So, what are you implying- that for the past few months West Africans have been “(whiling) away in the vomit, blood or feces of … Ebola victim(s)”?
I don’t think people are trying to catch it on purpose. When a sickness causes people to vomit, puke, bleed, and shit, these things are going to enter your environment, whether you like it or not.
Here is a cite for this.
Actually, the study looks at disgust response. The article speculates that this serves a disease avoidance function, directly relevant to this discussion.
The {aspirational}/{conservative/protective} crap is stuff that I made up (I mean, inferred).
Well before this date, actually. Because a link was established between the disease and a black population, some conservatives now feel justified (and relieved) in expressing their xenophobism/racism openly under the guise of protecting America, as well as conveniently, and without evidence, linking the disease to brown people they don’t like (warning PDF).
No, it took some guy lying on his exit paperwork, an ER staff who brain farted and let him go home for 2 days, it took him vomiting in the parking lot and it not being cleaned up, and his apartment mates breaking quarantine enough to first get police to keep them in, their not cleaning up the apartment and then needing to be removed to a secure quarantine facility … but we are all perfectly safe.:dubious:
No I said the opposite actually. It is easier for it to spread in Africa because they lack clean water or sewers, a hospital infrastructure and public education about the disease. America has all those things so it is much less likely to become a general health problem here.
Ebola as it currently exists is very hard to transmit. It spreads only from bodily fluids and only is contagious when you show symptoms. It is ridiculous, right now, to panic.
emphasis mine
Yes, the relatively recent SARS virus mutated to become airborne in recent history. SARS is a coronavirus (the same family as many cold viruses) which was previously thought to be spread in droplets. A Hong Kong outbreak in 2003 showed airborne contamination patterns leading Dr Julie Gerberding, then director of the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to state, “Under certain circumstances, at least, it may be airborne.”
I don’t know why everyone keeps talking about HIV. Are they related in any way, or are people just tying the two together just to draw parallels for argument’s sake?
Because, sure, back in the day people were afraid that you could get HIV from simple contact. They were wrong. But you CAN get Ebola from simple contact. I don’t think a person has to be a paranoid crazy to worry that Ebola has a mode of transmission that, when coupled with its virulence, makes it quite scary.
A statement like this is hard to swallow when everyday we hear about the mounting deaths from the disease, particularly among health care workers. Ebola may be harder to transmit than other viruses. I’m not a virulogist, so I have no clue. All I know is that when you go to the hospital with flu symptoms, no one puts you in quarantine. Your doctor and nurse don’t don hazard suits. “Very hard to transmit” doesn’t jibe with these facts.
I call using the crossbow!
Bio safety precautions are put in place not only based on the ease of transmission, but also on the severity of the disease and it’s prevention/treatment options. A highly communicable disease (like flu) has a low mortality rate, so extreme precautions aren’t needed. If you do get sick, you’re likely to get better. Plus most healthcare workers get the vaccine, so they’re immune. A low communicable disease that has limited treatment options and a high death rate (like Ebola) warrants more extreme protective measures because the consequences are so high if caught.
You said:
. . . the connection is that you’re concerned (and find the position reasonable) that a disease that is not communicable via air might actually be spreading over the air this very minute. Because . . . you think it just could. You’re not just worried about Ebola as we understand it, you’re worried about an Ebola fueled by fears that are not based on any evidence whatsoever. Just like fear about HIV. Except, my guess is we actually understand Ebola much more clearly than we did HIV in its early years, so fear about airborne Ebola is even more ridiculous.
Plus, we don’t sit around worrying that HIV, which is present across the population, would all of a sudden become airborne. Ebola’s been around since 1976, longer than HIV. So while it’s technically true, there are so many other things to worry about first.
If you actually read my post, I said that I would never call someone an idiot for worrying about an airborne Ebola. I didn’t say that I believe that Ebola is airborne or that I’m worried about it being airborne. It’s just that I don’t like being wrong. And I especially don’t like being loud and wrong. I’d hate to tell someone, “Don’t be a paranoid fool. You can’t get Ebola from the air”, and then we wake up tomorrow and find out otherwise. Maybe you can be this confident, but I personally can’t.
There seems to be a lot of “loud” people out there on BOTH sides, calling people idiots for being afraid or not being afraid enough. Both sides are kinda getting on my nerves.
Hope this clarifies what I was trying to say.
I don’t “believe” in anything either. However, just because something is science-based knowledge doesn’t mean it’s automatically up for debate.
The minute you start saying, “well, knowledge about a subject is such-and-such, but I’m going to entertain the idea that the knowledge might actually be another random unfounded thing, because evidence has been known to change,” then you become indistinguishable from a conspiracy theorist or science denialist.
Taking something like this from the WHO:
“Infection occurs from direct contact through broken skin or mucous membranes with the blood, or other bodily fluids or secretions (stool, urine, saliva, semen) of infected people. Infection can also occur if broken skin or mucous membranes of a healthy person come into contact with environments that have become contaminated with an Ebola patient’s infectious fluids such as soiled clothing, bed linen, or used needles.”
. . . and accepting it as truth is not being a weird science sheeple. It’s just having faith that subject matter experts know what they’re talking about. Responding to the above information by claiming that maybe they’re wrong and Ebola is transmitted through the air is not being a skeptic, it’s choosing to put your own fears above clear evidence.
ETA: I realize I’m coming across a bit strong perhaps. I’m not intending to be angry with you or anything. I just get peeved when people hold (what look to me like) “just because” beliefs, and posit them as reasonable positions. I feel like that’s where climate change denialism, young Earth Creationism, and all sorts of other not-based-in-reality movements start.
The “If you want a travel ban to/from Africa, you are racist!” accusation is a prime example of a red herring, illogical-conclusion attack.
If the current Ebola outbreak were in Europe (a predominantly Caucasian continent) instead of Africa, you’d hear Americans clamoring loudly for a travel ban to/from Europe, just like they currently demand a travel ban to/from Africa.
You can argue that the fear of Ebola is greatly exaggerated (and I’d agree,) but crying “racism!” is a pitiful attempt to smear people who want a travel ban.
DO YOU HAVE EBOLA?
Take this simple quiz and find out!
From “This paragraph perfectly sums up America’s overreaction to Ebola”.
Who is doing any of that?
You would think that the rightwingnuts would absolutely KNOW that Ebola can’t become airborne, because for that to happen, … EVOLUTION!
Here.
Did I say it was?
No it doesn’t. It means knowing the difference between a hypothesis and a fact. We are bombarded by hypotheses-presented-as-facts on a daily basis. Sometimes we’re told when these “facts” are revised. Sometimes we’re not. I accept just about everything I am told at face-value, but for some things I decide to be a little wary until I have a compelling reason not to. Yes, I fully understand that Ebola is not known to be transmitted by air. But I guarantee you if I am ever called to visit a sick loved one, I will be covering my face–whether to protect myself from aerosols or whatever. You can call me a conspiracy theorist if you want, but I really don’t think I am being THAT unreasonable. Maybe when we stop hearing stories from people who don’t know how they got infected, my feelings will change on this matter.
Since Ebola isn’t ever going to impact my area, then it doesn’t fucking matter what I believe, right? Why are you giving me such a hard time? Why does me having compassion for people who are afraid of the disease such a horrible thing to you?
You didn’t ask me, monstro, but I’m going to make an observation anyway. It looks like the OP pretty effectively poisoned the well by the way he worded his thread title: Why the liberal ‘pooh-poohing’ of the Ebola danger?
Within a fairly a small number of words, he manages to fit in TWO not-established assertions, AND a semantically loaded dog-whistle.
