible."

He explained: "We do not have an outbreak of Ebola in the United States. Nowhere. We do have two healthcare workers who contracted the disease from a dying man. They are isolated. There is no information to suggest that the virus has spread to anyone in the general population in America. Not one person in the general population in the United States."
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/15/shepard-smith-ebola_n_5992510.html
 
Anthony said:
Hmmm, last I heard Shepherd Smith of Fox News was telling people not to worry, and not panic, nor sensationalize.

Here's a report from your own Huffpo. Now who's the lemming again?



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/15/shepard-smith-ebola_n_5992510.html
Click to expand...

The problem that occurs when the courts rule that you are not under obligation to tell the truth because you wanted to evade telling the truth on one subject, is that NONE of what you then broadcast can be trusted to be true. This is what happened to Fox directly, and indirectly to the entire 'Fourth Estate'. At this point the most trustable source for information in this country is AlJezzira America.
 
Henning said:
The problem that occurs when the courts rule that you are not under obligation to tell the truth because you wanted to evade telling the truth on one subject, is that NONE of what you then broadcast can be trusted to be true. This is what happened to Fox directly, and indirectly to the entire 'Fourth Estate'. At this point the most trustable source for information in this country is AlJezzira America.
Click to expand...

Not sure about them ether.

It's the same type of people who block folks in Internet boards, they only want to hear what they want to hear, thus you get entertainment news.


Ain't the stations fault, its the viewers. If morons pulled their heads out of the sand and could listen to different view points and reason, you wouldn't have stuff like fox/MSNBC etc.
 
James331 said:
Not sure about them ether.

It's the same type of people who block folks in Internet boards, they only want to hear what they want to hear, thus you get entertainment news.


Ain't the stations fault, its the viewers. If morons pulled their heads out of the sand and could listen to different view points and reason, you wouldn't have stuff like fox/MSNBC etc.
Click to expand...

The good thing at this point about Al Jazzera is that they provide data on all sides of an issue, and they have reasoned editorials. I have yet to hear fundamentalist rhetoric come through in fact or opinion except as through direct representations being reported, without editorializing on it.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
you gotsta be kidding.....right? :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Click to expand...

No, sadly enough, I'm not. Nobody else has a mandate to,tell me the truth as they operate under the mandate of turning the greatest profit and nothing else. AlJezeera is the only one that at least still has a moral mandate to tell the truth.
 
Henning said:
No, sadly enough, I'm not. Nobody else has a mandate to,tell me the truth as they operate under the mandate of turning the greatest profit and nothing else. AlJezeera is the only one that at least still has a moral mandate to tell the truth.
Click to expand...

?

Do their morals pay well?
 
jmp470 said:
some questions: Who will be the first to panic? Where will the first protest be? How about the first quarantine? Also, with our lack of farming, how will our major cities get food?
!
Click to expand...


They are talking about the first quarantine but of course they are not calling it that.
They "ask" all the medical people dealing with to sign something saying they will not go to any public places (church, mall, ect)
If they will not sign they might talk to the courts.
Sorry no link heard it on the radio.
 
tinerj said:
If it holds that each Ebola victim infects two others (as it is now in both Africa and the US), and they each infect two others, etc., and do so about two weeks apart; then by the end of the year we will have the 100 that the poll asked for the "yes" vote.
Click to expand...

Nah, too many people on the planet as it is. It's my understanding that getting it and surviving pretty much makes you immune. Might be natures way of regulating our numbers, much like we do with every other species on earth.
 
Wait, 100 in a population of 310,000,000 is a "major outbreak"? That's what, .000032%? In what world is that a major outbreak?
 
Henning said:
Wait, 100 in a population of 310,000,000 is a "major outbreak"? That's what, .000032%? In what world is that a major outbreak?
Click to expand...

Agreed. I had to set some sort of limit and came up with one that would seem possible to me. I felt that when the deaths reached 1000 in Africa that it was a major outbreak simply because Ebola is so deadly, but really think our system would never let it get that far out of hand. Please don't prove me wrong.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Agreed. I had to set some sort of limit and came up with one that would seem possible to me. I felt that when the deaths reached 1000 in Africa that it was a major outbreak simply because Ebola is so deadly, but really think our system would never let it get that far out of hand. Please don't prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

I don't consider 1000 a major outbreak either. I don't consider it a major outbreak until it hits more than 2% of the population. I don't consider it an effective outbreak until to kills 30% of the population.
 
Henning said:
I don't consider 1000 a major outbreak either. I don't consider it a major outbreak until it hits more than 2% of the population. I don't consider it an effective outbreak until to kills 30% of the population.
Click to expand...

30% would be Dark Ages level death. 10% would effectively remove our ability to function and restore society to pre-outbreak normality. So if by "outbreak" you mean "set civilization back 80 years", then yes, 30% would be a "major outbreak"
 
Everyone will get it. Might take some time, but with the incompetence I see, it is inevitable.

You will live, or you will die.

What doesn't kill us makes us stronger. But while we are gasping and dieing from Ebola, Isis will attack in strength, having crossed the borders without impairment. Convert or die, infidel.

Our military won't be able to save us because they are now engaged in Africa becoming infected, to bring the virus back home to the rest of our troops.

You couldn't plan a more effective way to destroy the US if you wanted to.
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
Right now the number of deaths stands at about 4000 in Africa, with almost no medical infrastructure, no way to quarantine the infected, and little ability to communicate best practices to those most at risk.

We have two active cases, both of which are being carefully monitored, and one expired one (the guy died) where those with whom he came in contact have been quarantined. Most of the hysteria here is nonsense. You are far, far, far more likely to die form influenza.
Click to expand...

second best answer
 
We did bring small pox and other dieses to native Americans, we kidnapped people from Africa to be slaves. It was only a matter of time before we got ours.
 
Catalo said:
We did bring small pox and other dieses to native Americans, we kidnapped people from Africa to be slaves. It was only a matter of time before we got ours.
Click to expand...

"We" kidnapped?
 
Mason said:
Everyone will get it. Might take some time, but with the incompetence I see, it is inevitable.

You will live, or you will die.

What doesn't kill us makes us stronger. But while we are gasping and dieing from Ebola, Isis will attack in strength, having crossed the borders without impairment. Convert or die, infidel.

Our military won't be able to save us because they are now engaged in Africa becoming infected, to bring the virus back home to the rest of our troops.

You couldn't plan a more effective way to destroy the US if you wanted to.
Click to expand...

Did you used to really worry about Russian troops bombing your house as a kid? Maybe stop reading the highlighted passages from Revelations, put down the Tom Clancy novel and take Carmina Burana off the record player? ;)
 
SCCutler said:
As long as we continue with the ludicrous belief that, "it cannot happen here," it is inevitable that it shall.

The virus does not care whether the infected host is in a primitive shack in Sierra Leone, or a mid-century modern palace in Dallas.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat::mad3:
 
Originally Posted by SCCutler
As long as we continue with the ludicrous belief that, "it cannot happen here," it is inevitable that it shall.

The virus does not care whether the infected host is in a primitive shack in Sierra Leone, or a mid-century modern palace in Dallas.
Click to expand...

nddons said:
:yeahthat::mad3:
Click to expand...

The inevitability of Ebola on American shores has nothing to do with our belief in it being able to happen.

That it would come here has always been inevitable. What extent it will decimate the population is still an unknown, and to believe that we can control it through political edict is ludicrous.
 
Catalo said:
We did bring small pox and other dieses to native Americans, we kidnapped people from Africa to be slaves. It was only a matter of time before we got ours.
Click to expand...

They were purchased.
 
N801BH said:
Hmmm..

The end of this year is NOT 360 days away..:no:.....:nonod:
Click to expand...


He didn't say "per *calendar* year" and AP specifically asked "12 months". :)

Henning said:
No, sadly enough, I'm not. Nobody else has a mandate to,tell me the truth as they operate under the mandate of turning the greatest profit and nothing else. AlJezeera is the only one that at least still has a moral mandate to tell the truth.
Click to expand...


Huh. That's interesting. It's well documented that the owners of the network don't take kindly to mentioning the royalty in a bad light. In fact it's completely banned to discuss the owners in anything other than glowing terms, by law. Not just by "I want to keep my job..."

They do sometimes cover things the U.S. Networks won't. As does BBC.

But the claim that BBC America is regulated by law to "tell the truth" in their American subsidiary is completely laughable. BBC America has no such legal restrictions.

Someone actually believes that a) the law applies here, and b) that BBC never broadcasts a lie? That's freakin' hilarious.

Or even... that a law here on our own networks would mean diddly squat? Yeah. Right.

Network people get paid to say whatever the boss wants them to say, and always have.

There's too many open hours in the 24/7 news cycle and too few stories that will attract a shrinking viewership. The world has gone to "personalized news" online and people have less and less shared experiences. Then they wonder why they "didn't hear about that". Duh.

You have to tune up your BS meter and ask "So who's the seller and what are they selling?" when watching any media. And in the case of many of the networks mentioned, the only convenient way to consume them is to pay them up front to enter your home.

You know, that sanctuary where you go to have peace and quiet and read the morning paper thoughtfully over a cup of coffee? Oh wait... They killed the newspapers and fired the writers and then converted them to the same garbage that's on the TV. My bad. Never mind.

To pay to bring any of them into your home means you've already lost the battle. Paying someone to pipe propaganda into your domicile is beyond stupid.

Anyway. Back to AP's question...

100 is a pretty low number for something so virulent.

If... the individual caregivers in the medical community have taken the last week's events to heart and demand better precautions, I think there won't be too many more caregivers contracting the disease.

That said, our system is fatally flawed in that our training by society from childhood is that hospitals are where you go to be made well.

That's true if the hospital is notified in advance that you suspect you have symptoms of Ebola and everyone who touches you from that point forward, including the Ambulance crew or the ER, knows before you ever enter the building.

We basically encourage people to arrive at a building chock full of people, many immunosuppressed for various reasons, and walk right in the door, barfing, bleeding, spewing. And we've been training mommies for a couple of decades to show up at the ER too, when all Johnny needed was a day of bed rest for the flu. Training, as in, no consequences. Just come on in. We'll put ya in the lobby for a while because we've seen you here ten or twenty times before. Oh, don't mind us. We'll be right here walking Ebola man through the lobby.

This isn't going to be the best system to handle a virus like Ebola, of course.

If the virus really does take off, your government experts will be back in front of the cameras, telling you to stay home and die, after calling a hotline so they know which houses to quarantine and/or decontaminate later, and it'll be with promises that they're coming to get you.

Maybe they'll use all those fancy armored personnel carriers that they bought all the police departments as ambulances?

All the cool kids have one now, don't you know?

What's really fascinating to me are the number of healthcare workers contracting the disease while hundreds of people including family in direct contact with victims at homes, aren't nearly at the numbers I would expect.

This is a pretty solid indicator that someone's lying. Whether it's the families saying they were present when they actually self-evacuated/avoided the victims, or those who claim that the protective gear recommended, actually is the correct protocol for Ebola patients, or something else altogether, remains to be seen.

Sooooo... 100? I can see 100 in 12 months. That's not a very large number and it's an eternity with a virus that needs roughly a 20 day incubation period. That's roughly 18 incubation/infection cycles.

If people exposed keep getting on mass transit before that incubation cycle is finished, it'll get around pretty quick. Airplanes and now a cruise ship? What are these idiots thinking?

Oh. Wait. They're thinking they followed the protocol that they were told would keep them safe and it didn't. Hmm.

So I would give better than 50/50 odds for 100 deaths in a year, sure. It's very heavily dependent on how fast we learn and adopt behavior that doesn't spread the disease.
 
Geico266 said:
If the Mexicans think it is a good idea to refuse entry of possibly infected people why can't we?
Click to expand...

It would suck if the s#!t hit the fan in the US and all the Americans fleeing south to Mexico where denied entry. The shoe doesn't fit so well when it's on the other foot.
 
BG305 said:
It would suck if the s#!t hit the fan in the US and all the Americans fleeing south to Mexico where denied entry. The shoe doesn't fit so well when it's on the other foot.
Click to expand...

It won't matter. If we reach epidemic levels here, it will already be in Mexico, you can't deny nature her due, she'll take what she wants and there's not a damned thing you can do in the long run. We either create balance between population, resource, and nature, or nature will, and the natural way is culling large populations.
 
Henning said:
No, sadly enough, I'm not. Nobody else has a mandate to,tell me the truth as they operate under the mandate of turning the greatest profit and nothing else. AlJezeera is the only one that at least still has a moral mandate to tell the truth.
Click to expand...

What moral mandate is that? Do you know who funds Al Jazeera?
 
nddons said:
What moral mandate is that? Do you know who funds Al Jazeera?
Click to expand...

Yes, people who are devout Muslims and take the basic moral guidelines as absolutes from God. Will they censor things about themselves? Yes, but you don't see a bunch of propaganda in their favor either. What they have no reason to censor is the true face of Radical Islam, they are not their friends. Yes, the second level 'aristocratic' families are involved, but you have to remember, they were first tier Sultans until we went in in the Lawrence of Arabia days. We demoted them and made them subjects of another King, that is why that faction are ****ed off at us. We have created, and still perpetuate, this problem. This is the cost of not advancing into the future and sticking with the past.
 
BG305 said:
They were purchased.
Click to expand...
Not all of them, they were purchased by slave owners once they got to America but not necessarily from Africa. And even then there were free blacks that were kidnapped then sold back into slavery. As for the we part I meant americans, we have a pretty ****ty history. I get not everyone on here is from the U.S. or white. So no not we
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top