Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Smokin' Joe

No, Ebola was not imported, except to research laboratories over the decades, some Americans came home for medical treatment of the disease.

One traveler who was infected came into the U.S.

Still trying to make a mountain out something that never came to be a mountain?

The screaming crazies and the hysterics were wrong, and they were sure nasty at everyone who has proven to have been right.

Did we even lose any Americans to Ebola, I don remember, but I can show you the estimates on the threads here of tens of millions, of half of our population, and even up to 75% of the entire human race.


22 posted on 04/12/2015 7:02:42 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: ansel12
If the disease came across a border, that makes it imported, just the same as if you had brought in a chocolate bar.

As for hysteria, you are looking back with the following developments since the beginning of the outbreak:

A far better understanding of the method of transmission of the disease.

Although it was touted as being transferred by "bodily fluids", at the time that was a buzzword for sexual contact. While that is one way, obviously it is not the only way, and sexual contact was not necessary. Ironically, new cases are springing up in Africa because of sexual contact and the survival of the virus in semen for 60+ days even after the patient tests otherwise ebola free.

We have found out that the disease can be transferred by fomites, although there are apparently serious limitations on the effectiveness of that method of transmission. Those limits were unknown at that time.

Treatments developed include drugs, serum based treatments from blood donations from survivors, and even a vaccine.

Geeez, diptheria isn't so scary now, but tell someone that in 1905 and they'd consider you a nut.

There has been a great deal of progress made in treatment and prevention of the disease, which simply was not there, and that progress has been made on the back of learning more about the disease, an area in which we have made great strides. The initial mortality rate during the outbreak was pushing 70+%, but has been reduced by those new treatments to below 40%. Still pretty deadly when you consider the Spanish (1918) Flu only killed 2.5% of those infected, but less than originally anticipated (if the numbers are correct).

The screaming crazies and the hysterics were wrong, and they were sure nasty at everyone who has proven to have been right.

I'd be damned grateful that people you describe as "screaming crazies and hysterics" were wrong. I have little doubt they are greatly relieved this did not turn into a Civilization ending event.

I'd be thanking The Almighty that so much progress was made in fighting the disease, and that fewer died, rather than engaging in the anthropocentric hubris of "I told you so". Erring toward caution with something deadly seldom proves fatal, and next time those you describe as "hysterics" just might be right.

...but I can show you the estimates on the threads here of tens of millions, of half of our population, and even up to 75% of the entire human race.

I have little doubt those are with global travel completely unrestricted and no medical intervention, but by all means, provide a link.

23 posted on 04/12/2015 7:31:09 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson