To: walford
I'd give it only a 0.1% chance, but if Ebola were to get really, really bad in the US (and I give that a 1% chance), I can imagine a scenario where health workers say, "We think you might possibly have Ebola: we need to toss you directly into that incinerator over there. Grab him boys!"
Faced with something like a Hollywood Zombie Apocalypse,I can see people doing whatever it takes to stop the spread.
Not likely. But possible.
3 posted on
10/25/2014 12:39:13 PM PDT by
ClearCase_guy
(Democrats have a lynch mob mentality. They always have.)
To: ClearCase_guy
Yeah, and rather than grab a person they think has Ebola, just shoot them from a distance; that’s what I’d do. That stuff is incredibly infectious on a patient that is vomiting and showing under-skin hemorrhages.
To: ClearCase_guy
The thing is, if Ebola takes off in the US, do we really want every hospital and every medical professional at them exposed? I know the DC crowd would say "the risk of that is very slight", but:
1. I don't think they know what they're talking about
2. Even if the risk is slight, is it really sensible to have no hospitals in a region that are Ebola-free?
It wouldn't be difficult to direct everyone with Ebola-like symptoms to go to one hospital in the area. If it's flu or Envero or whatever, so what? A specialty hospital could sort it out without getting everyone else sick.
6 posted on
10/25/2014 12:44:19 PM PDT by
grania
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson