Why Ebola is a danger to the Northern Hemisphere - STOP IT NOW!

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
a reply to: KnightLight



Aerosol is different to airborne.



Bit difficult to discuss this topic seriously when you don't understand the difference between the two.

It is EXTREMELY difficult to discuss the true dangers of Ebola when people keep getting STUCK on one piece of the total picture.

And frankly, most ot the 'low information' people do not understand or even CARE what the difference between 'aerosol' and 'airborne' is, they only care that if there is someone in their proximity, whether they are in danger or not. THEY ARE IN DANGER whether it is 'airborne' or simply 'floats in droplets suspended in air'.

Now MOVE ON and debunk the rest of the post. Please. GO AHEAD AND DEBUNK THE FIRST TWO POINTS PLEASE. The first two FACTS scare me more than whether I can get it from someone 5 ft away that is still standing there, or has already left the room...as I have to use that same doorknob to enter and exit the room they were (or are still) in. Walk the same floor. Use the same facilities....all of a sudden all those toilet seat protectors that people rushed into production for their unfounded fears about HIV can be put to use to protect our asses from Ebola.

a reply to: AlphaHawk

I'm not saying its air borne,go talk to USAMRIID. And by the way, look at the health care worker in Texas who contracted from Duncan. This was AFTER all protocols had been observed. So then, how did the worker get it?

a reply to: KnightLight

I have attacked Mike Adams in the past, because I did consider him a fear-mongerer pushing product. His links to commonsenseshow and other stores pushed on that site really hurt the credibility.

But with Ebola, every credible source is under embargo by the CDC and NIH, old websites with reliable information are being scrubbed and sanitized to remove any fact that may scare people, and true information is being hidden from us. I was surprised to find the Public Health Canada information...it will probably be scrubbed before Monday I am sure.

Now, sources that have cried wolf for years...have a real wolf to cry about, and no one will listen to them. Isn't that an old proverb about that somewhere....hmmm...maybe I should go find it.

Therefore, we have only those sources that are used to speaking about surpressed information telling us the truth for a change.
What a twist of fate.

I'm worried, too, about how Ebola will behave outside of its habitat. Outside of ATS, the world seems to
be in a cloud. A quick look at Pinterest will show people's real concerns: a recipe for pumpkin pie, fall wardrobe ideas, autumn leaves, etc.

Ebola is a nice reminder that the US government should stop creating things in a lab, and then testing them out on populations in resource rich nations to get them out of the way.

There is a PINK ELEPHANT in the room people that only a few are looking at. I've said it damn near to death on ATS about this - EBOLA HAS BEEN HERE. It just didn't fly over with a white missionary either. This thing is time release like Tylenol people. With all the rigormoro about the failing economy, high unemployment, stealing Germany's gold, just America losing control of the empire with too many proxy wars and people fed up - here comes AIDS 2.0 and Tuskegee 3.0.

OBAMA did not sign that EO to quarantine people with respiratory distress for the hell of it now did he? How many EO's has that man signed that will damn 99% of the population to hell if they get exposed to Ebola? Somebody open up that map of the country being split and one governor controls a section. See if it corresponds with the "outbreak locale".

Ebola is DOMINATING these boards mostly out of people's fear. I don't blame you. Contagion, The Walking Dead, and The Strain are embedded in your minds as to what is going to happen in a pandemic. Even the CDC is playing patsy by their Zombie Apocalypse. News flash. 1 out of every 25 of you on here will get it. You can pray your non canned food diet makes you immune but the fact is, the US has patents on the strains that are affecting people. Like AIDS, watch a certain demographic of whites go down. But then see it take off in the Black and Latino communities.

I'm talking STRAINS people. Most of you are thinking, its just one strain and its not.

And nobody is asking in a depressed economy, outside of the missionaries, how are all these people now getting it. We've hit what, 11 states of infection so far and counting, and that is just what is reported.

Whatever MSM is allowed to say, count on it being either 6 months of old news being released or just wrong news. They are not remotely getting a handle on this nor do they want to. Kill off most of the people, and the survivors will love you for saving them.

You're confusing aerosol transmission with a virus that is airborne - the ebola strain in question can be transmitted via aerosol droplets, like a sneeze as you've mentioned, but that doesn't make it airborne.
a reply to: GroidNificent

Ebola needs to spread that way the bible thumpers can cry it is one of the signs from God and use it to seize power. Throughout history mother nature comes up with a disease that thins out the herd and it is about time for it to happen again.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
THE epidemics in the US are LUNG based viral infections. Ebola DIES in sunlight.

Hard to be airborne that way.

If true, then all i have to do to be resistant to ebola is take a clear tube, connect it to my viens so that the blood is passed in this tube so the sunlight can hit it. I'm cured. What vitamin is that the sunlight gives off, i forget. Well, i'll take that too to make sure.

a reply to: cloaked4u



Also if true, my body would create an antibody against ebola if i had my blood run thru a clear tube and back in me. That way the ebola would be a dead cell and my body would create antibodies against it. I will keep that in mind, if true.

Op thanks for the thread. For the sake of the threads topic we should mind the Op and the info instead of touting the "aerosol vs airborne. " The fact is NO ONE here knows, apparently neither do the officials such as dealing with it-see the Dallas nurse that is affected now who was wearing protective gear and followed protocol.

To add the apparent suppression of information here: The Public Health Agency of Canada site revised their data, from possibly airborne, to not at all(from their earlier animal study that indicated the possibility). Which is suspect in itself.

Guess many have forgotten that not long ago science had believed the flu was not spread, though indicated to be, by air;

While scientists knew that small particles called aerosols represent possible routes of disease spread, they thought that cases almost never arise that way.
See here

-small article cut for copy write size.

a reply to: lakesidepark

I have not had time to look through all facts but considering I have come to the understanding that a virus does not just change its course of transmission. Its stated that in 100 years of studies for viruses that no virus has changed its state of transmission. So a virus that is only able to be transmitted through bodily fluids cannot then become airborne. Scientists have tried to alter viruses in the past to make a virus airborne and what they have found is even once they forced the virus to act as airborne, it lost other properties, the ability to kill.

So give that a little research and think.

OMG already. Airborne...not airborne. Who cares? It's infectious as hell and we no healthcare system is prepared for more than a few dozen cases. And once it gets beyond the few dozen cases, it is not prepared at all. Full stop.

Airborne or not is very important, you can't just sweep it under the rug. And if this spreads further, we don't need the disinformation and panic caused by people assuming something spreads in a way it doesn't. It is not airborne, and it's unlikely to become so.

Doesn't matter whether it's "aerosol" or "air borne", it can still be spewed through the air, short distances.
Sneezes, coughs.

That spew, possibly containing little bits of the virus, will be landing on surfaces, and staying there far too long, because the virus survives cold conditions .

Damn.

a reply to: fleabit

No. Airborne, aerosol, bodily fluids whatever. Not that important.

What's important is that there is not enough level 4 protective gear for those on the front lines.

What's important is that they are not stopping flights.

What's important is that they are lying to themselves and to us.

It's a freaking level 4 virus that we actually know very little about other than from a few relatively contained outbreaks in the world thus far.

"I see the reasons to dampen down public fears," Russell said. "But scientifically, we're in the middle of the first experiment of multiple, serial passages of Ebola virus in man.... God knows what this virus is going to look like. I don't." www.abovetopsecret.com...

He doesn't, they don't, and neither do we.

a reply to: AlphaHawk

only on the first page, so apologies if this has been cleared up.

1. Is Ebola an airborne pathogen like flu? No.

2. Can Ebola remain contagious while traveling through the air over short distances in aerosol form? Yes.

3. Would most non-scientist describe describe point 2 as airborne? Yes.

I agree with, and understand the point you are making, however from a containment point of view people need to understand that there is a risk without needing "direct" contact with an infected person. If people believe transmission is only through direct contact, will they take precautions while in a room with others coughing and sneezing through the usual, other seasonal maladies? Will people take greater care over washing hands or food stuffs?

Again, I understand that a truly airborne Ebola is a terrifying prospect and while points 1 and 2 above are very different vectors, most non-scientist will accept 2 as defining airborne, while thinking of point 1, which is why we have to be very careful with the language we use.

For most people, education stops when they leave school, and its too late now to try and educate the planet on the difference between vectors 1 and 2 above, so which is the safest course of action:

adhere to the scientific definition, maintaining that Ebola is not airborne and accept that people may not take even the most basic precautions to prevent transmission?

or

use "airborne" in the laymen sense as alluded to above (aerosol) knowing people will be terrified but probably, more likely to take precautions to prevent transmission?

Doomsayers are saying that you can get Ebola easily, that is myth, its not very contagious virus, and it will NEVER go airborne. We have never seen human virus that went airborne, so its very unlikely that Ebola does that either. We have had HIV-1 for 100 years and it hasn't gone airborne either.

You can only catch Ebola if someone sneezes right front of you, as it can stay alive only small distance. And it doesn't go through the skin, only if it catches into your mouth, eyes or nose. Ebola doesn't spread from simple handshakes or airborne germs.

And Ebola mutates really slowly, it hasn't changed much from what it was originally. And those who survive it, become immune to it for a very long time.

Ebola is far less contagious than Spanish Flu we had before, which had about 17 secondary cases, while Ebola has 1,3-1,8 secondary cases. Its because the reproductive rate of Ebola is slow.

originally posted by: tony9802
a reply to: lakesidepark

I agree... here is an article I was just reading a moment ago and this one is very frightening:
It's written by Hodges from Thecommonsenseshow.com website; The title of the article is:

"Ebola Patients & Exposed Persons to be Sent to Death Camps According to HHS Documents"

Here is a link to that article:

www.thecommonsenseshow.com...

That was THE most panicky thing I have ever read. Anyone that panicky will be the first to drop - die of fear, rather than anything serious.

Let's look at that article from my perspective, and understand that I am NOT the only person like me. Let's assume I'm in a home where some respiratory distress has taken place. Hell, let's go whole hog and assume that I'm in an Ebola-ridden home.

Let's further assume that the "transporters" are coming, per the article, to remove the household to our "final destination", also per the article, a direct quote therefrom.

If I'm assumed to be in danger of dying anyhow, just what in the hell makes anyone think that they're going to remove me from MY HOME alive? Further, how many of these brave fine folk who make the attempt really plan on leaving there alive themselves? What, exactly, do they think I have to lose by not fighting at that point?

Misery LOVES company, as they say, and I'll take as many of those stalwarts with me as is humanly possible.

Better just leave me alone to die (or not, as is more likely the case) in peace. They're NOT going to add insult to injury and walk away without a mark.

Lots of marks. Permanent marks.

The whole thing sounds like bunk to me, spun up to sell the "survival" geegaws they're hawking on that site.

originally posted by: Dimithae
a reply to: AlphaHawk

USAMRIID says it can go air borne. They study in biolevel safety 4 labs. Guess they would know. Also they left it out on a counter on purpose in the lab to see how long it took the fluorescent lights to kill it. It took several weeks. I would suggest reading The Hot Zone by Richard Preston. There is a lot of info on Ebola and what it can and can not do.

From Wikipedia:

The Hot Zone: A Terrifying True Story is a best-selling[1] 1994 non-fiction thriller by Richard Preston about the origins and incidents involving viral hemorrhagic fevers, particularly ebolaviruses and marburgviruses. The basis of the book was Preston's 1992 New Yorker article "Crisis in the Hot Zone". link

Why do people continually refer to a book written in 1992 - over 20 years ago, as a reference textbook for what the Reston variety of Ebola can or cannot do? That's so last century and is not even the same strain of Ebola that most people who get it have.

Ebola Zaire mutated and is now the new, shiny Ebola we have now. It's not your grandfather's (Reston) Ebola.

One thing that I keep telling my family, and which nobody seems to be considering, is the ongoing effect the spread of ebola will have in the ecosystem ALL OVER THE WORLD.

People with ebola, however few they may be in number, still must poop, pee and vomit. In a developed country, the infected person has doubtless pooped, peed, and/or vomited into his toilet after becoming infected, but before going to the hospital. That waste is now in the municipal sewage system. Our sewage systems are not hermetically sealed. There are leaks into the environment: into waterways, into the groundwater, and into the soil. Sewage pipes tend to run through areas with rats, bats, raccoons, skunks, and other fauna... wet areas with cool temperatures where the virus can thrive. What about countries with less than ideal sewage treatment? The sewers in some places vent directly into the waterways. Think about it.

Even in nations with excellent sewage treatment facilities, what about infected sludge pools? Dessicated sludge is used in farming and manufacturing applications. Once dessicated, it is highly likely that the virus will die. But can we guarantee that ALL virus in the dried sludge has died before we use it?

The sad fact is that, even after this outbreak has passed, there will now be reservoirs of ebola virus in numerous unknown locations all across the globe. Ebola will no longer be a disease isolated on the African continent. Twenty years from now, in the USA and the rest of the world, there will still be cases of ebola of zoonotic origin popping up on occasion anytime a person comes into contact with a reservoir of virus in the animal world. As it has done in Africa forever, it will now do in other places where the virus establishes a reservoir in the rest of the world.

Acknowledgement of this fact permanently changes the scope of the ebola problem.

The bat is out of the bag, so to speak.