Question about ebola/beliefs/government........

[iris lilies]

\
Here's a radical notion - you say that you believe the government doesn't know.....I am saying the exact same thing. Hence, we actually agree here IL. Yes.....we actually agree. No sarcasm intended, it's just that it's not often that that happens, you know? About Mitt Romney - what I said was intended as nice words for the man and I genuinely do believe he would have handled this differently from how Obama has were he in office. ...

Sure we agree on the root problem: the Goob doesn't know the entire story of Ebola transmission. We still disagree a little bit on what they are doing with that ignorance.

But mainly I wanted to refute your Romney projection. I get it that you are imagining he would act in a positive way.

I don't know that stringent governmental action is positive, but I have no freeking clue about how Romney would act nor does anyone else. I deeply suspect that his actions wouldn't look much different than those of our current President.

[JaneV2.0]

The medical professionals who do know--having worked directly with persons infected by Ebola--in every interview, stress that 1) you can't test for Ebola in an asymptomatic individual and 2) an infected individual is not contagious until he/she has symptoms, and then only if he/she is emitting fluids (i.e. vomitus). The reporters who interview them keep asking the same dumb questions, showing that either 1) they aren't listening to the answers, or 2) they're looking for "sexier" responses.

[bae]

Some other questions about Ebola:

How much of the ruckus is because it is from Africa?
Because of the color of the skin of many of the victims?
Because they don't speak English?
Because of anti-immigrant isolationist sentiments?
Because of cool zombie-virus movies?
Because the media has nothing better to do?
Etc?

[kib]

i just keep wondering how it is that we know it's a killer, and we know exactly how and when it's transmitted ... and yet two people with all that knowledge in the good old USA where we are so very very perfect and pristine in our process and the best medicine in the world that no one could ever catch ebola here and I could go on for three more paragraphs about our greatness, that two trained professionals who knew without a doubt that their patient had the disease, caught it anyway. One patient, two transmissions. To me thatsays the specifics are a bit blurrier than implied.

I understand why this is not emphasized . If there is no symptomatic person out there transmitting the disease, high and perhaps not 100% understood transmission risk is irrelevant, but I doubt people would make the distinction. I do appreciate NPR for trying to explore different aspects of what's going on and not just spouting rhetoric.

[catherine]

Some other questions about Ebola:
How much of the ruckus is...
...
Because of cool zombie-virus movies?
Because the media has nothing better to do?
Etc?

I vote for this ^

Seriously, the only scary thing about this is the unknown. The chance that any of us are going to die of ebola is, I think, extremely remote.

Some have gone so far as to to say that the whole brouhaha is a conspiracy to distract us from what's going on in the Middle East.

Who knows? It's not much ado about nothing, but compared to things that pose real risk, let's put it in perspective.

[Rogar]

When you get down to the basics, I pretty much trust the government with this. At first I think they were a little slack, but all the media coverage has gotten the public, including I think politicians, to get on the stick. One thing I worry about is that some of the discussion around restricting travel and isolating people in the slightest risk seems to almost be becoming a partisan issues. At least among the local politicians. Ebola is not doubt very serious, but the public outcry is generating some things that are an media generated, fear driven, and irrational over reaction. One of the CDC heads was on Face the Nation and explained how applying resources to Ebola means taking resources away from other important things. But I am generally satisfied with things for the current degree of risk and think we are close to following the example that Gardenarian mentioned that seems to have worked somewhere else. If we start seeing outbreaks in India or Europe or anywhere with a crowded population and poor medical facilities, then all bets are off.

I saw one politician in a short clip somewhere saying...You know how all the Zombie movies start out. Some government or health official comes on the evening news and sayings everything is contained and there is no risk to the general public. Fortunately I don't believe in Zombies and it's only a movie. At least at this point.

[Alan]

Did anyone here ever read The Stand by Stephen King? If Randall Flagg shows up in your neighborhood, be afraid, be very, very afraid. Otherwise....

[IshbelRobertson]

I LOVED that book, although it gave me nightmares!

[gimmethesimplelife]

Did anyone here ever read The Stand by Stephen King? If Randall Flagg shows up in your neighborhood, be afraid, be very, very afraid. Otherwise....

One of my favorite books of all time.....the characterization was so believable and I loved the ending when Stu and Frannie are reunited and Fran's baby lives. Absolutely incredible. And King wrote in a way that made such a scenario not seem all that far fetched, and yes, I have thought of this novel from time to time during this Ebola thing. Rob

[Gregg]

...I loved the ending when Stu and Frannie are reunited and Fran's baby lives. Absolutely incredible.

Dang it Rob, I'm only on Chapter 8!