Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Good observations and points.
I suppose I am more cynical about medicine these days and I don't doubt that there are benefits to vaccinations, but I also assume that there must be problems too (connected with many other things) and on the whole it is in the medical industry interest to keep vaccinations in a positive light and the words of people like Bill Gates hardly make you rest easy about their purpose. Many parents do not really know what they are putting into their babies. At the least people should be aware, but people generally trust their doctors, and I am sure doctors really think they are doing the right thing too. Do we really know the long term consequences? I'm fine with the flu, I don't want a shot for it. Plenty of vitamin C and water is enough.
I agree that everyone is getting diagnosed with something these days and I question to what extent it is just to keep people medicated and compliant. I cannot speak for everyone, but my own take is that it is the system that is a key problem and it suits the system to make people think there is something wrong with them. Take the shot, take the pill, it's good for you. Don't talk back! I think a better system would lead to less difficult children, less depression in adults etc. It can never be perfect, but the system seems designed to diagnose something wrong with you and say nothing to see here. I'm somewhat deviating and going off cue here.
I just hope this ebola is contained soon. It looks like a horrible way to die, I just don't trust the people in control, and the man that got back to America who turned himself in, but got set loose. Well, it is troubling.
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Quote:
Originally Posted by
AdamGB
Swine flu hysteria part 2.
It's a horrific way to die, but honestly... It's not particularly good at spreading. It's a lot easier for it to spread in impoverished places in Africa, it isn't airborne which severely limits it's spread potential in advanced societies, flu viruses will kill more people this year. 250-500 thousand according to the WHO.
Swine flu, SARS, West Nile Virus....yeah all completely hyped up by the media wanting to creep people out and yes Influenza kills off a fair amount of the old and the young, but Ebola is something that is pretty bad especially considering the lack of a 100% proven and accepted cure though some steps have been positive in getting us to that point.
WHO | Ebola virus disease
"The average EVD case fatality rate is around 50%. Case fatality rates have varied from 25% to 90% in past outbreaks."
That ain't a good sign...the aforementioned diseases didn't have a fatality rate close to that and the deaths happen rather quickly.
I hope that everything works out for the best and this is all a brief little moment of hysteria but an epidemic could happen with Ebola and it wouldn't be a good thing.
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Until it mutates and becomes airborne I wouldn't worry about it becoming a global epidemic, it's areas lacking any real sort of robust healthcare infrastructure that are at any serious risk.
It's not contagious incubating and the onset of symptoms are so quick that it's easily contained in developed societies.
Scary disease, poor contagion.
You're right to be suspicious of the pharmaceutical industry miles, it wants us sick. More money to be made in treating symptoms and prolonging 'life' than there is in curing and more importantly preventing illnesses, especially when the industry's bread and butter comes from illnesses that lifestyle alone can prevent.
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Quote:
Originally Posted by
X
I couldn't help noticing how quiet the Western media was while the Ebola virus was busily burning through 600 people in West Africa. Funny that, as the story reads like several Hollywood films and lazy talentless journalists love to already have a plot for their usual drivel.
It seems that there is now a risk that the virus might travel outside West Africa, as quarantine has not been successful.
Now it's all over the news, governments are meeting to discuss it and people seem to have started to seriously research a vaccine.
Am I being over cynical in equating all this new coverage and efforts with the fact that somebody white and non African might get sick?
Check out African wars over the past few decades that feature industrial slaughter, horrific brutality that makes ISIS look like Sunday School teachers and epic numbers of dead and never get a mention in our media. All our governments did was sell weapons to them, normally to both sides.
Contrast that with war coverage from a region we give a shit about like the Middle East. Africans need to dig for oil.
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Africans need to dig for oil.
....they actually have and sell quite a bit of oil. A lot of African oil goes to Europe and China.
But being the wizen liberal you are you probably A) Already knew that and B ) had protested against Africa being taken advantage of by countries like China and Russia.....oh wait you ONLY do that when America is at fault...my bad
http://www.chinasourcingblog.org/Chi...20Projects.png
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Aaaaaand that Ebola patient in Dallas is now dead. Thanks a bunch for bringing that horrible disease to America Thomas Eric Duncan you dope!
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Africans need to dig for oil.
....they actually have and sell quite a bit of oil. A lot of African oil goes to Europe and China.
But being the wizen liberal you are you probably A) Already knew that and B ) had protested against Africa being taken advantage of by countries like China and Russia.....oh wait you ONLY do that when America is at fault...my bad
http://www.chinasourcingblog.org/Chi...20Projects.png
Africa has about nine percent of world reserves. The Middle East has sixty percent. A lot of African oil goes to America too, but where it goes is irrelevant. Oil is a fungible product, it's available for sale globally. What really matters is who gets to produce it.
It's interesting that you're comparing American and Chinese actions in Africa to get access to African resources. There's quite a historical record to look back on. One country largely supplies their guy with millions of dollars of weapons. The other country sets up economic co-operation agreements, sends engineers to build roads, dams and so on, sends cheap consumer goods and sets up economic development funds to allow the Arfican countries to bypass the World Bank and the IMF which lock African countries into the tender mercies of the western financial system.
Which country do you think aspiring developing African democracies want to do deals with?
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
....so again, you said
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Africans need to dig for oil.
And I replied "Actually they do have oil and sell it to various places"....which you apparently deemed an unworthy response to your whining.
As for China's involvement in Africa I bring them up because although America might lock the African nations into the IMF World Bank system IF African nations took that route Western nations such as America would be less tolerable of happenings like the genocide in Darfur, the Rwandan Civil War, etc, which China was more than happy to stay completely out of and allow the chips to fall where they may.
But you're right, the United States NEVER EVER EVER invests in infrastructure in other nations. We're really horrible at it. We never help the world...never. Not via The Marshall Plan, not just in general helping out after floods, hurricanes, earthquakes. We didnt' build schools and roads in Iraq and Afghanistan either of course....we just rape and pillage the world, we provide no safe haven for anyone but those dirty capitalists pigs who steal from and kill the brown people right comrade?
How about you just stop thinking up new posts and just put "It's America's Fault!" for every single reply you give? I'd hate for you to waste your time on debate.....especially since you're not all that great at it.
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tam Seddon
Well your odds are better than the USA considering how many troops we're sending.
Troops sent to fight ISIS = 0
Troops sent to fight Ebola = 4000
But hey it isn't like either is a big deal right?
No not at all ;D:rolleyes:
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
And the second they started feeling ill, you'd assume they'd have the sense to get themselves quarantined and not run around covering people in their bodily fluids.
This is of course assuming that they don't under go a cautionary quarantine when returning to the UK to ensure no incubation, I don't think they'll be goi g about this idly somehow.
The nurse that contracted it in Spain did so whilst treating a spanish missionary who died from it, an unfortunate working hazard. People she'd been in contact with have been quarantined as a precaution, before even showing symptoms - it's only contagious when symptoms develop, not when incubating. She was a nurse dealing with somebody dying of ebola, not an average member of the public...
Just because there has been a case, does not mean it is 'spreading'.
5 Reasons America Can Calm the F#@% Down About Ebola | Cracked.com
Re: Quite angry about Ebola coverage
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
....so again, you said
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kirkland Laing
Africans need to dig for oil.
And I replied "Actually they do have oil and sell it to various places"....which you apparently deemed an unworthy response to your whining.
As for China's involvement in Africa I bring them up because although America might lock the African nations into the IMF World Bank system IF African nations took that route Western nations such as America would be less tolerable of happenings like the genocide in Darfur, the Rwandan Civil War, etc, which China was more than happy to stay completely out of and allow the chips to fall where they may.
But you're right, the United States NEVER EVER EVER invests in infrastructure in other nations. We're really horrible at it. We never help the world...never. Not via The Marshall Plan, not just in general helping out after floods, hurricanes, earthquakes. We didnt' build schools and roads in Iraq and Afghanistan either of course....we just rape and pillage the world, we provide no safe haven for anyone but those dirty capitalists pigs who steal from and kill the brown people right comrade?
How about you just stop thinking up new posts and just put "It's America's Fault!" for every single reply you give? I'd hate for you to waste your time on debate.....especially since you're not all that great at it.
Why are resource-rich African countries queuing up to do business with China but not with America? Why do business with a Communist tyranny but not the world's greatest democracy?
You could read up about it but there's such a vast amount of information that you'd soon be facing shelf overload. If one of the little screws that holds the little shelf brackets onto the inside of your head works loose you could even be looking at total shelf collapse. So be careful out there.
