# Ebola and you!



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

I've been reading the CDC report on Ebola for the last week or so off and on. I started after learning of the aid station assault were the locals "freed" patient's with advanced stage infection and looted bloody mattresses. Then today I read locals have killed 8 Ebola aid workers and dumped their bodies in a ditch.

Now I'm a pretty moral guy. Believe it or not I try and take the high road when I can. HOWEVER I'm starting to wonder when we draw the line with humanitarian efforts. When does the stupidity of the few become a legitimate concern for the rest of the world. After reading the CDC report I honestly think nukes shouldn't be off the table.

Meh.....that reaction might be as dumb a looting bloody Ebola mattresses so I am posing the question to more informed TPU members. How should the threat be tackled? The CDC is REALLY concerned about this and honestly we are historically over due for a natural plague.

Also please reply with scientific backing and legitimate posts. This is the Science and Technology forum. Not GN.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 19, 2014)

Let's hope the tests of a possible cure go well, start maybe going church (which ever one you like) and I personally will be staying mostly in my room for the next few months.
I can't believe how stupid those idiots where and as for the Murders id certainly consider a few apaches but a nukes a bit extreme imho


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 19, 2014)




----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Let's hope the tests of a possible cure go well, start maybe going church (which ever one you like) and I personally will be staying mostly in my room for the next few months.
> I can't believe how stupid those idiots where and as for the Murders id certainly consider a few apaches but a nukes a bit extreme imho


I wasn't saying nukes as a reaponse for the murders. I was saying turn west Africa into glass because of the virus and the locals seem to wish to infect the world because they refuse to stop eating bush meat and get treated. I understand these people are uneducated but, their lack of education could kill off half the world. When do we draw the line? When does it become us or them AND is there a hope of a vaccine? This is a virus after all. There will never be a "cure".


----------



## SaltyFish (Sep 19, 2014)

You could apply something similar to endangered species. Should they be helped out, or should nature be allowed to run it course on them?

Playing humanitarian/morally superior being (for a given value of "morals")/whatever requires, by it very nature, an expenditure of resources that could've gone towards more practical ends.

As for the plague part, that's quite inevitable due to microbial pathogens evolving defenses faster than humans can find new ways to kill them. Amusing how many things we so easily wipe out inadvertently yet when it comes to the stuff we really want dead, our track record isn't as good.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 19, 2014)

Ah I get you Mm, I think that's a bit much though still , the capitalist world should completely ban flights and boats from there right now though but that's not going to happen eh


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Sep 19, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I wasn't saying nukes as a reaponse for the murders. I was saying turn west Africa into glass because of the virus and the locals seem to wish to infect the world because they refuse to stop eating bush meat and get treated. I understand these people are uneducated but, their lack of education could kill off half the world. When do we draw the line? When does it become us or them AND is there a hope of a vaccine? This is a virus after all. There will never be a "cure".



I'm reminded of the Guinea Worm eradication effort spear-headed by Carter.  

It took the aide workers a huge amount of time just to get people to understand that it wasn't a curse or magic.  Africa is seriously backwards, and there are concerted efforts for their people to go through some more genocides in the near future.


I'm not sure it's worth helping the Middle East, and I'm not sure if helping Africa is possible.  At the same time, the effort to make other people understand how much of a wasted effort it is tires me.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

lilhasselhoffer said:


> I'm reminded of the Guinea Worm eradication effort spear-headed by Carter.
> 
> It took the aide workers a huge amount of time just to get people to understand that it wasn't a curse or magic.  Africa is seriously backwards, and there are concerted efforts for their people to go through some more genocides in the near future.
> 
> ...


I can't argue that. However that stupidity (theirs not yours) could effect everyone on the planet at this point and its getting worse. My question is what is the hope and where do we draw the line? Seriously is there some kind of scientific reasoning or guideline for this? I REALLY hate to use the term "final solution" but I'm wondering about an end game here when it comes to Ebola spreading past west Africa.

If this thing hits India or China you will see a LOT more killed and it controlled in ways that are less than "moral". Not by choice mind you, but of necessity. Both nations will do what it takes to contain the spread in their boarders the worlds opinion be dammed. I'm starting to think we (the world) should cut its losses now before its to late.

People will be outraged of course. Outraged but alive. CDC really doesn't have an game finisher according to their studies. Think about that.


----------



## erocker (Sep 19, 2014)

Thank God we have an internet forum to solve this problem known as ebola! Let's get over to Africa guns a blazin!!

*Might be a legitimate post to some.


----------



## 64K (Sep 19, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I wasn't saying nukes as a reaponse for the murders. I was saying turn west Africa into glass because of the virus and the locals seem to wish to infect the world because they refuse to stop eating bush meat and get treated. I understand these people are uneducated but, their lack of education could kill off half the world. When do we draw the line? When does it become us or them AND is there a hope of a vaccine? This is a virus after all. There will never be a "cure".



Putting morality aside for the moment. Wouldn't the required number of nukes to destroy all life on a continent the size of Africa be problematic to the rest of humanity due to the spread of nuclear fallout into the oceans and carried in the atmosphere to perhaps every other country as well? Also what would Russia do if we released that many nukes so close to them?


----------



## Sasqui (Sep 19, 2014)

If we had a massive plague here in the US, I don't think the situation would be much better.  Though we have a much better infrastructure, it would be overwhelmed and fall apart over time, leading to terror, mayhem, violence and a breakdown of society.  Fear is one of humanities greatest motivators (that and greed).

Call me cynical.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

64K said:


> Putting morality aside for the moment. Wouldn't the required number of nukes to destroy all life on a continent the size of Africa be problematic to the rest of humanity due to the spread of nuclear fallout into the oceans and carried in the atmosphere to perhaps every other country as well? Also what would Russia do if we released that many nukes so close to them?


First off we wouldn't need to hit the entire continent. Just the high risk areas. I suspect once a few cities become holes in the ground people will fall in line. Second I'm not calling for hydrogen bombs on the front of an ICBM. I'm talking about small scale tactical strikes that do not have 10,000 year half life's. As for Russia I don't think it would take much for them to get on board with the bombings. After all its going to hit Moscow before it hits the US.



Sasqui said:


> If we had a massive plague here in the US, I don't think the situation would be much better.  Though we have a much better infrastructure, it would be overwhelmed and fall apart over time, leading to terror, mayhem, violence and a breakdown of society.  Fear is one of humanities greatest motivators (that and greed).
> Call me cynical.


That's why it has to be stopped now.



erocker said:


> Thank God we have an internet forum to solve this problem known as ebola! Let's get over to Africa guns a blazin!!
> *Might be a legitimate post to some.


 I'm sure if Ebola needs an infraction the CDC will have you on speed dial.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 19, 2014)

It's called humanitarian aid for a reason and it's not based on any scientific principle mearly ta stance of We can and should be helping our fellow humans.
I think if you're going to throw the Africans to the wolves so to speak , could it also be argued that cancer research is a waste of time and money, yes it might save people but does this overpopulated globe really need more pensioner's and mouth's to feed, it's odd because I have family that's been kicked by the big C and I have folded for years at one point but I have pondered , , is it a reasonable and justified stance to allow some to pass on with little help or meds given the impending resource issues? ?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> It's called humanitarian aid for a reason and it's not based on any scientific principle mearly ta stance of We can and should be helping our fellow humans.
> I think if you're going to throw the Africans to the wolves so to speak , could it also be argued that cancer research is a waste of time and money, yes it might save people but does this overpopulated globe really need more pensioner's and mouth's to feed, it's odd because I have family that's been kicked by the big C and I have folded for years at one point but I have pondered , , is it a reasonable and justified stance to allow some to pass on with little help or meds given the impending resource issues? ?


Cancer is not transmittable and people who contract cancer don't attack their doctors. They tend to want to be treated and live so your analogy doesn't apply here.

I am all for helping people. My church has done tons of missions to east and central Africa to teach people how to properly do irrigation and I am in no way advocating genocide. What I am saying is this virus is spreading due to an ignorance that cannot be tamed and no matter how much money they dump into the region its spreading. How can you help people that do not want help? Normally you would let nature take its course but if we do that WE ALL could die.

Seriously I haven't read a single shred of evidence from TPU that refutes what I'm saying......I really want to be wrong on this also.


----------



## Sasqui (Sep 19, 2014)

Too late:  http://www.wwltv.com/story/news/loc...to-board-ship-docking-in-no-tonight/15791245/

They say it's malaria, which mimics the first symptoms of Ebola.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Sep 19, 2014)

We just need to completely block them. Shut down all access into/out of the country. Any aircraft leaving gets shot down, any boat gets sunk. The virus will run its course when there is nothing left to infect. This way we aren't responsible for directly solving/killing people and let the virus do all the work.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 19, 2014)

To MM,,And I did say earlier, the capitalist world is still sending boats and plains to and from there so your iphone can be made etc sorry android you aren't a sheep after all   simply cut unnecessary travel there might help but that costs so its a no go much like you're idea , whos going to provide the gallium , platinum etc for our ego massaging I7 gaming box's eh.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> And I did say earlier, the capitalist world is still sending boats and plains to and from there so your iphone can be made etc sorry android you aren't a sheep after all   simply cut unnecessary travel there might help but that costs so its a no go much like you're idea , whos going to provide the gallium , platinum etc for our ego massaging I7 gaming box's eh.


I have a Nokia with Windows sir. And yeah we need to cut off everyone in and out.


----------



## 64K (Sep 19, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> First off we wouldn't need to hit the entire continent. Just the high risk areas.



I don't think that would do it. According to the WHO Ebola originally started in Central Africa so it would take a lot more than just targeting West Africa if you didn't want it to start up all over again.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

"The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rainforests"

Also from what I understand Ebola isn't airborne. It can only be spread through blood and bodily fluids. If a lot of cases started showing up in the US people could take reasonable precautions and avoid infection.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Sep 19, 2014)

If that is the way they want to handle things over there, we should impose a full travel and trade embargo.  Isolate them and leave them to deal with things themselves as they prefer.  Plus, it helps to restrict the spread of the disease elsewhere.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2014)

Tatty's 10 point plan........

1.  UN mobilise....... 500,000 troops required.
2.  Quarantine Africa, close all ports and airports throughout the continent, no one goes in, no one goes out, get support from non infected nations or do it forcibly, possibly use the opportunity to get rid of a couple of dictators whilst we are at it 
3.  Close all internal borders within Africa.
4.  Defend those borders around countries that so far do not have the disease, use their troops also.
5.  Set up huge "Super" Field Hospitals within the 4 or 5 countries affected so far with isolation blocks
6.  Guard said Field Hospitals
7.  Allow population to filter to hospitals through guarded "safe routes"
8.  Treat the disease "on site", restricted all movement outside of safe routes
9.  Beat the disease, continue research and tests
10. Cure the disease and burn everything in sight!

Sprinkle lightly with a "pinch of salt"


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

Tatty_One said:


> Tatty's 10 point plan........
> 
> 1.  UN mobilise....... 500,000 troops required.
> 2.  Quarantine Africa, close all ports and airports throughout the continent, no one goes in, no one goes out, get support from non infected nations or do it forcibly, possibly use the opportunity to get rid of a couple of dictators whilst we are at it
> ...


That solution is way to British.

Joking aside that would cause a blood bath. Some of those dictators would rather spread Ebola than give up power. I think it would have the opposite effect than wanted.



64K said:


> I don't think that would do it. According to the WHO Ebola originally started in Central Africa so it would take a lot more than just targeting West Africa if you didn't want it to start up all over again.
> http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/
> "The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rainforests"
> Also from what I understand Ebola isn't airborne. It can only be spread through blood and bodily fluids. If a lot of cases started showing up in the US people could take reasonable precautions and avoid infection.


 The difference is Central Africa was willing to seek treatment. In all honesty Ebola is the problem but it in West Africa its not the cause. Stupid people are the cause. Locking out areas and then hitting them with tactical seems like the only solution...........OR is that solution to American for Sir Tatty?


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 19, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> That solution is way to British.
> 
> Joking aside that would cause a blood bath. Some of those dictators would rather spread Ebola than give up power. I think it would have the opposite effect than wanted.
> 
> The difference is Central Africa was willing to seek treatment. In all honesty Ebola is the problem but it in West Africa its not the cause. Stupid people are the cause. Locking out areas and then hitting them with tactical seems like the only solution...........OR is that solution to American for Sir Tatty?


And you were worried my method may cause a blood bath?  A "tactical" would kill thousands of women and children, at least my method would only kill those that didn't do what they were told


----------



## Sasqui (Sep 19, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> ocking out areas and then hitting them with tactical seems like the only solution...



I don't know what would be worse, the fallout, or ebola being spread into the atmosphere by droplets of blood and fragments of human remains.  The scope of the outbreak is rather staggering:


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 19, 2014)

Tatty_One said:


> And you were worried my method may cause a blood bath?  A "tactical" would kill thousands of women and children, at least my method would only kill those that didn't do what they were told


You and I both know there is no blood after a tactical. There is no humidity at all for a short time. Blood bath averted. One or two tacticals and Ill bet you a pint that people will be lining up at treatment centers and the spread will stop.

Would innocents die? Yes. But far more innocents will die if we don't. Boots on the ground will make it spread faster I suspect. Hell we could fire bomb if people are so scared of nukes. The outcome is what we need. Means of delivery I could care less about.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 19, 2014)

Sasqui said:


> Too late:  http://www.wwltv.com/story/news/loc...to-board-ship-docking-in-no-tonight/15791245/
> 
> They say it's malaria, which mimics the first symptoms of Ebola.


 
  Dafuk?????  That's where I am!!!!


----------



## Sasqui (Sep 19, 2014)

rtwjunkie said:


> Dafuk?????  That's where I am!!!!



Don't panic man!  ...just don't pick up any sailors


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 19, 2014)

Sasqui said:


> Don't panic man!  ...just don't pick up any sailors


 
I hope it IS just malaria, because we can imagine how fast that stuff would spread in a dense metropolitan area like New Orleans.


----------



## buildzoid (Sep 19, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You and I both know there is no blood after a tactical. There is no humidity at all for a short time. Blood bath averted. One or two tacticals and Ill bet you a pint that people will be lining up at treatment centers and the spread will stop.
> 
> Would innocents die? Yes. But far more innocents will die if we don't. Boots on the ground will make it spread faster I suspect. Hell we could fire bomb if people are so scared of nukes. The outcome is what we need. Means of delivery I could care less about.


You'd need a seriously large nuke to get a city completely vaporized. Another issue is that most of a nukes destructive power comes from the shock wave it makes so you would end up with bit's of infected being sent flying everywhere. So really you'd need to use a nuke with way more firepower than necessary to get a "clean" explosion. Fire bombs are almost certainly the better option in terms of cleanliness but they are harder to use as fast. Also firebombs will cause much more suffering than a nuke because with a nuke the main blast zone is an instantaneous death so if your whole target got caught in the fireball it be much cleaner and less painful but the nuke would not be a tactical by any measure unless it's being dropped on a small town or village.

Right now I think it be better to just completely lock down Africa and wait for a vaccine to get made. If a vaccines doesn't get discovered soon enough you can always burn the infected areas to the ground.


----------



## AphexDreamer (Sep 20, 2014)

So people don't just want population control they want controlled population control.


----------



## D007 (Sep 20, 2014)

Everyone should just mind their own dam business. Let natural selection take place.


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 20, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> You'd need a seriously large nuke to get a city completely vaporized. Another issue is that most of a nukes destructive power comes from the shock wave it makes so you would end up with bit's of infected being sent flying everywhere. So really you'd need to use a nuke with way more firepower than necessary to get a "clean" explosion.



I think someone is forgetting that thermonuclear explosions have extremely high temperatures and it's that high temperature that starts the reaction in the first place. In fact I would imagine that with a modern nuke would vaporize everything within several kilometers while scorching the land for several more. I suspect that heat would kill Ebola almost instantly much like how it kills human life just as quickly.


D007 said:


> Everyone should just mind their own dam business. Let natural selection take place.


Until Ebola spreads across the world and ten of thousands if not eventually hundreds of thousands will could die (forget the possibility of millions and a global epidemic).

In all seriousness, by the time the government actually considers nuclear weapons it will probably already be too late although I think the idea that nukes would spread it more is asinine. Fortunately Ebola is only spread through contact with someone who is infected or their bodily fluids and not by air. If it mutates and it becomes the case that it could spread by air, I would have to agree with TMM, all options need to be on the table.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 20, 2014)

FordGT90Concept said:


>



I don't know how to say this without sounding xenophobic, racist or mean but generally speaking the African continent (we'll give Egypt a pass here), has contributed very little positive to the world. To this day it's a hot bed for so many problems that the rest of the world picks up the tab on.

And who should we blame?


Spineless politicians poking their nose where it doesn't belong?
Clueless celebrities and black leaders suggesting that Africa is some utopian homeland?
Christian missionaries with a suicide wish?
Altruistic posers who for some reason think that being charitable to your native nation isn't good enough, so you have to fly across the world to some hell hole in order for it to be meaningful..



D007 said:


> Everyone should just mind their own dam business. Let natural selection take place.


Let's face it, if the world had left Africa alone, there's a good chance the majority of it's issues would have stayed self-contained and isolated.

What really upsets me is that we're sending good young military men to deal with what is clearly not a military situation. While not entirely the same, it has a foreboding feeling of Black Hawk Down - a non military peace effort, turned into a military cluster fu**.




Aquinus said:


> Fortunately Ebola is only spread through contact with someone who is infected or their bodily fluids and not by air. If it mutates and it becomes the case that it could spread by air, I would have to agree with TMM, all options need to be on the table.



Any ways, onto the science side of things - I do not understand why they've brought the patients back to North America?


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 20, 2014)

newconroer said:


> Any ways, onto the science side of things - I do not understand why they've brought the patients back to North America?


It's not spread by air though which means you only have to isolate a person by location, while properly disposing of materials as hazardous waste. Minimizing contact with the actual person is the key, but it wouldn't really matter if the windows in his or her room were open (unless he or she was vomiting out it, that's a different story.) For only a handful of people, proper safety precautions practically eliminates the risk of outbreak and the industrialized world is much more prepared to deal with such cases than say, Sierra Leone is.

When it comes to highly infectious diseases, we're a lot more careful than they are. We also don't eat bush meat which is why we don't have this problem. I want to say something like bats carry the pathogen but aren't impacted by it.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 20, 2014)

Aquinus said:


> It's not spread by air though which means you only have to isolate a person by location, while properly disposing of materials as hazardous waste. Minimizing contact with the actual person is the key, but it wouldn't really matter if the windows in his or her room were open (unless he or she was vomiting out it, that's a different story.) For only a handful of people, proper safety precautions practically eliminates the risk of outbreak and the industrialized world is much more prepared to deal with such cases than say, Sierra Leone is.
> 
> When it comes to highly infectious diseases, we're a lot more careful than they are. We also don't eat bush meat which is why we don't have this problem. I want to say something like bats carry the pathogen but aren't impacted by it.



Thank you for the explanation however NA is not the only first world continent capable of handling the quarantine. Let's not forget Europe..


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 20, 2014)

newconroer said:


> Thank you for the explanation however NA is not the only first world continent capable of handling the quarantine. Let's not forget Europe..


The US took care of it's own citizens, much like how Spain took care of its own doctor (who unfortunately died) as did the UK. It's not like we're (the US of A) taking care of every international doctor that gets infected. We take care of our own, as it should be.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 20, 2014)

Oh ok, I understand then.


----------



## buildzoid (Sep 20, 2014)

Aquinus said:


> I think someone is forgetting that thermonuclear explosions have extremely high temperatures and it's that high temperature that starts the reaction in the first place. In fact I would imagine that with a modern nuke would vaporize everything within several kilometers while scorching the land for several more. I suspect that heat would kill Ebola almost instantly much like how it kills human life just as quickly.


The super high temperatures only occur at the epicenter of the blast so if you used a small nuke like 20-80kilotons it would not vaporize the entire target. Just check the documentation of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. The cities both got leveled but most of the damage was cause by the shock wave not the heat. People suffered serious burns if exposed to the radiation but didn't get vaporized unless they were at ground zero . So really if you wanted to completely erase a city you would need a 500+ kiloton nuke and that isn't a tactical.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 20, 2014)

Aquinus said:


> It's not spread by air though which means you only have to isolate a person by location, while properly disposing of materials as hazardous waste. Minimizing contact with the actual person is the key, but it wouldn't really matter if the windows in his or her room were open (unless he or she was vomiting out it, that's a different story.) For only a handful of people, proper safety precautions practically eliminates the risk of outbreak and the industrialized world is much more prepared to deal with such cases than say, Sierra Leone is.
> 
> When it comes to highly infectious diseases, we're a lot more careful than they are. We also don't eat bush meat which is why we don't have this problem. I want to say something like bats carry the pathogen but aren't impacted by it.


 
I think you overestimate the ability of the industrialized nations to deal with a MAJOR epidemic.  It doesn't take much of a disaster even now to totally overwhelm emergency responses and relief aid in just a portion of any country.  And our ability to contain something like this, which is as infectious as this is just not there except for a few cases in a few special positive air pressure containment wards.  It takes one mistake at the CDC, or one lesser standard of isolation protocol being violated elsewhere in say, the U.S., perhaps.  Let us also not forget, not everyone who gets a mysterious illness will seek medical help, for any number of reasons.  Then in a deranged state they start biting people, or puking on them,

It's not a far stretch.  Like @TheMailMan78 said, we're only a power outage away from civilisation and being tribes.


----------



## Frick (Sep 20, 2014)

newconroer said:


> I don't know how to say this without sounding xenophobic, racist or mean but generally speaking the African continent (we'll give Egypt a pass here), has contributed very little positive to the world. To this day it's a hot bed for so many problems that the rest of the world picks up the tab on.
> 
> And who should we blame?
> 
> ...



It's the continent that keeps on giving!

BTW, it's interesting how people can use phrases like "If a vaccines doesn't get discovered soon enough you can always burn the infected areas to the ground." so callously. On the other hand, sending soldiers in might even be fun.


----------



## Vario (Sep 20, 2014)

TheMailMan78, as a church goer shouldn't you understand the concept of selfless charity?


----------



## buildzoid (Sep 20, 2014)

Frick said:


> It's the continent that keeps on giving!
> 
> BTW, it's interesting how people can use phrases like "If a vaccines doesn't get discovered soon enough you can always burn the infected areas to the ground." so callously. On the other hand, sending soldiers in might even be fun.


What else would you do other than keep researching until most of the people are dead anyway at which point you'll have to sanitize the area and fire is the best way to do that. I didn't say burn it to the ground while most of the population is healthy I meant it as a solution once 95%+ of the population is dead.


----------



## Vario (Sep 20, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> What else would you do other than keep researching until most of the people are dead anyway at which point you'll have to sanitize the area and fire is the best way to do that. I didn't say burn it to the ground while most of the population is healthy I meant it as a solution once 95%+ of the population is dead.


So your plan is to kill the remaining 5%?


----------



## buildzoid (Sep 20, 2014)

Vario said:


> So your plan is to kill the remaining 5%?


If they're infected and don't agree to any treatment(if any exists at that point) then yes.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 20, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> If they're infected and don't agree to any treatment(if any exists at that point) then yes.



So anyone for some Dead Island 3 with me?


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Sep 20, 2014)

I'm missing some of this discussion, because apparently everyone moved on from the why to  the what do we do.

Nuclear weapons really aren't an option.  The reason is simple.  The environmental impact, coupled with the massive cost of this, would be too great.  Even if we could get past those two points, there are people who would never do this because it's morally dubious.

Education in Africa doesn't work.  For every child that can afford to be in schools there is at least one that cannot.  As long as superstition and hate are spread from one generation to the next there will be strife.  The people who "freed" the ebola victims hopefully aren't motivated by anything but good intentions (read: warlords smart enough to use a sort of biological cleansing solution), but they are criminally un-educated.

What is the solution then?  Quarantine, cleansing of exports, and minor fortification of resource extraction efforts.  Quarantines allow the disease to burn out, by preventing further infections.  It may require armed enforcement, but stopping transmission has to be priority one.  Cleansing exports is trickier.  The easiest way to do this is either fire or radiation.  My money is radiation.  A low level exposure to a weak radioactive source kills everything, then goods are stored at a safe location.  Just prior to shipping another quick bath is initiated.  Everything leaving the ports is cleared, and the setup should be cheap enough to install in every African port.  Without any real operational or maintenance costs, you've got sterile non-living exports.  Fortification of resource gatherers is a bit more painful.  Unfortunately, we cannot help everyone, so those we do help need protection.  I'm not saying we don't help those that ask for it, but by fortifying our locations we have areas that can render aide, without sending more people out to contract disease.  Hospitals are generally over-run because armed guards don't stand watch over them.  Doing so sends terrible messages about our confidence, but this kind of epidemic isn't something to take lightly.



I guess the gist of what I'm saying is to not cut Africa off, and to not use nuclear bombs as a solution.  Ebola is frightening, but the scarier thing is that we are guilty of genocides just because there is a risk of the infection passing out into the rest of the world.  If nothing else, the bird flu scares should have tempered our resolve to contain and control a pathogen.  It should have taught us that humans, and more importantly our infrastructure, are too fragile to take a cavalier attitude towards.

If that lesson is not adequately learned our population may well never reach the predictions economists make.  I guess the horrible truth of disease is that it weeds out higher population densities with frightening accuracy, and it does so without regards to wealth or power.  Thankfully, this started in Africa and not Europe, China, or the Americas.


----------



## de.das.dude (Sep 20, 2014)

Its pretty clear that the car cans are too dumb for their own good. Who are we to care about their welfare. They freed Ebola. Patients to steal some ruling mattresses...... Come on!!


----------



## newconroer (Sep 20, 2014)

lilhasselhoffer said:


> Education in Africa doesn't work.  For every child that can afford to be in schools there is at least one that cannot.  As long as superstition and hate are spread from one generation to the next there will be strife.  The people who "freed" the ebola victims hopefully aren't motivated by anything but good intentions (read: warlords smart enough to use a sort of biological cleansing solution), but they are criminally un-educated.



It may not work, and it's not our problem if it doesn't work - or rather it shouldn't be. 



lilhasselhoffer said:


> What is the solution then?  Quarantine, cleansing of exports, and minor fortification of resource extraction efforts.  Quarantines allow the disease to burn out, by preventing further infections.  It may require armed enforcement, but stopping transmission has to be priority one.  Cleansing exports is trickier.  The easiest way to do this is either fire or radiation.  My money is radiation.  A low level exposure to a weak radioactive source kills everything, then goods are stored at a safe location.  Just prior to shipping another quick bath is initiated.  Everything leaving the ports is cleared, and the setup should be cheap enough to install in every African port.  Without any real operational or maintenance costs, you've got sterile non-living exports.  Fortification of resource gatherers is a bit more painful.  Unfortunately, we cannot help everyone, so those we do help need protection.  I'm not saying we don't help those that ask for it, but by fortifying our locations we have areas that can render aide, without sending more people out to contract disease.  Hospitals are generally over-run because armed guards don't stand watch over them.  Doing so sends terrible messages about our confidence, but this kind of epidemic isn't something to take lightly.



You just described exactly why we SHOULD cut them off. Once again, the world taking care of Africa for no good reason.




lilhasselhoffer said:


> Ebola is frightening, but the scarier thing is that we are guilty of genocides just because there is a risk of the infection passing out into the rest of the world.  If nothing else, the bird flu scares should have tempered our resolve to contain and control a pathogen.  It should have taught us that humans, and more importantly our infrastructure, are too fragile to take a cavalier attitude towards.



Best to cut ties now and not have to face a moral position such as this ever again.


----------



## W1zzard (Sep 20, 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hcthj

Excellent documentary on Ebola, must-watch if you want to discuss the various issues. Should be available as Torrent from the usual suspects, too.


----------



## RCoon (Sep 20, 2014)

Somewhere Matthew Broderick just bought the game "Contagion" on steam. We can call his feature film "Diseasegames". It's ok, Madagascar is always impossible to infect, we can all just flee there.


----------



## Frick (Sep 20, 2014)

newconroer said:


> Best to cut ties now and not have to face a moral position such as this ever again.



That's not how the world works dude. There are resources in Africa. If they find the precious materials needed to make faster computers, they will be exploited. Or imagine if they find huge swats of oil somewhere. They will be exploited, there will be slavery.

Which is part of the problem. The rich nations live on the poor nations; I personally think it's a bit too late to say "we are not responsible". The world is just a net of dependancies, and many threads end in the lives of poor, uneducated people with corrupt leaders. And given how they say Africas population will double by 2050... They, and everyone else, is in for some serious shit.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 20, 2014)

Frick said:


> That's not how the world works dude. There are resources in Africa. If they find the precious materials needed to make faster computers, they will be exploited. Or imagine if they find huge swats of oil somewhere. They will be exploited, there will be slavery.
> 
> Which is part of the problem. The rich nations live on the poor nations; I personally think it's a bit too late to say "we are not responsible". The world is just a net of dependancies, and many threads end in the lives of poor, uneducated people with corrupt leaders. And given how they say Africas population will double by 2050... They, and everyone else, is in for some serious shit.


 
You said it very well!  There is no way for any nation to survive anymore by being isolationist.  Nor can the industrialized nations survive without the HUGE amount of natural resources (including, but not limited to Gold, copper, iron, diamonds and oil) that are traded for from the African Continent.  And isn't one of the countries there in possession of one of the few rare earth minerals deposits in the world?  Those are crucial for those of us who love computers, as well.


----------



## newconroer (Sep 20, 2014)

Frick said:


> That's not how the world works dude. There are resources in Africa. If they find the precious materials needed to make faster computers, they will be exploited. Or imagine if they find huge swats of oil somewhere. They will be exploited, there will be slavery.
> 
> Which is part of the problem. The rich nations live on the poor nations; I personally think it's a bit too late to say "we are not responsible". The world is just a net of dependancies, and many threads end in the lives of poor, uneducated people with corrupt leaders. And given how they say Africas population will double by 2050... They, and everyone else, is in for some serious shit.





rtwjunkie said:


> You said it very well!  There is no way for any nation to survive anymore by being isolationist.  Nor can the industrialized nations survive without the HUGE amount of natural resources (including, but not limited to Gold, copper, iron, diamonds and oil) that are traded for from the African Continent.  And isn't one of the countries there in possession of one of the few rare earth minerals deposits in the world?  Those are crucial for those of us who love computers, as well.



Good ol' forefathers saying something about entangling alliances .... how prophetic they were.


----------



## D007 (Sep 20, 2014)

We survived the plague because we adapted to it. not because the CDC saved us. 
They like to think they have power but they have very little power imho.

In the long run I think not letting humanity use natural selection could be our downfall.
Our bodies will never adapt if we don't let them.

Regardless I'm tired of lending a helping hand, to people who would just assume cut our heads off and leave our bodies in a ditch.


----------



## Frick (Sep 20, 2014)

D007 said:


> We survived the plague because we adapted to it. not because the CDC saved us.
> They like to think they have power but they have very little power imho.
> 
> In the long run I think not letting humanity use natural selection could be our downfall.
> ...



What if said people unknowingly supplied you with your luxury goods? Your economy depends upon it. Yes, you individually, because even americans are affected by economics no matter how many rifles they've got.

And anyway, we are not as adaptable as we once were. We don't work, we just provide services to each other. The moment we gained consciousness we stopped being flexible, everything since has been a long, slow rape on natural resources while waiting for the inevitable darkness. We just push our problems ahead of us and think of people as "them" because that is a lot easier than to imagine them as actual human beings.

Which again, is part of the problem. As humans we should care about other humans, but we are often powerless to do anything about their problems. And the problems are so numerous and so horrific it becomes a sort of overload, especially if we are burdened by personal problems (which we are). Which is what makes our everyday lives interesting - when we can make a difference, do we? It's all in the small details, even when it comes to morals. This is not a reason to not care btw.


----------



## ChiefJudge (Sep 20, 2014)

Signed up just to say what the hell is this? Nuke Africa? Are you retarded? You quarantine and treat. Not nuke. Africa is the most valuable continent on earth.
*Ebola is not deadly if properly treated* and has been contained before, and these keyboard warriors want to use nukes. What is this? A secret club for middle-aged guys like "TheMailMan78" to post questionable fantasies about killing Africans? This reminds me of the gun nuts who spend all day online utterly hoping for a zombie breakout.
The international community/US military/UN/African leaders (and so on) can completely lock normal outward flights and put very tight screening in place to leave the country, and keep sending help until the issue is treated. It's literally that simple. Even the Africans alone could eventually handle it (there's already a vaccine for Ebola that works on all animals). It would just take longer because we know how poor and badly trained a lot of Africa is outside the few very well-off places.

@rtwjunkie: You're delusional if you think I'm going to be posting on a forum with standard of discussion this low.

@lilhasselhoffer: It has a 51% fatality rate in Africa according to your own link. It's not deadly if treated properly. Sorry to burst your fantasy, but we're not going to let Ebola "run it's course". That's just going to let it evolve more and is a bad for humanity as whole. Jesus you people have absolutely no sense, and no background in medical care or virology. I do hope something run it's course on you though.

That's an internet discussion for you.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 20, 2014)

@ChiefJudge: Dude, it's the MM, easily the most controversial figure here because he speaks frankly. Once you're here for awhile you'll see he's a good guy, and very knowledgable on computer issues. It had it's effect by spawning a discussion on the topic, and on alot of levels, there are some very learned responses, commentary and interaction.

Oh, and welcome to TPU!


----------



## Vario (Sep 20, 2014)

ChiefJudge said:


> Signed up just to say what the hell is this? Nuke Africa? Are you retarded? You quarantine and treat. Not nuke. Africa is the most valuable continent on earth.
> *Ebola is not deadly if properly treated* and has been contained before, and these keyboard warriors want to use nukes. What is this? A secret club for middle-aged guys like "TheMailMan78" to post questionable fantasies about killing Africans? This reminds me of the gun nuts who spend all day online utterly hoping for a zombie breakout.
> The international community/US military/UN/African leaders (and so on) can completely lock normal outward flights and put very tight screening in place to leave the country, and keep sending help until the issue is treated. It's literally that simple. Even the Africans alone could eventually handle it (there's already a vaccine for Ebola that works on all animals). It would just take longer because we know how poor and badly trained a lot of Africa is outside the few very well-off places.


Thanks, finally someone is reasonable.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Sep 20, 2014)

newconroer said:


> It may not work, and it's not our problem if it doesn't work - or rather it shouldn't be.
> 
> You just described exactly why we SHOULD cut them off. Once again, the world taking care of Africa for no good reason.
> 
> Best to cut ties now and not have to face a moral position such as this ever again.



You obviously are detached from reality, so here's a lesson.  Most of the world's rarer resources (gallium, indium, etc...) are very prolific in Africa.  Assuming that you still want any technology to be manufactured, you've got to have trade with them. 

Let's assume we can cut ties.  The US has no way to contact Africa, and no import of goods.  Unfortunately, that's not a huge problem.  Most of our crap is produced in Asia, and people from those countries are obligated to trade with Africa for the goods.  Rather than one leap, ebola is two leaps away.  Given that the Chinese can't even abide by the lead free paint rules, what exactly makes you think their quarantine procedures are adequate?


Cutting ties is just a dumb idea.  We live on a shrinking planet, and in ten years cutting ties won't be feasible.  What we need is a solution now, and that's what I outlined.  A nuke solves one problem, and creates two more.  Cutting diplomatic ties is, for lack of a more appropriate word, retarded.  To think it is a real option is to demonstrate poorly developed mental faculties.  We need a plan that still allows for trade, but makes sure that contamination can be controlled.



Assuming you still have a hard-on for cutting ties, talk to some Cubans.  Our embargo with them is going strong after several decades, and all it is doing is hurting the people of Cuba.



ChiefJudge said:


> Signed up just to say what the hell is this? Nuke Africa? Are you retarded? You quarantine and treat. Not nuke. Africa is the most valuable continent on earth.
> *Ebola is not deadly if properly treated* and has been contained before, and these keyboard warriors want to use nukes. What is this? A secret club for middle-aged guys like "TheMailMan78" to post questionable fantasies about killing Africans? This reminds me of the gun nuts who spend all day online utterly hoping for a zombie breakout.
> The international community/US military/UN/African leaders (and so on) can completely lock normal outward flights and put very tight screening in place to leave the country, and keep sending help until the issue is treated. It's literally that simple. Even the Africans alone could eventually handle it (there's already a vaccine for Ebola that works on all animals). It would just take longer because we know how poor and badly trained a lot of Africa is outside the few very well-off places.



Where in Hades are you getting your facts from?  Ebola not being deadly is 100% BS.

Care to not believe me?  Check out the WHO's own page, and see the listing of deaths being anywhere from 25-100% of cases: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

What is also of note is that there is no cure or treatment currently recognized.  They just pump you full of fluids, so that the ones you lose can be replenished.  Basically, they're keeping you hydrated, and hoping your immune system fixes the problem.  That isn't "not deadly if properly treated," that's only deadly most of the time.

While I agree that a nuke is not the solution, what we are doing now is insufficient.  You seem to think we have a magic bullet vaccine and cure.  That could not be farther from the truth.  

I'll refer back to the Guinea worm comment.  It took decades to cure a non lethal issue, with strong push-back from native Africans.  How can you expect a pathogen that is lethal in days to somehow buck the trends and be easier to educate people about?  How can you expect people to go to Africa and render billions of dollars worth of aide, at great personal risk, rather than simply let this thing run its course?


It's heartless to say, but humanity has demonstrated that it learns fastest when its nose is bloodied.  The atom bomb ended WWII, the invasion of non-native species was addressed by the DNR after the invasion of said species, humanity stopped testing on humans whenever the horrors of the holocaust and other experiments were brought to light, and it will take another global epidemic before people realize that quarantine procedures are a necessary evil.  I say bring the Ebola on.  It has to be better than MRSA and anti-biotic resistant strains of dead diseases that we've managed to create ourselves.


----------



## remixedcat (Sep 20, 2014)

http://www.futurity.org/vip-vaccines-hiv-flu-malaria-768232/


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 21, 2014)

ChiefJudge said:


> Signed up just to say what the hell is this? Nuke Africa? Are you retarded? You quarantine and treat. Not nuke. Africa is the most valuable continent on earth.
> *Ebola is not deadly if properly treated* and has been contained before, and these keyboard warriors want to use nukes. What is this? A secret club for middle-aged guys like "TheMailMan78" to post questionable fantasies about killing Africans? This reminds me of the gun nuts who spend all day online utterly hoping for a zombie breakout.
> The international community/US military/UN/African leaders (and so on) can completely lock normal outward flights and put very tight screening in place to leave the country, and keep sending help until the issue is treated. It's literally that simple. Even the Africans alone could eventually handle it (there's already a vaccine for Ebola that works on all animals). It would just take longer because we know how poor and badly trained a lot of Africa is outside the few very well-off places.
> 
> ...


Middle aged people have been on this Earth long enough to know what they teach you in school isn't always the case and man in a large dose is stupid. However we are young enough to still learn and adapt. So yes I am PROUDLY middle aged. @ChiefJudge you are 21 years old according to your profile. You know where I was when you were still rolling around in your mama's tummy? I was poaching deer with my father to eat because marshal law had been declared in my home town and everything was destroyed. No power for 6 MONTHS and no drinkable water for almost the same amount of time. While you were nursing on your moms breast I was eating frog legs so have a little respect.

As for "fantasies about killing Africans" I have none. I have fantasies about Denise Milani. I've read about containment, I've read about treatment and I've read about all the magic of first world medicine. You know what? ITS ALL BS because it relies way to much on human error. IF the people in west Africa would seek treatment and not loot field hospitals I would be more than happy to have my tax money spent on saving their lives. HOWEVER that isn't the case and the games they are playing could throw us into another dark age. Now I know a lot of highly moral people and limo liberals think everyone just needs a hug but, I've been around long enough to quote Mike Tyson, "Everyone has a plan until someone punches them in the mouth". If we don't act soon and harsh we may lose a hundred years of advancement because we didn't do what needed to be done. Ebola will be a punch in the mouth to civilization.

Nukes people think are stupid. Yet recommend radiation for decontamination. They recommend good medical treatment is the key yet I contracted MRSA a few years ago FROM A HOSPITAL rated top 10 in the world. I have the scar tissue all over my leg to prove it. I've lived under marshal law IN THE UNITED STATES and seen first world citizens revert to tribes yet people think the US or Europe can contain an outbreak.

I'm sorry but unless I see a vaccine soon or they contain the infection and keep it from spreading I don't see another logical choice.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 21, 2014)

ChiefJudge said:


> @rtwjunkie: You're delusional if you think I'm going to be posting on a forum with standard of discussion this low.



Well, all i have to say is youve reached the most friendly and knowledgeable tech forum around (yes, Ive been on most of them, and most are filled with asshats). Here, people take the time to help each other and share their knowledge. And yes, sometimes talk about other big matters in the world.  And sometimes disagree, although mostly civilly...like a family.

What you may not know, is this community banded together to donate parts and money to build several crunching computers to help the research fight against cancer, in honor of one of our longtime members and moderators that died from cancer recently.  Or the many, many game giveaways that are sponsored by many member of this forum.

So, if you don't want to post here, because we are not highbrow enough for you, we certainly won't stop you from leaving (and don't let the door hit you on the way out).  But if you want to stay, and share your opinions and share your knowledge on techy subjects without insulting an entire forum, and learn a few things too, you won't find a friendlier or more welcoming crowd, and we'd love to have you.

And had you lurked a little more, you might have known from prior observation that Mailman is not entirely serious.  He's making a point though...we do need to fix this.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Sep 21, 2014)

ChiefJudge said:


> @lilhasselhoffer: It has a 51% fatality rate in Africa according to your own link. It's not deadly if treated properly. Sorry to burst your fantasy, but we're not going to let Ebola "run it's course". That's just going to let it evolve more and is a bad for humanity as whole. Jesus you people have absolutely no sense, and no background in medical care or virology. I do hope something run it's course on you though.
> 
> That's an internet discussion for you.



You are either a troll, idiot, idealist, or a combination of the three.

By the same token, the bubonic plague could have been treated.  Somehow the history books record a completely different story, prior to the implementation of vaccines.  We have no vaccine for ebola, so defend your point.  History records diseases like this being plagues, and the only distance between us and the middle ages is a very fragile infrastructure, never really designed for true epidemics.

To the threat, I'd suggest you read the rules of this forum.  Civil discourse is accepted, but an open and hollow threat paints you as a child without anything to add to the discussion.  That sort of crap gets you banned, and your rather caustic responses paint a good reason to report you to moderators.  If you are so offended, please leave the discussion. 

Finally, before you propose something run the numbers.  The article cites 51%, but the total infections is 2387, with the deaths adding up to 1590.  That's 66% of all confirmed cases leading to death.  Perhaps critical thinking is something you lack, because a 2/3 chance of death is pretty much death.  



As far as insulting TheMailMan78, get out.  Seriously, leave now if you can't take what is being said.  He's a lot like Lewis Black.  What he says is blunt, often times offensive, but is generally well intentioned and attempting to convey a point.  You seem incapable of interacting in a discussion, so don't start.  

Five years ago I was fresh out of college, and knew everything.  My heart didn't bleed, but I knew how things should work.  After two years in the real world, you discover college is an elaborate prank, and the people who got the joke are the ones who spent the weekends drunk and enjoying their last bits of freedom.  Unless you are getting a doctorate, or going into research, reality has to sink in.  Life is not found in a text book, and college does little more than get you to read the text and build debt. 



TheMailMan78 said:


> Nukes people think are stupid. Yet recommend radiation for decontamination. They recommend good medical treatment is the key yet I contracted MRSA a few years ago FROM A HOSPITAL rated top 10 in the world. I have the scar tissue all over my leg to prove it. I've lived under marshal law IN THE UNITED STATES and seen first world citizens revert to tribes yet people think the US or Europe can contain an outbreak.
> 
> I'm sorry but unless I see a vaccine soon or they contain the infection and keep it from spreading I don't see another logical choice.



Yeah, not sure exactly how to respond to this.

A nuke is high grade enriched material, designed to undergo atomic decay whenever detonated.  Large cost, large complexity, and big boom.  The radioactive sources I proposed are weakly decaying, similar intensity to the beach sands commonly found in Brazil.  Exposure breaks down simple organisms quickly, and there's no extra cost.  The alternative is heat, which costs money and has the tendency to damage things.  Not sure how you are equating a bomb with a bath in low level radiation, so please give me a hint here.

As far as the medical system, that's a function of stupidity, as much as anything else.  We proscribe a ton of anti-biotics, and people don't take the appropriate doses (I'm feeling better, so I don't have to take it).  Remaining organisms develop a tolerance, and people track these back to hospitals.  MRSA is entirely the fault of human hubris, and a medical system leaning far too heavily on one tool.


As far as the Marshall Law, I'm 100% behind you.  It takes surprisingly little for people to become violent and brutal animals.  Every tornado, hurricane, and natural disaster proves that out.  

Honestly though, the world can't afford for African exports to drop.  Even a tactical nuclear device would contaminate a large swath of land, so we may well be stopping Ebola at the price of dramatically higher cancer in those that survive.  This is why a nuke solves one problem, but introduces the far more difficult problem of dealing with its repercussions.


Assuming that you were looking for a real scorched earth solution, a fuel-air explosive could theoretically be used.  No radiation, just searing heat that vaporizes organic matter.  Still have to deal with question of ending lives, but at least the resources aren't contaminated.  Good lord it feel dirty to say that, I think I have to go pet some puppies to balance out the evil of that thought.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 21, 2014)

lilhasselhoffer said:


> You are either a troll, idiot, idealist, or a combination of the three.
> 
> By the same token, the bubonic plague could have been treated.  Somehow the history books record a completely different story, prior to the implementation of vaccines.  We have no vaccine for ebola, so defend your point.  History records diseases like this being plagues, and the only distance between us and the middle ages is a very fragile infrastructure, never really designed for true epidemics.
> 
> ...


I honestly mentioned fire bombing already. Just thought nuke would be a quicker death.


----------



## Tatty_One (Sep 21, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I honestly mentioned fire bombing already. Just thought nuke would be a quicker death.


A quicker death if one explodes within a mile or two of you, if you are 5, 10 or even 50 miles away you may just last for 10 or 20 years with pain, suffering and decreasing functions, not a nice way to go, fact is 70% of those that die take a long time to do it, it's indiscriminate........ in any case, we don't have them to use them, just to scare others off from using them


----------



## Peter1986C (Sep 21, 2014)

This thread is sinking even below the GN level (then again, GN de facto increased its standards recently). Just saying, on GN I would have considered locking the thread by now, given the outright ridiculous comments here.


----------



## erocker (Sep 21, 2014)

Chevalr1c said:


> This thread is sinking even below the GN level (then again, GN de facto increased its standards recently). Just saying, on GN I would have considered locking the thread by now, given the outright ridiculous comments here.


Yeah I don't think that the discussion of dropping bombs on Africans is in the spirit of the kinds of science that this forum section was created for.


----------

