It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: 00nunya00
But by that logic IFit was airborne it does not spread very efficiently via that route. If it did spread like flu or the cold we would have known by now.
originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00
No there shouldn't. Airborne or not applies to the man in the ATL hospital because that is what the fear mongers in that thread are trying to perpetuate. They think the mere fact he came here and breathed, Ebola is now everywhere and 21 days from now people will be dying.
Pictures showed unsuited people several yards from the infected, and again people started talking about how that person should be isolated. This thread is directly related to whether Ebola is airborne or not.
originally posted by: 00nunya00
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: 00nunya00
But by that logic IFit was airborne it does not spread very efficiently via that route. If it did spread like flu or the cold we would have known by now.
Fair enough! I agree, if it was really good at airborne transmission, half of Africa would be dead by now. Perhaps it dies out in the air quicker than other viruses; perhaps the type of aerosols released are not as good at lingering in the air as the flu. Point is, no one is 100% sure, and with so many cases of trained western professional catching it despite their meticulous adherence to protocols, it is a possibility, and should not be dismissed out of hand.
originally posted by: 00nunya00
originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: 00nunya00
But by that logic IFit was airborne it does not spread very efficiently via that route. If it did spread like flu or the cold we would have known by now.
Fair enough! I agree, if it was really good at airborne transmission, half of Africa would be dead by now. Perhaps it dies out in the air quicker than other viruses; perhaps the type of aerosols released are not as good at lingering in the air as the flu. Point is, no one is 100% sure, and with so many cases of trained western professional catching it despite their meticulous adherence to protocols, it is a possibility, and should not be dismissed out of hand.
originally posted by: Seek_Truth
a reply to: Destinyone
I know that the Monsanto connection to Tekmira was discussed in this thread earlier, however I wasn't aware of any connection between Monsanto and the creator of Zmapp, Mapp Bio.
Is there a connection or are we confusing Tekmira with Mapp Bio?
-Cheers
The drug being credited with potentially saving the lives of two American missionaries infected with the deadly Ebola virus was produced in Owensboro.
The serum wasn't manufactured but grown — in a greenhouse full of genetically modified tobacco plants.
[/b
Read more here: www.kentucky.com...=cpy
Although there is no authorized drug to cure the Ebola virus, several experimental drugs are being created, including ones being developed by Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation (NASDAQ:TKMR) of British Columbia. Over the past five days, the company's stock has shot up by more than 30 percent.www.ibtimes.com...
One fascinating development worth investigating further is that TEKMIRA Pharmaceuticals, a company working on an anti-Ebola drug, just received a $1.5 million cash infusion from none other than Monsanto. Click here to read the press release, which states "Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation is a biopharmaceutical company focused on advancing novel RNAi therapeutics and providing its leading lipid nanoparticle (LNP) delivery technology to pharmaceutical partners."
The money from Monsanto is reportedly related to the company's developed of RNAi technology used in agriculture. The deal is valued at up to $86.2 million, according to the WSJ. (11)
Another press release about Tekmira reveals a $140 million contract with the U.S. military for Ebola treatment drugs:
TKM-Ebola, an anti-Ebola virus RNAi therapeutic, is being developed under a $140 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense's Medical Countermeasure Systems BioDefense Therapeutics (MCS-BDTX) Joint Product Management Office.
Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...
originally posted by: LrdRedhawk
This message is for "kruphix" and "raymundoko"...
For the past 2 days, I've seen nothing productive from either of you that contributes to this thread. All I've seen you do is come in here and start arguments, attack, berate, belittle and insult people. If you're really that adamantly against what is being said here, then what other reason could you possibly have to be posting in this thread other than to play your games. If I was an ATS mod, I would have banned both of you long before now. You are both reprehensible.
I don't think you understand the basic difference between these two. For someone to be infected by someone who sneezes or coughs, they would have to sneeze or cough directly on them to where you feel the wetness with Ebola because you need to be in contact with the fluids...not just breath in air particles.
But if it does, it will be contained...I really have no worries about it.
Are you kidding
originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00
Stop trying to say airborne vs not airborne doesn't belong in this thread. It is directly related to an Ebola patient coming to the USA. If it isn't airborne then we have nothing to worry about...
originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: new_here
You are right, poor choice of words. We have far less to worry about than if it was airborne.
Precautions can be taken to greatly reduce and eliminate the spread of a non airborne virus.
originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 00nunya00
Considering it has never been airborne I am going to go ahead and stick with the fact it isn't airborne. You can say "it might" all you want, but the disease has been around for many decades and if it was airborne we would know it.
Interim Guidance about Ebola Virus Infection for Airline Flight Crews, Cleaning Personnel, and Cargo Personnel
Provide the sick person with a surgical mask (if the sick person can tolerate wearing one) to reduce the number of droplets expelled into the air by talking, sneezing, or coughing.