borisp wrote:

Yep. So, the bottom line, Bush proposed a huge increase in funding, Dick Cheney led the implementation, Obama proposed a modest cut.

drifterx wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
For those that think medicine is science - let me debunk that for you. Some of it is. But most everything in the med field is hit or miss. Doctors will experiment on you to get the right cocktail to manage your symptoms.

Medical practice is simply like hitting the side of your tv to get a better signal - there isn't always true cause and effect science - doctors typically roll the dice on any given treatment and hope for improvement. Doctors play the odds every day with our health.

They're doing the same with Ebola. I'm just extremely skeptical that they know what they're doing - and they understand the odds in the game they are playing.

Here's a newsflash for you, experimentation is part of science! Didn't you learn that in high school? Nobody has a foolproof manual for everything in life which is why we experiment to find these out as part of the scientific method.

Of course, you could always go back to using leeches because the church said so.

Also, human experimentation has ethical and legal boundaries. If you are aware of 'shenanigans' then you should report them to the authorities. If you have a better way of researching ebola then by all means report it to the NIH. One thing is for sure, hampering otherwise healthy doctors and scientists with travel bans and quarantines won't help anyone but your paranoia.

drifterx wrote:
I can't speak for the military but if you expect otherwise healthy civilians to comply to a 21 mandatory quarantine against their will then you can expect plenty of expensive lawsuits to hit NJ. That pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way of draconian policies.

I'm sure both these governors will do a bit more backtracking in the coming days, if they haven't already.

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:
Bull. Total bull.
And you know it, - otherwise you'd provided numbers instead of "tend to correspond".

I really just didn't think you were capable of reading. I still don't think you are, but take a look.

NIH Funding 1994 to 2014
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43341.pdf

Control of Congress 1855 to 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_S ... s_and_control_of_Congress

The biggest decreases are the last 4 years of Republican control of the House.

There is a big increase in the early 2000s -- when Democrats controlled the Senate.

The biggest gains Republicans are responsible for are in the late 1990s. Doesn't everybody long for 1990s Republicans?

dtjcview wrote:
For those that think medicine is science - let me debunk that for you. Some of it is. But most everything in the med field is hit or miss. Doctors will experiment on you to get the right cocktail to manage your symptoms.

Medical practice is simply like hitting the side of your tv to get a better signal - there isn't always true cause and effect science - doctors typically roll the dice on any given treatment and hope for improvement. Doctors play the odds every day with our health.

They're doing the same with Ebola. I'm just extremely skeptical that they know what they're doing - and they understand the odds in the game they are playing.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
...

No fever.. what about other symptoms?

Isn't that enough to call shenanigans on the CDC?

hero69 wrote:
why don't they toughen laws against dui such as automatic license revocation and time behind bars and onerous penalties....

borisp wrote:
Bull. CDC was created to prevent spreading of the communicable diseases. Nobody ever limited them to "active response". And, if they are "emergency room", how come they can't figure out what the procedures are?

borisp wrote:
Bull. Total bull.
And you know it, - otherwise you'd provided numbers instead of "tend to correspond".

ianmac47 wrote:
The Center for Disease Control and the National Institute of Health are two different federal programs. One is for active response to crisis (CDC) while the other is responsible for research into cures and preventative care (NIH). Metaphorically, its the difference between the emergency room and medical research.

ianmac47 wrote:
NIH funding hasn't been consistently cut, although adjusted for inflation, there are many years where its receiving funding increases below inflation. More importantly, big cuts tend to correspond with Republican control of Congress. And I'm sure I don't have to remind that its Congress, according to the Constitution, that originates all spending bills.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
...

No fever.. what about other symptoms?

Monroe wrote:
Funding for the CDC had TRIPLED from 2001 to 2010. Any issues with spending from the CDC have come from wasting money on stupid programs, of which they have many.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
@Brewster - the most likely explanation is that the CDC simply don't know. Given the size of the outbreak, and the fact that a large percentage of doctors have managed to contract it - several of the 30 or so US doctors - it's likely more contagious than previous strains/outbreaks. But they're sticking to their quack science script - at least to the press and public.

Point taken, but have we seen any evidence that shows one is contagious even if they are asymptomatic?

I'd argue it has to be the other way around - assume exposed folks are sick until proven healthy. And yes we have seen evidence that up to 12.5% that are sick show no fever:

Source: http://m.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/10/21-days/381901/#

Hatfill: Well, 12.5 percent of patients don't run a fever. In that New England Journal of Medicine study, where they just looked at several thousand of these cases in West Africa, the lead author of the paper is adamant. He says, I sat there, I monitored this patient's temperature myself until they died and they never ran a fever. Well, generating a fever is a fairly complex mechanism in your body. Neutrophils and cytokines are involved. One of the things a virus does is it inhibits neutrophil activation. Ebola's outer glycoprotein can secrete a truncated version of it. You've seen the planes come over and shoot out the flares so the missile can't get them. That's what Ebola's doing. It's shooting out these little truncated bits of glycoprotein as flares. It's masking itself. Indirectly, its inhibiting neutrophil activation, and what they release tell us to run a fever.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
@Brewster - the most likely explanation is that the CDC simply don't know. Given the size of the outbreak, and the fact that a large percentage of doctors have managed to contract it - several of the 30 or so US doctors - it's likely more contagious than previous strains/outbreaks. But they're sticking to their quack science script - at least to the press and public.

Point taken, but have we seen any evidence that shows one is contagious even if they are asymptomatic?

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
I'm glad the NJ nurse was allowed to fulfill her quarantine at home.

Yes so am I, back in Maine and not NJ.

WhoElseCouldIBe wrote:
I'm glad the NJ nurse was allowed to fulfill her quarantine at home.

dtjcview wrote:
@Brewster - the most likely explanation is that the CDC simply don't know. Given the size of the outbreak, and the fact that a large percentage of doctors have managed to contract it - several of the 30 or so US doctors - it's likely more contagious than previous strains/outbreaks. But they're sticking to their quack science script - at least to the press and public.

Monroe wrote:
In other words 'I've got nothing' is what you're saying re:CDC funding, lol.
...

hero69 wrote:
isn't the GOP mantra "Cut, cut, cut" and "war, war, war!"

hero69 wrote:
there might have already been a cure for ebola, if the cdc was not forced to cut research due to cuts forced by the GOP.