- This topic has 212 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by
zk.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 7, 2014 at 2:05 AM #778469October 7, 2014 at 2:17 AM #778470
CA renter
Participant[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]
Also, “casual contact” means contact that isn’t sexual or where one wouldn’t consciously expect fluids to be exchanged. And the story about the journalist didn’t say anything at all about the chair being soaked in any blood or bodily fluids. While I’m guessing a patient had used the chair, bodily fluids were not mentioned, and they made a point to say that safety measures were in place.[/quote]
In both the carrying of the woman and the decontaminating of the chair, you’re assuming a lack of bodily fluids. It’s those kinds of assumptions that lead to your invalid conclusions. It doesn’t make sense to use those examples to conclude that the virus is easier to transmit then “they” are telling you it is when you don’t really know what the situation was.
[quote=CA renter]
If someone picks their nose or sneezes into their hand, and then holds onto a stair rail or touches a door handle, it sounds like that’s enough for transmission. This sounds very much like a highly contagious disease. [/quote]
“Sounds like” doesn’t seem like much to go on. What makes it “sound like” to you that holding a stair rail after sneezing into your hand is enough to spread the disease?
[quote=CA renter]
Remember, the govt was telling people that the air was safe to breathe after the Sept 11 attacks, even when they knew otherwise. We have no reason to blindly believe what they are telling us. Their #1 job is to prevent panic and chaos, not necessarily to ensure our safety. If you need evidence of this, just look at the stories above about the guys with the pressure washer and the hiring of private “hazmat” guys from Illinois to decontaminate the apartment — where four people had been living with soiled sheets and towels — FIVE days after this man was diagnosed.[/quote]
No doubt some mistakes were made. But I don’t see how that translates into “the government is hiding things from us to a degree that makes a large –scale outbreak something to worry about.”Unless you have a propensity to see these kinds of things where there is nothing. Conspiracy theorists and paranoids of all stripes are constantly seeing some massive, horrible, world-changing, armageddon-type event on the horizon, but they don’t seem daunted by the fact that they’re basically always wrong.[/quote]
I use the words “sounds like” or “seems like” or “IMHO/IMO” when I cannot say something with 100% certainty but have strong evidence or reason to believe something to be true. More people should try it.
As for those damned “conspiracy theorists”…
There is perhaps no more controversial issue in assessing the limits of political and
administrative discretion than the question of whether it is ever ethical for a public official to lie in the public interest. While we cringe at the thought of legitimating mendacity by public
officials, we have the realistic admonition of Michael Walzer that “no one succeeds in politics
without getting their hands dirty.” This paper will look first at the defense of official deception as
classically articulated by Machiavelli and Walzer. We will then look at the case against lying by
officials presented by Sissela Bok and Maureen Ramsay, with a focus on Ramsay’s extensive
arguments in The Politics of Lying against the “just
lie” theory. We will finally test the feasibility of the just lie theory by applying its standards to a case study based on actual administrative experience where recourse to deception appears to have achieved a good result.”https://www.mtholyoke.edu/sites/default/files/president/docs/EthicsofLying.pdf
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2013/08/23/thirteen-things-government-trying-keep-secret-you
The theory that the government doesn’t intentionally lie (for either benevolent or malevolent reasons) is naive. 😉
October 7, 2014 at 6:34 AM #778472zk
Participant[quote=CA renter]
The theory that the government doesn’t intentionally lie (for either benevolent or malevolent reasons) is naive. ;)[/quote]If I gave the impression that I thought the government never lies, I certainly didn’t intend to. I know they lie, and sometimes even for malevolent reasons. But I don’t think that (U.S.) government evilness is the norm or even common. I think it’s pretty rare. There are people who think it’s the norm. And those are the people who are your real conspiracy nuts. And, CAR, I might have given the impression that I lump you in with those nuts. I don’t, and I’m sorry if I gave that impression. I think there’s a spectrum of paranoia, and those people are way out on the end of it. I think you’re more paranoid than you should be. But, I’m willing to accept the possibility that your fears are justified (and therefore not paranoia), and that I’m less afraid than I should be. I don’t think so, but it’s possible, and I can certainly agree to disagree with you on that. But your real nuts who always see armageddon coming and government conspiracy, I think they’re obviously wrong.
October 7, 2014 at 1:36 PM #778474njtosd
Participant[quote=CA renter]As for how contagious this disease can be…this pertains to the most recent journalist/cameraman who is being flown to NE:
“She said her son did not know how he contracted the virus.
“He took all the necessary precautions and he was very aware of the precautions to take,” she said. “He helped decontaminate a car and he was wearing protective [gear] but he thinks maybe some water splashed on him.”’
…“Ashoka’s father is Dr Mitchell Levy, the medical director of the intensive care unit at Rhode Island Hospital. He told CNN it was unclear how his son got the virus, but added: “He was helping inside clinics disinfecting, whether it was a chair or some vehicle that had potentially been exposed, he remembers getting some of it in his face.”‘
……..
So, the notion that you have to be “digging around” in a sick/dead patient’s blood, feces, urine, saliva, teardrops, etc. is a bit naive, IMHO. Apparently, it doesn’t take much contact with bodily fluids, and it can be transmitted via very casual contact, like carrying a pregnant woman with the disease to a taxi, or decontaminating a chair. And to claim that it’s not airborne, as if the virus dies suddenly when mucus/saliva is forcefully expelled from the body by a cough or sneeze, seems a bit too optimistic.[/quote]
Your conclusion assumes that the man would be honest about his activities. There are all sorts of reasons that someone might not want to admit intimate contact with another person – especially if that person wants to come to the US and is concerned about being labelled as being somewhat at fault for his condition. And, I know I will be criticized for this, but here goes anyway: this guy and his mom are interesting, but not the people I would expect to be rigidly factual. Here is some info about them:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2779257/NBC-cameraman-Ebola-reincarnation-Tibetan-teacher-mother-married-Buddhist-guru-16.htmlOctober 7, 2014 at 1:54 PM #778475Zeitgeist
ParticipantWow! You can’t make this stuff up.
October 8, 2014 at 1:18 AM #778478Participant[quote=zk][quote=CA renter]
The theory that the government doesn’t intentionally lie (for either benevolent or malevolent reasons) is naive. ;)[/quote]If I gave the impression that I thought the government never lies, I certainly didn’t intend to. I know they lie, and sometimes even for malevolent reasons. But I don’t think that (U.S.) government evilness is the norm or even common. I think it’s pretty rare. There are people who think it’s the norm. And those are the people who are your real conspiracy nuts. And, CAR, I might have given the impression that I lump you in with those nuts. I don’t, and I’m sorry if I gave that impression. I think there’s a spectrum of paranoia, and those people are way out on the end of it. I think you’re more paranoid than you should be. But, I’m willing to accept the possibility that your fears are justified (and therefore not paranoia), and that I’m less afraid than I should be. I don’t think so, but it’s possible, and I can certainly agree to disagree with you on that. But your real nuts who always see armageddon coming and government conspiracy, I think they’re obviously wrong.[/quote]
No worries, zk. Oddly enough, I didn’t take your comments personally, but thanks for the clarification. Does that mean I’m not paranoid? 😉
All the best!
October 8, 2014 at 1:36 AM #778479Participant[quote=njtosd][quote=CA renter]As for how contagious this disease can be…this pertains to the most recent journalist/cameraman who is being flown to NE:
“She said her son did not know how he contracted the virus.
“He took all the necessary precautions and he was very aware of the precautions to take,” she said. “He helped decontaminate a car and he was wearing protective [gear] but he thinks maybe some water splashed on him.”’
…“Ashoka’s father is Dr Mitchell Levy, the medical director of the intensive care unit at Rhode Island Hospital. He told CNN it was unclear how his son got the virus, but added: “He was helping inside clinics disinfecting, whether it was a chair or some vehicle that had potentially been exposed, he remembers getting some of it in his face.”‘
……..
So, the notion that you have to be “digging around” in a sick/dead patient’s blood, feces, urine, saliva, teardrops, etc. is a bit naive, IMHO. Apparently, it doesn’t take much contact with bodily fluids, and it can be transmitted via very casual contact, like carrying a pregnant woman with the disease to a taxi, or decontaminating a chair. And to claim that it’s not airborne, as if the virus dies suddenly when mucus/saliva is forcefully expelled from the body by a cough or sneeze, seems a bit too optimistic.[/quote]
Your conclusion assumes that the man would be honest about his activities. There are all sorts of reasons that someone might not want to admit intimate contact with another person – especially if that person wants to come to the US and is concerned about being labelled as being somewhat at fault for his condition. And, I know I will be criticized for this, but here goes anyway: this guy and his mom are interesting, but not the people I would expect to be rigidly factual. Here is some info about them:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2779257/NBC-cameraman-Ebola-reincarnation-Tibetan-teacher-mother-married-Buddhist-guru-16.html%5B/quote%5DAll true. I did look into his background a bit when I first saw the story, so knew about the weird family history. Still, the guy has apparently spent many years trying to help those less fortunate, so I’m going to give him some credit. After all, anyone can lie about anything, but we have to trust that most people will try to be honest, at least most of the time (I hope!).
Also, just noticed that he thinks he got the disease while disinfecting (spray washing) a car, not a chair. I need new glasses. 🙁
October 8, 2014 at 2:07 AM #778480outtamojo
ParticipantThey are gonna off that Spanish lady’s dog.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/spain-to-kill-dog-of-madrid-woman-who-contracted-ebola/October 8, 2014 at 7:24 AM #778476Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]
Your world view is simplistic.[/quote]
[quote=zk]
I’m very curious to hear why you think that.[/quote]Nothing, huh, Zeitgeist? That’s what I thought.
October 8, 2014 at 1:25 PM #778486Participantzk,
You have your weltanschauung and I have mine. I do not want to argue with you because it is a waste of time or to quote Heinlein: “Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.” If you don’t want to read my posts why not just ignore me and look for posts that are more aligned with who you are.By the way, “The man who brought Ebola to the United States from West Africa 18 days ago has died in Dallas. Thomas Eric Duncan succumbed to the virus at 7.51am today at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital. His fiancée Louise Troh spoke out in anger shortly after his death and called for a full review of his medical care. Reverend Jesse Jackson, who appeared in public with Duncan’s mother, raised the specter of legal action against the hospital as he contemned Duncan’s treatment.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2785245/Dallas-Ebola-patient-dies-Thomas-Eric-Duncan-succumbs-deadly-disease-bringing-America-Liberia.html#ixzz3FaSRpyIzOctober 8, 2014 at 1:53 PM #778487The-Shoveler
ParticipantAnyone know how many Ebola patients have been treated in the U.S.A. ?
Seems the Odd’s may be about the same here or overseas as far as when you are already ill.
October 8, 2014 at 3:32 PM #778489Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]zk,
You have your weltanschauung and I have mine. I do not want to argue with you because it is a waste of time or to quote Heinlein: “Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.”
[/quote]
Well, Zeitgeist, if you want to say I have a simplistic world view, and if you want to compare my ability to debate with that of a pig to sing, you certainly have that right. But if you can back neither of those points with any evidence, then it says a lot more about you than it does about me.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
If you don’t want to read my posts why not just ignore me and look for posts that are more aligned with who you are.
[/quote]
What gives you the idea that I don’t want to read your posts? No, I enjoy debating those with whom I disagree. That should be obvious. If I’ve given any indication that I don’t want to debate, by all means point it out. I’m pretty sure you’ll come up empty handed. Yet again.
[quote=Zeitgeist]By the way, “The man who brought Ebola to the United States from West Africa 18 days ago has died in Dallas. Thomas Eric Duncan succumbed to the virus at 7.51am today at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital. His fiancée Louise Troh spoke out in anger shortly after his death and called for a full review of his medical care. Reverend Jesse Jackson, who appeared in public with Duncan’s mother, raised the specter of legal action against the hospital as he contemned Duncan’s treatment.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2785245/Dallas-Ebola-patient-dies-Thomas-Eric-Duncan-succumbs-deadly-disease-bringing-America-Liberia.html#ixzz3FaSRpyIz%5B/quote%5DYeah, chances were he was going to die. He had ebola. And of course Jesse Jackson was there threatening legal action. There were lots of cameras. If you think any of that is relevant to my point that there won’t be a widespread outbreak, I think you’re wrong. But I’d love to hear your reasoning so that we can debate it.
October 8, 2014 at 7:18 PM #778492Participantzk,
I pray you are right and I am wrong. This is something I do not want to be right about. I hope the government is handling infection in a competent fashion and that the public is protected from this and other diseases that are being brought in from other countries as well as our own homegrown seasonal varieties. I remain hopefully skeptical based on how this first case was mishandled. Perhaps the various agencies involved will learn from their errors.This is why I am skeptical, since you like to know these things: “U.S. officials initially described the number of people potentially exposed as a handful, and on Wednesday said it was up to 18. But on Thursday, the Texas health department said there were about 100 potential contacts. However, Dallas County officials said more than 80 had direct or indirect contact with the patient. ‘We are working from a list of about 100 potential or possible contacts,’ Texas health department spokeswoman Carrie Williams said.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/02/us-health-ebola-usa-exposure-idUSKCN0HR18720141002The way I understand math, 100 is more than a handful and that is what I consider as lack of transparancy.
October 8, 2014 at 8:44 PM #778494Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]zk,
I pray you are right and I am wrong. This is something I do not want to be right about. I hope the government is handling infection in a competent fashion and that the public is protected from this and other diseases that are being brought in from other countries as well as our own homegrown seasonal varieties. I remain hopefully skeptical based on how this first case was mishandled. Perhaps the various agencies involved will learn from their errors. [/quote]Totally agree.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
This is why I am skeptical, since you like to know these things: “U.S. officials initially described the number of people potentially exposed as a handful, and on Wednesday said it was up to 18. But on Thursday, the Texas health department said there were about 100 potential contacts. However, Dallas County officials said more than 80 had direct or indirect contact with the patient. ‘We are working from a list of about 100 potential or possible contacts,’ Texas health department spokeswoman Carrie Williams said.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/02/us-health-ebola-usa-exposure-idUSKCN0HR18720141002The way I understand math, 100 is more than a handful and that is what I consider as lack of transparancy.[/quote]
Interesting points. It could be, as you say, lack of transparency. It could also be incompetence and stupidity and poor communication. It’s probably a bit of all of them. I don’t think any of that rises to the level of major conspiracy, nor do I think there will be a major conspiracy.
My view of how ebola spreads and what the potential is for the current situation is informed by scientists, not the government. Scientists, as a general rule, get their view from the science of a situation, not the politics of it. There are some scientists out there whose view of how ebola spreads is scarier than the government’s view. But even those scientists think a widespread outbreak in this country is highly unlikely.
October 8, 2014 at 9:31 PM #778495moneymaker
ParticipantSo did the Spainards test the dog or are they just dog haters over there. If it is transmissible by dogs then that is very bad, probably would be transmissible by other mammals as well.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.