What is he under investigation for?
He researches TB, and works with the particular strain his son-in-law is striken with. An article about the FIL being investigated was posted to this thread a day or two ago, it must have gone over your head.
Gone over my head? What makes you think that?
Try answering my question.
Sure. How about where Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the CDC, said in a press conference about this case on May 29th (which was, you’ll note, before any information about Speaker’s identity had been released) “It’s our understanding, from conversations with the health officials, that the issue of travel was discussed, that the patient was advised that it was not appropriate to travel when you have tuberculosis.”
But then again, we know from you what a bunch of filthy, filthy liars those CDC people are.
Yes, the test results that had nothing to do with the decision to contact Speaker, ask that he turn himself in to medical authorities in Italy, and put him on a no-fly list, because those filthy, filthy liars at the CDC are also big practical jokers.
Yes, that’s why the CDC held a press conference trying to find the people on the planes potentially infected with a 70% fatal disease before the guy’s name and situation was released to the media. They weren’t, as they claimed in the press conference, trying to do what they’re supposed to do, which is monitor and attempt to control potential outbreaks of infections diseases, but were just covering their asses from a PR disaster.
Oh, those filthy, filthy liars!
Except that the spokesman for the hospital he’s currently quarantined at made it clear that “noncontagious” doesn’t at all mean “can never transmit the disease and certainly can never become MORE contagious.”
But of course, he’s one of those filthy, filthy lying doctors.
You asked for evidence that he was considered contagious during or after his trip to Europe. I provided said evidence.
Oh, wait…I forgot that anything the CDC says or does is to be immediately discounted, because they’re all filthy, filthy liars, and only the pure-as-the-driven-snow personal injury lawyer is a trustworthy source.
Man, what WAS I thinking?
I did. So did Kokopilau. To use small words: They are trying to find out if the father-in-law might somehow have infected Mr. Speaker with XDR-TB, either on purpose or through carelessness.
OTHER than the fact that he was on a no-fly list, the CDC told him NOT to take commercial airlines, he was placed in quarantined in the US, and the spokesman for the hospital he’s currently quarantined at says he “may” be declared “relatively noncontagious” after THREE tests for infectivity?
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
So, what does that have to do with his judgement regarding his opinion of his son’s condition? Why would he be fine with the guy hanging out with his daughter & granddaughter? In other words, how is this investigation relevant to what I said? Answer: It isn’t.
No, you didn’t answer my question the first time.
I found the brick wall I told this information to infinitely more receptive than Capitalist Lion Tamer.
Pray forgive my error in judging you to be capable of inference. I won’t make the mistake again.
Because, unlike the CDC, he’d have a REASON to be untruthful, if he was indeed involved with the infection of his son-in-law.
Therefore, his claims about what he told his son-in-law and what he truly thought about his son-in-law’s case of TB are rendered suspect.
Not that I expect you to understand any of that.
No, he was not on a no-fly list prior to his departure for Europe. Sorry.
Regarding his doctors’ opinions prior to the THREE TESTS.
From last Friday (before the THREE TESTS):
What did you infer here:
That is stating a clearly-known fact. I was trying to figure out why either of you found his investigation relevant.
No, you have only provided evidence that the CDC wanted him quarantined in Europe, but not before. As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread, there could be any number of reasons for this.
Thanks for bringing something of quality to the discussion.
And if I was talking about his being on a no-fly list prior to his departure for Europe, I’m sure that your comment would mean something.
No, it wasn’t before the three tests.
Maybe because the CDC themselves say that they’re investigating him because it’s relevant to the TB case?
Wait, I forgot…they’re all a bunch of a filthy, filthy liars and not to be trusted.
Oh, I don’t know, MAYBE THAT IT IS POSSIBLE THE SOURCE OF THE INFECTION WAS THE TB RESEARCHER SOMEHOW? Further, that the CDC had to make certain this was not the case, and so were obligated to investigate? :dubious:
That’s more than can be said of you.
If this thread has deteriorated to this level of dialog from the two of you, then I’ll assume that you have no interest in continuing a reasonable discussion, unless I see evidence to the contrary.
Thanks.
What does that have to do with his judgment re his son-in-laws travel plans?
Pardon? Look over some of your sneering posts directed at me! Don’t you dare play the “injured, but dignified reasonable debater” because you aren’t. I was actually more ladylike in my most recent comments than you have been genteel towards me, in fact.