I generally agree with that.
I am willing to judge the CDC based on it’s day to day response to things like this.
I do find it very interesting that this is spread the same way AIDS was, but they are treating it like an isolation disease.
Remember, AIDS remains in the blood stream forever. EBOLA is only supposed to be there as long as you are symptomatic. None the less, which one was treated as an infectious disease? The one with the shorter exposure potential. Very interesting.
There’s your political correctness at work.
Yeah, but AIDS alone doesn’t make people start bleeding all over the place, ebola does. So ebola is going to be a lot easier to catch that AIDS. Also, people with AIDS weren’t sickened by it at the start, so they could basically go on with their lives, people who have ebola get very sick and need care given to them.
I don’t think these 2 things are very comparable. The AIDS “epidemic” basically stayed within the homosexual and drug abusers universe (also some people who were given blood therapeutically). For example, I’ve never heard of a doctor or a nurse who contracted AIDS from treating a patient, I’m not saying it never happened, but if it did it was a rare and isolated occurrence.
We were told over and over again that AIDS would spread to the general population, that never happened.