Death of the Ebola Epidemic and the Lessons Unlearned

Canada Free Press ^ | 01/22/15 | Michael Fumento

[Democrat_media]

ok i see something now.

I talk to a lot of people from all over the country and the world in person . so i see how the media controls everyone here, online, the gym , at work ,etc.

anything the media decides to give massive coverage to they get most people in the WORLd to talk about.

[ansel12]

Well, I didn’t run into it out in public and work, but like I said, there was a lot here, and of course the conspiracies, thanks for sharing your conspiracy.

[Smokin' Joe]

I work with the public and everywhere people were talking about ebola and believing it was a threat, just like everything the media decides to make the topic .

Right. Then you also recognize that what the media fails to discuss doesn't exist, right? When AP stopped covering the disease, it went off the average person's radar, right after the new 'ebola czar' took over and shut the feed off to the generally lazy-assed media who only parrot the AP feed or summarize it.

In reality, Ebola is still a problem where it has been a problem--in Africa. It is the worst outbreak in history and continues to grow, according to the numbers released by the WHO.

Many of us were just opposed to bringing it here. In order to prevent that, we needed to know some answers about contagion, effects, incubation periods, etc.

The venerable CDC fell flat on their asses on that, with the effect of getting a couple of nurses infected here after an infected patient finally was admitted.

If that made people uneasy and a mite distrustful of the party line, well, maybe there was a reason.

Overall, it exposed the response and prevention measures as generally worthless, and that has been amended to reduce risk further in the future.

If you don't think the negatives (as in 'there isn't any such thing') can be media manipulated every bit as severely as the panic, you need to talk with folks who worked on Operation Ranchhand in SE Asia, just to mention one group.

The media mission shifted so strongly from 'prevent Ebola here' to 'prevent panic', that I can't honestly say I would trust the media to report accurately either way.

[Democrat_media]

There was never any ebola epidemic threat to the USA. the news media fooled you and the American people. it was a media lie. what % of the USA population was or is infected with ebola? a statistically non-existant number . If you study propbability and statistics you will see that you have more of a chance of winning the lottery than contracting any ebola. If i were you i’d start worrying about the media. you fail to see that the media controls your mind. is that ok with you that smug ,arrogant , marxist liberal reporters control your mind. you think that some things are your thoughts . they are not . most are put there by “society” and that is the media.

are you going to answer . what % of the U.S. population is infected with ebola?

[Smokin' Joe]

FIrst off, I have never said the media wasn't the greatest of our problems. Let's get that straight.

As for MY mind, the media doesn't control that. They only control some of the sources of information, and I really don't rely on them much. I'm a scientist and have seen what a complete hash they make of the most fundamental concepts, so I don't trust them to get their own birthdays right.

Second, can you quantify the increase in ebola cases in the US before 2010 and after, as a percentage?

We already know the answer. You can't. It's undefined.

The problem wasn't so much one of whether we were in imminent danger of having a ELE epidemic here, so much as one of getting lies out of the usual government agencies: "It is not dangerous." (it isn't if you don't bring the disease here but no safeguards were being put in place to prevent that).

"We can handle it in any hospital"--total BS. It remains a level 4 pathogen, with a minimum kill rate greater than 10X the Spanish flu among those who are infected. (Of eight people treated in the US, two died. That's 25%. Elsewhere, depending on strain and outbreak, the numbers range from 30% to 90% killed of those infected.)

Limited exposure makes a total infected population number ridiculous, much as those who die of plutonium poisoning every year. That still doesn't mean you want plutonium dumped in vacant lots.

Third, no one knows what effect Ebola was going to have in the US if it got loose 'in the wild', whether the virus would find a reservoir species here like it has in Africa, or whether it would be spread as readily by infected persons here as it apparently was in Africa.

To err on the side of caution would have been prudent, to proceed carelessly remains foolish. Hubris kills.

I don't feel manipulated by the US media, primarily because a large number of the articles I read and information I got was NOT from the US media.

If you would care to see a better over view of that entire situation from start to present look at the links in the Ebola Surveillance Thread. I doubt you will, but you will even find that the outbreak is not over, only the information is being contained.

Now, tell me, do YOU trust the US Media to tell you if there are active cases of Ebola in the US? Have you tracked the isolation plane in its travels? Because if you are only relying on the US media to tell you the US media pulled a fast one, you just are not getting the full picture. There is a lot going on out there they aren't saying anything about.