# The Ebola Thread



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)




----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Looks like FOX News viewers may be better informed than those who follow "progressive" media on such matters:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


>


What the hell are you trying to say CM???

I am at a loss.

It seems to me you are trying to somehow politicize something that should not be political at all.

If others are doing it and you don't like it then why further it by doing the very same thing?

Every once in a while it would be nice to hear your own thoughts and views and not just simply let others do the talking for you... It grows tiresome and frustrating.

You are an educated man, surely you must have some original things to say.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Why think when you can post a meme?


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Yeah, maybe this could have gone in the humour thread. It's more of an attempt to be funny than inform, or initiate discussion.

Anyways, the fact that Obama cancelled an appearance at a fundraiser should indicate to everyone the seriousness of the outbreak.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

chasMac said:


> Yeah, maybe this could have gone in the humour thread. It's more of an attempt to be funny than inform, or initiate discussion.
> 
> *Anyways, the fact that Obama cancelled an appearance at a fundraiser should indicate to everyone the seriousness of the outbreak.*


See that doesn't help. 

That statement is exactly the same as what CM posted, just the flip side of the coin.

This situation is far too important to make light of.

I am surprised that a learned man like CM would initiate a thread on Ebola with such a post.

But don't let his momentary lapse of reason detract from the real and present threat that is among us now.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Umm, but it's true. Obama correctly deemed the Ebola crisis to take precedence over a fundraiser. Kudos to his acute judgement.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Ok thanks for the follow up. I see your point now...


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

This shouldn't be a left-right issue, as some here would make it. But leaders should be held accountable. With regard to Ebola, little has been done to inspire confidence. I can't for the life of me figure out why flights to heavily affected regions have not been temporarily suspended. I cheerfully concede that such a measure would not hinder its spread in NA completely; but surely it would make it more difficult. That is all we can do in the case of epidemics.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

I remember when Toronto had SARS they killed our economy 
Banned travel etc. 
why aren't they doing to the same to those countries in Africa? Seems 
Incredibly pro judgement to allow continued travel to and from that region.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

macintosh doctor said:


> I remember when Toronto had SARS they killed our economy
> Banned travel etc.
> why aren't they doing to the same to those countries in Africa? Seems
> Incredibly pro judgement to allow continued travel to and from that region.


Because the US is putting the security of Liberia, etc. before the safety of its own citizens:

CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden:



> Casting too wide a net, such as invoking travel bans, would only provide an illusion of security and would lead to prejudice and stigma around those in West Africa.





> There’s a real risk to the stability and security of societies, as governments are increasingly challenged to not only control Ebola but to provide basic health services and other government functions. The stability of these countries and their economies, as well as those of their neighbors and of others, is at increasing risk.


CDC - Blogs - Our Global Voices – Ebola

By all means, assist these countries AND invoke a travel ban.

Here is another similar comment from American Ebola expert, David Quamman: 



> "You can't isolate neighborhoods; you can't isolate nations. It doesn't work. And people talk about, "Well, we shouldn't allow any flights from Liberia." I mean, we in America, how dare we turn our backs on Liberia? Given the fact that this is a country that was founded in the 1820s, 1830s because of American slavery, we have a responsibility to stay connected with them and help them see this through."


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

They are operating based on guilt. LOL - they will kill us because of stupidity. 
They can have their guilt served better by sending medical care and military but still ban all travel. 
I guess when they destoryed our economy during sars they weren't feeling any guilt then.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

screature said:


> What the hell are you trying to say CM???
> 
> I am at a loss.
> 
> It seems to me you are trying to somehow politicize something that should not be political at all.


Jeez, I didn't know that making fun of Fox "News" was somehow politicizing something. When did Fox become a political party? Or did the Republicans finally just accept the obvious and change their name?

The meme comes from Jon Stewart's examination of the media's blowing the Ebola issue out of perspective, criticizing the rampant fear that has taken over the airwaves in the USA.

But anyway. Now I know. Make fun of Fox, and you're making a political statement...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Poor, poor misunderstood victim. You've played that card so many times, the bicycle has worn off the back.



CubaMark said:


> Jeez, I didn't know that making fun of Fox "News" was somehow politicizing something. When did Fox become a political party? Or did the Republicans finally just accept the obvious and change their name?
> 
> The meme comes from Jon Stewart's examination of the media's blowing the Ebola issue out of perspective, criticizing the rampant fear that has taken over the airwaves in the USA.
> 
> But anyway. Now I know. Make fun of Fox, and you're making a political statement...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

If it makes any difference CM, I laughed out loud and clearly understood your intent, without comment necessary.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

SINC said:


> If it makes any difference CM, I laughed out loud and clearly understood your intent, without comment necessary.


Why would you find it funny, SINC, when Ebola has actually been known to be transmitted through air? Is it funny, simply because it uses the word FOX?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Its funny because it ridicules FOX and is the truth about that particular network.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Yes, but FOX is right about airborne Ebola. Stewart is wrong.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Never fear. BO has appointed an Ebola Czar. The guy has zero medical knowledge but is a master at manipulating the media message, ergo no harm can possibly come to those who worship at the lame stream alter.

Put into perspective:
Auto accidents killed about 34,000 Americans last year, no auto accident czar.
Medical and pharmaceutical screw-ups killed over 100,000 last year, no czar
Ordinary flu about 40,000, again no czar.

Ebola less than half a dozen stateside and it gets a czar. Kind of makes me wonder if this is a weaponized strain intended to wipeout a sizeable chunk of the population?????? <insert sarcasm emoticon here> Why else would there be such a flaming need to appoint a master media manipulator? <insert 2 sarcasm emoticons here>


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> Never fear. BO has appointed an Ebola Czar.


It is a substitute for closing the borders.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> Jeez, I didn't know that making fun of Fox "News" was somehow politicizing something. When did Fox become a political party? Or did the Republicans finally just accept the obvious and change their name?
> 
> The meme comes from Jon Stewart's examination of the media's blowing the Ebola issue out of perspective, criticizing the rampant fear that has taken over the airwaves in the USA.
> 
> But anyway. Now I know. Make fun of Fox, and you're making a political statement...


I simply don't understand why you chose to make that post as your first post to start a thread on Ebola. This is not a laughing matter and that John Stewart chose to make it so shows his lack of sensitivity on the matter... Strikes me as something Bill Maher (I can't stand that guy) would be more likely to do.

It was clearly meant to be political IMO. Fox News is a very politically motivated and partisan. You know that, so by posting what you did as the first post of an Ebola thread I cannot see how you were only making fun of Fox News.

How about instead you posted a link to Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) where one can make a donation to help the "front line troops" who are fighting Ebola.

That would have been more appropriate and helpful IMO.

Here is the link for anyone who is interested:

https://msf.donorportal.ca/MSFEN/Donation/DonationDetails.aspx?L=en-CA&G=21&F=545&T=GENER

I have been paying a quarterly donation to MSF for years now, they do great work and are highly respected for those who may not know.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

I returned yesterday from a business trip in the States. At Canadian Customs, I was asked a new question on the heels of my answering where I had been traveling (Missouri and Texas): "Have you come in contact with anyone who had Ebola or signs of Ebola?" 

Despite immediately recognizing that the question was inane, I knew not to challenge it if I wanted to get through security anytime this year.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Why would you find it funny, SINC, *when Ebola has actually been known to be transmitted through air?* Is it funny, simply because it uses the word FOX?


At this point the evidence is only anecdotal. People who contracted Ebiola who said they didn't have any contact with an Ebola infected person.

But they can't possibly know that for sure. Shaking hands with or even brushing up against a sweaty Ebola infected person is all that it takes for transmission of the virus.

Had the document that you refer to been peer reviewed?


It certainly seems to me that it goes against all other existing documentation as to how Ebola is transmitted.

It may be correct, but thus far the science is in the majority that Ebola is not air born yet.

But that is the great fear that virus may mutate to become air born and that is when the **** is really going to hit the fan.

Perhaps the document that you refer to has documented the first cases of air born transmission, potentially meaning that the virus has begun to mutate. But I remain skeptical until there is much more definitive evidence as there was no scientific evidence indicated in your post... just anecdotal.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

KC4 said:


> I returned yesterday from a business trip in the States. At Canadian Customs, I was asked a new question on the heels of my answering where I had been traveling (Missouri and Texas): "Have you come in contact with anyone who had Ebola or signs of Ebola?"
> 
> Despite immediately recognizing that the question was inane, I knew not to challenge it if I wanted to get through security anytime this year.


I had a heart attack scare at work two weeks ago and the first thing that the first responders asked was, "Have you recently flown outside of the country".

So this situation is being taken very seriously as it should be, so even though you may have felt the question was inane it was just proper due diligence at this point in time. Although I do have to say the question you were asked was not worded very well and on that front I can see why you thought it was inane.

But that being said how hard is it to answer a one sentence question with a simple yes or no response, relative to what it could potentially mean if you did not answer or didn't tell the truth when answering the question?


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

screature said:


> I mean how hard is it to answer a one sentence question with a simple yes or no response, relative to what it could potentially mean if you did not answer or didn't tell the truth when answering the question?


Exactly, Screature, it wasn't hard to answer at all, nor tell what I would need to answer without hesitation in order to avoid delay. 

My point was simply that the questioning is ineffectual. How am I really supposed to unequivocally know whether I have come in contact with the Ebola virus, unless it has been made apparent to me, at which time I should not, in good conscience, be traveling.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

KC4 said:


> Exactly, Screature, it wasn't hard to answer at all, nor tell what I would need to answer without hesitation in order to avoid delay.
> *
> My point was simply that the questioning is ineffectual. How am I really supposed to unequivocally know whether I have come in contact with the Ebola virus, unless it has been made apparent to me, at which time I should not, in good conscience, be traveling.*


Yes I know, see my edited post.

I agree that the question you were asked was not very helpful or effectual in terms of potential positive results...

But on the other hand it could be. There are plenty of cognitively/morally/ethically challenged people out there.

Compliance

I couldn't even finish watching it, it was too upsetting, but apparently it really happened.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> Had the document that you refer to been peer reviewed?


_The Medical Management of Biological Casualties Handbook_ of the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases? Yeah--it's in its seventh edition.

Also note Canadian studies:

BBC News - Growing concerns over 'in the air' transmission of Ebola

So while we cannot say for certain that airborne transmission has occurred in humans, there is an indication that it has--therefore we cannot say for certain that airborne transmission has not occurred in humans


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> Never fear. BO has appointed an Ebola Czar. The guy has zero medical knowledge but is a master at manipulating the media message, ergo no harm can possibly come to those who worship at the lame stream alter.
> 
> Put into perspective:
> Auto accidents killed about 34,000 Americans last year, no auto accident czar.
> ...



The point about Ebola is not the hard numbers but the exponential rate at which it can grow in a population if not contained.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> _The Medical Management of Biological Casualties Handbook_ of the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases? Yeah--it's in its seventh edition.
> 
> Also note Canadian studies:
> 
> ...


But it is only anecdotal evidence at this time. Clearly much more study needs to be done and one should and not accept as fact one study or another.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> The point about Ebola is *not the hard numbers b*ut the exponential rate at which it *can* grow in a population if not contained.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I disagree. It is about the hard numbers.

There needs to be a balance struck between what could happen and what is actually happening.

Cooler heads should prevail IMO.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> I disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First there were no North American cases, like a few short weeks ago. Now there are North American cases, both in th US and Canada. Every one who came into contact with the infected person could be a carrier and not even know it. This is not like malware or an irritating flu virus. This is much deadlier. Better to be prepared than not and find out FOR SURE how far the infection has spread. The water is not safe to drink even after you remove the zombie from the well, so to speak. You would not be so calm if this was happening on your street, but as long as it seems far away, we think we can be nonchalant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> First there were no North American cases, like a few short weeks ago. Now there are North American cases, both in th US *and Canada*. Every one who came into contact with the infected person could be a carrier and not even know it. This is not like malware or an irritating flu virus. This is much deadlier. Better to be prepared than not and find out FOR SURE how far the infection has spread. *The water is not safe to drink even after you remove the zombie from the well, so to speak. You would not be so calm if this was happening on your street, but as long as it seems far away, we think we can be nonchalant.*
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No cases in Canada. Get your facts straight.

There needs to be a balance both in reporting/commentary and action.

My god man get a grip.

Have you read my posts? Apparently not.

All I am saying is there is no need for panic at this point in time, if ever... When is panic ever a good thing?. 

Panicking is the worst thing we could do. Take a look at at what I have posted previously before going off on some rampage.

Your statements are very out of place.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> But it is only anecdotal evidence at this time. Clearly much more study needs to be done and one should and not accept as fact one study or another.


Right. So in the face of evidence--not mere hearsay--that Ebola can be spread by airborne means, I will not accept the CDC's assurances that it can not possibly be spread through aerosols.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Right. So in the face of evidence--not mere hearsay--that Ebola can be spread by airborne means, I will not accept the CDC's assurances that it can not possibly be spread through aerosols.


No not right hearsay is not admissible evidence.I t is mere hearsay, the document that you referred to said as much.

There was no documented science behind it.

If Ebola was an air born virus (I don't know why you keep using the term aerosols, what deodorant or perfume? Just speak plainly) it would be far more wide spread than it is now.

Do you really think it is air born at this point??

There really is no evidence of it thus far except for the anecdotal evidence that you present that has not been proven.

The virus may very well mutate to become air born but *the vast majority of indications *are that we aren't there yet.

Why spread FUD about such a serious issue?

You don't know for sure all you have is the information that you are going on like the rest of us but somehow you seem to think that the information that you have is superior to the information that everyone else has. 

Why is that exactly?


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Uh huh. It started with a handful of cases in Africa too, and now there more than 1500 dead and 3000 ill. I'm not sure when you figure is a good time to start getting concerned, Screature. No official deaths in Canada yet, fine. Just wait a few more days. 

The African count so far:
"More than 1,500 people have died, while more than 3,000 have contracted the disease during this year’s epidemic, according to the World Health Organization."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> Uh huh. It started with a handful of cases in Africa too, and now there more than 1500 dead and 3000 ill. I'm not sure when you figure is a good time to start getting concerned, Screature. No official deaths in Canada yet, fine. Just wait a few more days.
> 
> The African count so far:
> "More than 1,500 people have died, while more than 3,000 have contracted the disease during this year’s epidemic, according to the World Health Organization."
> ...


You clearly have no idea what I am saying and just want to oppose me for the sake of it.

Take a deep breath and actually READ what I have said thus far.

You are so far off the point as to what I am saying it is truly astounding.

You couldn't be more wrong.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> No not right hearsay is not admissible evidence.I t is mere hearsay, the document that you referred to said as much.
> 
> There was no documented science behind it.


In fact, this medical resource says several cases were _documented_.



screature said:


> If Ebola was an air born virus (I don't know why you keep using the term aerosols, what deodorant or perfume? Just speak plainly) it would be far more wide spread than it is now.


Aerosols--meaning airborne on droplets of infected fluid--not merely a virus floating freely in the air. It *is* widespread! How much MORE widespread would you expect it to be?



screature said:


> Do you really think it is air born at this point??
> 
> There really is no evidence of it thus far except for the anecdotal evidence that you present that has not been proven.


I don't know if it's airborne, but documented cases give me no sense of solace that it is NOT airborne.



screature said:


> The virus may very well mutate to become air born but *the vast majority of indications *are that we aren't there yet.


I'm not sure it needs to mutate. However, whether or not the virus mutates into something wildly different is not a real fear of mine. It's bad enough as it is.



screature said:


> You don't know for sure all you have is the information that you are going on like the rest of us but somehow you seem to think that the information that you have is superior to the information that everyone else has.
> 
> Why is that exactly?


It is not "information that I have." It is readily available to anyone who wants to do some independent research on the matter, instead of listening exclusively to government talking heads who seem to be doing a rather lousy job so far.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

For those who may have missed it here is a link to support people on the front line against Ebola who could really use your help.

https://msf.donorportal.ca/MSFEN/Don...&F=545&T=GENER


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> In fact, this medical resource says several cases were _documented_.
> 
> Aerosols--meaning airborne on droplets of infected fluid--not merely a virus floating freely in the air. It *is* widespread! How much MORE widespread would you expect it to be?
> 
> ...


We shall have to just agree to disagree.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

For the record, I believe Toronto did a dreadful job of controlling the SARS outbreak as well. No slags against health care workers who were told to enact outdated protocols. The city was lucky that the outbreak subsided on its own.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> You clearly have no idea what I am saying and just want to oppose me for the sake of it.
> 
> Take a deep breath and actually READ what I have said thus far.
> 
> ...


Take a chill pill, my friend. You're no fun to talk to when you get like this.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> Take a chill pill, my friend. You're no fun to talk to when you get like this.


When I get like what?

When someone makes a series of posts that are clearly based on a presupposition and not what was actually said, I am going to get a few raised hairs.

You my friend are the one who needs to take a "chill pill".


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

_If it pleases the multitude, here you have a non-partisan, apolitical, non-confrontational link to a website that delves deeply into all things Ebola. Please remain calm._

*"Ebola Deeply" Is The Only Place You Should Be Getting Ebola News*

BEFORE PREPPING OR PANICKING, CLICK OVER TO THE EBOLA DEEPLY, AN AUTHORITATIVE RESOURCE FROM THE JOURNALISTS WHO BROUGHT YOU SYRIA DEEPLY.

Lara Setrakian hopes her newest website, Ebola Deeply, shuts down in six months. While that might seem like a strange goal for any other new venture, it's pure optimism for Ebola Deeply, the latest project from the team behind the single-topic news site Syria Deeply.

Hopefully, by then, the Ebola crisis will have passed and the world will no longer need Setrakian's digital hub for information surrounding the disease. Now, however, as Ebola has spread to the U.S. and continues to infect people in Africa and elsewhere the media coverage has swung from inadequate to incoherent. "Ebola is hyped, but then also misunderstood," says Setrakian, the founder of the Deeply news sites, and a former reporter for ABC News and Bloomberg. 

(FastCompany)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Well, that's settled then.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Cuba’s Impressive Role on Ebola*
*By THE EDITORIAL BOARD OCT. 19, 2014*



Cuba is an impoverished island that remains largely cut off from the world and lies about 4,500 miles from the West African nations where Ebola is spreading at an alarming rate. Yet, having pledged to deploy hundreds of medical professionals to the front lines of the pandemic, Cuba stands to play the most robust role among the nations seeking to contain the virus.

Cuba’s contribution is doubtlessly meant at least in part to bolster its beleaguered international standing. Nonetheless, it should be lauded and emulated.

The global panic over Ebola has not brought forth an adequate response from the nations with the most to offer. While the United States and several other wealthy countries have been happy to pledge funds, only Cuba and a few nongovernmental organizations are offering what is most needed: medical professionals in the field.

* * * *​
The Cuban health care workers will be among the most exposed foreigners, and some could very well contract the virus.

* * * *​
Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday praised “the courage of any health care worker who is undertaking this challenge,” and made a brief acknowledgment of Cuba’s response.

* * * *​
The Cuban health sector is aware of the risks of taking on dangerous missions. Cuban doctors assumed the lead role in treating cholera patients in the aftermath of Haiti’s earthquake in 2010. Some returned home sick, and then the island had its first outbreak of cholera in a century. An outbreak of Ebola on the island could pose a far more dangerous risk and increase the odds of a rapid spread in the Western Hemisphere.

* * * *​
Cuba has a long tradition of dispatching doctors and nurses to disaster areas abroad. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the Cuban government created a quick-reaction medical corps and offered to send doctors to New Orleans. The United States, unsurprisingly, didn’t take Havana up on that offer. Yet officials in Washington seemed thrilled to learn in recent weeks that Cuba had activated the medical teams for missions in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea.

With technical support from the World Health Organization, the Cuban government trained 460 doctors and nurses on the stringent precautions that must be taken to treat people with the highly contagious virus. 

* * * *​
In a column published over the weekend in Cuba’s state-run newspaper, Granma, Fidel Castro argued that the United States and Cuba must put aside their differences, if only temporarily, to combat a deadly scourge. He’s absolutely right.

(NYTimes)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I hope they are volunteers.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> I hope they are volunteers.


...and there's the cynic, offering his great wisdom founded on decades of anti-communist brainwashing... 

(Yes, they are volunteers)


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I've checked up on it and it looks like they're volunteering, but not allowed to return to Cuba if they catch Ebola:

El régimen de los hermanos Castro no repatriará a los médicos que contraigan ébola | Cuba, África, Cuba, Ébola, La Habana, Organización Mundial de la Salud, Sierra Leona - América

Doesn't Cuba understand that travel bans won't work?



CubaMark said:


> ...and there's the cynic, offering his great wisdom founded on decades of anti-communist brainwashing...
> 
> (Yes, they are volunteers)


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> *Cuba’s Impressive Role on Ebola*
> *By THE EDITORIAL BOARD OCT. 19, 2014*
> 
> 
> ...


Well for an attempt at making a non-political response I don't think you quite achieved your stated intent.

Linking to MSF where one can make a personal donation is still the best non-political that one could refer to to IMO... As I have posted twice now.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

screature said:


> Well for an attempt at making a non-political response I don't think you quite achieved your stated intent. Linking to MSF where one can make a personal donation is still the best non-political that one could refer to to IMO... As I have posted twice now.


(a) Why are you folks so insistent in your apparent belief that you have a right to tell me what I can or cannot post? It's fascinatingly odd....

(b) You posted a link to MSF - thanks, it was a missing element in this thread. 

(c) There's nothing wrong with getting political - but my initial post wasn't intended to be so; it was intended as a criticism of the media (FOX in particular, 'cause they're so darn good at it) for their over-hyped, fear-crazed "reporting".

(d) Any chance that comes up to show the world that Cuba ain't what most of you think it is, I'll take advantage of that, sure!


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> I've checked up on it and it looks like they're volunteering, but not allowed to return to Cuba if they catch Ebola:
> 
> El régimen de los hermanos Castro no repatriará a los médicos que contraigan ébola | Cuba, África, Cuba, Ébola, La Habana, Organización Mundial de la Salud, Sierra Leona - América
> 
> Doesn't Cuba understand that travel bans won't work?


Nice try at setting bait.

FYI, from the New York Times editorial cited & linked above:

_As a matter of good sense and compassion, the American military, which now has about 550 troops in West Africa, should commit to giving any sick Cuban access to the treatment center the Pentagon built in Monrovia and to assisting with evacuation.

The work of these Cuban medics benefits the entire global effort and should be recognized for that. But Obama administration officials have callously declined to say what, if any, support they would give them._​


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Personally, I don;t care what anyone posts in particular--as long as they're up front about their overweening partisanship.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> *(a) Why are you folks so insistent in your apparent belief that you have a right to tell me what I can or cannot post? It's fascinatingly odd....*
> 
> *(b) You posted a link to MSF - thanks, it was a missing element in this thread. *
> 
> ...


*
*
I don't know about others, I only post what I feel to be true to my own sensibilities and sense of logic.

I thought your initial post on such a serious issue was politically motivated and not at all on topic relative to anything productive and so I said so...

If others here agree with me or don't I really don't care that much... I think my record shows that.

Thank you.

Well that is your own political cross to bear.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

I don't see eye to eye on very much that Mark posts, but he's bang on with his assessment of Cuba's humanitarian efforts, especially medical. They punch way above their weight, and put most other nations (including us) to shame with the level of help they give relative to their available resources. If the Cuban international medical aid teams were collecting donations, I'd be far more inclined to give to them than I would MSF or the Red Cross.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

heavyall said:


> I don't see eye to eye on very much that Mark posts, but he's bang on with his assessment of Cuba's humanitarian efforts, especially medical. They punch way above their weight, and put most other nations (including us) to shame with the level of help they give relative to their available resources. If the Cuban international medical aid teams were collecting donations, I'd be far more inclined to give to them than I would MSF or the Red Cross.


I second that entire post!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

You can send out a lot of doctors when you only pay them $72 a month.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> You can send out a lot of doctors when you only pay them $72 a month.


Not bad considering everyone else only gets $20. You're talking about an economy that is being deliberately crushed by US foreign policy. It's astounding how much they are able to do with so little.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

heavyall said:


> Not bad considering everyone else only gets $20. You're talking about an economy that is being deliberately crushed by US foreign policy. It's astounding how much they are able to do with so little.


They should have settled with the people from whom they stole land years ago and none of this would have happened. If they weren't so tight-assed Communist they could be doing much more.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

I have been watching the news casts of the NYC doctor who has the sickness.. one of the scary visuals was, police coming out of the apartment building then removing gloves then placing them in the piled high garbage bags left out side for days that the NYC sanitation has not picked up..

I just have to say wow.. that will be the 'cause' of the American Ebola..


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

<snort>


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> They should have settled with the people from whom they stole land years ago and none of this would have happened. If they weren't so tight-assed Communist they could be doing much more.


You mean the land that the Americans stole from the Spanish, who previously stole it from the Cubans, and the Cubans fought several wars to get back? 

Besides that, Cuba did offer compensation. It's the Americans who refused to settle -- they mistakenly thought the Revolution wouldn't last, and that they'd just be able to come and take it back again.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> They should have settled with the people from whom they stole land years ago and none of this would have happened. If they weren't so tight-assed Communist they could be doing much more.


You should perhaps not enter into a topic on which you have zero knowledge, and I have a frikkin' PhD. Cuba attempted to settle all claims from their nationalization process. They did so with companies owned by citizens of every country except the USA. The U.S. government intervened to ensure that those claims were never settled, which keeps the issue alive and is used as another reason for not normalizing relations.

I refer you to this very interesting article from the Inter-American Law Review (40(3)) (PDF), which in section VI states:

_The decades-old question has been: if the Cuban government recognizes the validity of the U.S. claims, why has it not met the requirement under international law for “prompt, adequate and effective” compensation, thereby removing legal encumbrances on the nationalized assets? The U.S. government’s position is that Cuba has never been serious about compensating American owners of expropriated properties. In reality, the Cuban government has made repeated attempts to settle the claims, but *the U.S. government has refused to negotiate and has intervened in attempts by private claimants to negotiate a settlement*._​
Now, can we get back to discussing Ebola, or do you have another tangent you'd like to take us off onto...?


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

CubaMark said:


> You should perhaps not enter into a topic on which you have zero knowledge, and I have a frikkin' PhD. Cuba attempted to settle all claims from their nationalization process.
> 
> Now, can we get back to discussing Ebola, or do you have another tangent you'd like to take us off onto...?


thats why we have Canadians in prison in Cuba, for settling claims. LOL
Cuba is a corrupt society, only recently attempting to be free commerce; by arresting those 
that are used to paying off those in power, which was the norm.. since that is changing - they are attempting to sweep under their carpets years of corruption.. good luck.. 
Free the Canadian business owners that are in your prisons, as well as other political prisoners.. That would be a start to settling.. have free and fair trials.. not closed doors. 

Congratulations you have a PhD.. I am so happy for you.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> You should perhaps not enter into a topic on which you have zero knowledge, and I have a frikkin' PhD. Cuba attempted to settle all claims from their nationalization process.


That's because Decree 851 tied compensation to sugar export levels that were economically impossible.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> That's because Decree 851 tied compensation to sugar export levels that were economically impossible.


The compensation wasn't tied to exports. The fund used to pay the compensation was derived from a bond issue, backed by a fraction of the revenues from sugar exports. The only thing that made any of it "economically impossible" was the blockade.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Exactly as I said.



heavyall said:


> The fund used to pay the compensation was derived from a bond issue, backed by a fraction of the revenues from sugar exports.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

It was 25% of the exports that were already the reality, not "economically impossible" at all until the US decided to try to MAKE IT impossible. That still did not affect the actual amount offered as compensation. Refusal and/or inability to pay has not ever been the stumbling block, the American govt refusing to allow the former owners to accept the payment has always been the issue. That is the OPPOSITE of what you said.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*heavyall*, you have a PhD too?


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

macintosh doctor said:


> thats why we have Canadians in prison in Cuba, for settling claims. LOL
> Cuba is a corrupt society, only recently attempting to be free commerce; by arresting those
> that are used to paying off those in power, which was the norm.. since that is changing - they are attempting to sweep under their carpets years of corruption.. good luck..


Tokmakjian and dozens of others -most of them Cuban- were arrested and jailed for corruption. What do you want, MD? A country that combats corruption, or a country that is corrupt? You can't criticize Cuba for fighting corruption and then turn around and criticize it for being corrupt. I know that's typical Right wing talking around the issue, but it ain't gonna fly here.



macintosh doctor said:


> Free the Canadian business owners that are in your prisons, as well as other political prisoners.. That would be a start to settling.. have free and fair trials.. not closed doors.


Cuba's legal system is based on the Spanish (i.e., from Spain, duh) tradition, as one would expect, given the country's history of colonization. It operates very differently from North American legal systems. There's a Digby fisherman who can give you the low-down on some of its failings. But it is a system recognized and accepted as being as correct as any other legal tradition. A key part of the process is a very detailed and time-consuming investigation and 'making the case', including interaction with the defense attorney, before the trial is held. That's why the trial phase is considerably shorter than in our system. I'm no lawyer - but that's the gist of it. 

As for "political prisoners", would you care to identify them? I can then help you to find their links to the CIA or USAID or whichever other branch of the U.S. government's subversive programme cultivated their "opposition". Not that I believe for a minute that such alliances would matter to you.



macintosh doctor said:


> Congratulations you have a PhD.. I am so happy for you.


Thanks, man! It was a long, hard road, but now it's behind me, and I can move on to the enthralling new world of engaging trolls on the internet. So fulfilling! :lmao:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I don't know why anyone would expect a country with a Caaa1 credit rating (only default is lower) to even attempt to pay its debts. Ask Russia and the Paris Club about that.

But seriously, how do you prevent a person or company from receiving compensation for their property? Cuba wanted to pay Coca Cola, but the US government stopped the cheque?




heavyall said:


> It was 25% of the exports that were already the reality, not "economically impossible" at all until the US decided to try to MAKE IT impossible. That still did not affect the actual amount offered as compensation. Refusal and/or inability to pay has not ever been the stumbling block, the American govt refusing to allow the former owners to accept the payment has always been the issue. That is the OPPOSITE of what you said.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> I don't know why anyone would expect a country with a Caaa1 credit rating (only default is lower) to even attempt to pay its debts. Ask Russia and the Paris Club about that.


I already addressed that: 



> The only thing that made any of it "economically impossible" was the blockade.


50+ years of being economically crushed by the American blockade doesn't tend to do wonders country's credit rating.



> But seriously, how do you prevent a person or company from receiving compensation for their property? Cuba wanted to pay Coca Cola, but the US government stopped the cheque?


They did far more than that. No trade of any kind is allowed. They can't accept money, they can't donate money, they can't buy or sell anything, they can't bring anything back, or leave anything there. No company or individual that resides in the US or does any business with any one who does is allowed to be involved in any economic transaction with Cuba. Foreign nations and individuals that do business with Cuba can't do business in the US, and face having their assets seized without due process. Ships that dock in Cuba are banned from docking in the US for six months. Even humanitarian organizations are severely restricted as to how much help they are allowed to give.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I never supported the embargo, but half of that is nonsense. The US is Cuba's fifth largest trading partner.



heavyall said:


> They did far more than that. No trade of any kind is allowed. They can't accept money, they can't donate money, they can't buy or sell anything, they can't bring anything back, or leave anything there. No company or individual that resides in the US or does any business with any one who does is allowed to be involved in any economic transaction with Cuba. Foreign nations and individuals that do business with Cuba can't do business in the US, and face having their assets seized without due process. Ships that dock in Cuba are banned from docking in the US for six months. Even humanitarian organizations are severely restricted as to how much help they are allowed to give.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

CubaMark said:


> *heavyall*, you have a PhD too?


LOL! I have been known to *P*ile it *H*igh and *D*eep, but no one has yet to formally recognize that!

To be fair to Fury, I once thought many of the same things that he does. I didn't know any better. The message we get here is primarily propaganda from the diaspora in Miami, and almost every word of it is completely fabricated. Actually going to Cuba several times, making friends with many Cubans (both in Cuba and in Canada), and having longtime family friends from Canada move TO Cuba has shown me that there is a lot more to it than we are told.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> I never supported the embargo, but half of that is nonsense. The US is Cuba's fifth largest trading partner.


Walk in to a US grocery store and find me some Cuban sugar or coffee. Go to an American cigar shop and find me some Cohibas*. Go to an American bar and try to order a Havana Club* with TuKola. Better yet, try to go through American Customs with any of those things in your suitcase.

*real Cuban ones, not the countefeit Dominican or Puerto Rican stuff.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

CubaMark said:


> You should perhaps not enter into a topic on which you have zero knowledge, and I have a frikkin' PhD.


Appeal to authority, a logical fallacy. Argument fail.

For a guy with a PhD, you don't know much about formulating the basis of a discussion...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

You said no US company could do business in Cuba. You were wrong.




heavyall said:


> Walk in to a US grocery store and find me some Cuban sugar or coffee. Go to an American cigar shop and find me some Cohibas*. Go to an American bar and try to order a Havana Club* with TuKola. Better yet, try to go through American Customs with any of those things in your suitcase.
> 
> *real Cuban ones, not the countefeit Dominican or Puerto Rican stuff.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Show me a reasonable source that says that owners of property stolen by Cuba may not legally be compensated.



heavyall said:


> To be fair to Fury, I once thought many of the same things that he does. I didn't know any better. The message we get here is primarily propaganda from the diaspora in Miami, and almost every word of it is completely fabricated. Actually going to Cuba several times, making friends with many Cubans (both in Cuba and in Canada), and having longtime family friends from Canada move TO Cuba has shown me that there is a lot more to it than we are told.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

FeXL said:


> Appeal to authority, a logical fallacy. Argument fail.


It is not unreasonable to expect someone who has spent decades studying a subject to have specialized knowledge that the average person may not, logical fallacy or no.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> I never supported the embargo, but half of that is nonsense. The US is Cuba's fifth largest trading partner.


If that is your position, then my earlier appeal to authority is now proven valid. :clap:


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Show me a reasonable source that says that owners of property stolen by Cuba may not legally be compensated.


Show me a reasonable source that says otherwise.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

heavyall said:


> Show me a reasonable source that says otherwise.


I made no claim about there being anything unusual about the settlement process--you did--and you're telling me that Cuba has had the money ready for 50 years, but that the US government has made it illegal for the property owners to receive restitution.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Applauding your own posts again, CM?

The US routinely exports a half billion dollars worth of product to Cuba annually--sometimes a little more, sometimes less. 

While I don't support the embargo, you still need to get your facts straight.




CubaMark said:


> If that is your position, then my earlier appeal to authority is now proven valid. :clap:


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> You said no US company could do business in Cuba. You were wrong.


No, you're wrong. Get your head out of your ass and actually go there to see how things really operate compared to how the American propaganda tells you, then get back to me. You simply do not know what you're talking about, and any source you've read that tells you otherwise is flat out lying.

If I own a farm or a factory in the US, and I want to sell my stuff to Cuba, I'm absolutely in no uncertain terms, NOT ALLOWED to do that, period. 

At best, Cuba might receive a the occasional shipment of powdered milk or expired penicillin, but actual TRADE, it doesn't exist. There are no Cuban products on American shelves, there are no American products on Cuban shelves. No hardware, no food, no cleaning products, no hygiene products, no clothes, nothing. None in the grocery stores, none in the bodegas, none in people's homes, none in the tourist sectors either*. The only "western" looking brand you'll see with any regularity is Nestle, and that's because Nestle is Swiss

The closest they ever get to "American" products is when someone goes over to Mexico and buys some stuff there and imports it to Cuba. Those are in exceptionally small quantities though, you really need to hunt to find them.

*That's the most telling part. Tourism is Cuba's biggest income source right now. Millions of people are bringing in billions of dollars, and it's simply not possible for Cuba to meet those people's food expectations, not even at a five star resort. There's no American food, condiments, booze, snacks, clothes, sunscreen, whatever. Whatever they've got, it's a brand you don't recognize, labelled in a language you don't speak, that was shipped from thousands of miles away. The US is 90 miles away, if they could get that stuff from there, they would.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Sometimes more than $700 million a year!



heavyall said:


> No, you're wrong. Get your head out of your ass and actually go there to see how things really operate compared to how the American propaganda tells you, then get back to me. You simply do not know what you're talking about, and any source you've read that tells you otherwise is flat out lying.
> 
> If I own a farm or a factory in the US, and I want to sell my stuff to Cuba, I'm absolutely in no uncertain terms, NOT ALLOWED to do that, period.
> 
> ...


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Sometimes more than $700 million a year!


So where is it? Where is this stuff the Americans are claiming to be shipping to Cuba? Where is the "trade" occurring? They aren't in Havana. Not in Camaguey. Not in Nueva Gerona. Not in Santa Clara, Sancti Spiritus, Trinidad, Santa Lucia. Not in the cities, not in the countryside. Not in the big money tourist areas of Varadero, or Cayo Santa Maria either.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

heavyall said:


> No, you're wrong. Get your head out of your ass and actually go there to see how things really operate compared to how the American propaganda tells you, then get back to me. You simply do not know what you're talking about, and any source you've read that tells you otherwise is flat out lying.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're correct, based on my first hand observations there in July. That's why all the American cars there are from the 1950's or earlier; they can't get parts or new cars, so they just keep rebuilding the old cars with great pride. Parts shipped in from other sources. Tukola is actually pretty tasty too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Not at all. Everybody knows that trade in cars and other consumer goods are forbidden. However, food and medical supplies and a broad category of "humanitarian" supplies are sold to Cuba by the US under the _Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act_
2000. 2013 logged one of the lower export figures in recent years-about $350 million.



fjnmusic said:


> You're correct, based on my first hand observations there in July. That's why all the American cars there are from the 1950's or earlier; they can't get parts or new cars, so they just keep rebuilding the old cars with great pride. Parts shipped in from other sources. Tukola is actually pretty tasty too.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> Not at all. Everybody knows that trade in cars and other consumer goods are forbidden. However, food and medical supplies and a broad category of "humanitarian" supplies are sold to Cuba by the US under the _Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act_
> 2000.


*Where is it? *


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

heavyall said:


> *Where is it? *


You'll have to ask the Cuban government how the goods are dispersed. As you know, they are not very forthcoming about they handle their internal affairs. All imports are handled by a government agency called Alimport--it isn't like you can sell directly to the retailers.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Wow.

Interesting stuff, good enough for another thread but this one is supposed to be about Ebola so maybe we could get back to the original subject.

Don't mean to be a post/thread cop, but it just seems to me that someone should mention it at this point, if not earlier.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

That Ebola in New York story shows how wrong-headed the CDC has been about its open borders policy. Treat Ebola patients in Africa, no quarantine, flight home, bowling next--by a medical professional yet--then onto the subway and into the hospital.



screature said:


> Wow.
> 
> Interesting stuff, good enough for another thread but this one is supposed to be about Ebola so maybe we could get back to the original subject.
> 
> Don't mean to be a post/thread cop, but it just seems to me that someone should mention it at this point, if not earlier.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Macfury said:


> That Ebola in New York story shows how wrong-headed the CDC has been about its open borders policy. Treat Ebola patients in Africa, no quarantine, flight home, bowling next--by a medical professional yet--then onto the subway and into the hospital.


This from the guy making half-assed comments about Cuba doing this very thing - preventing any infected workers from returning until cured. Funny how his brain works, eh?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I was agreeing with Cuba's position on infection control. Where did you get the idea that I didn't?



CubaMark said:


> This from the guy making half-assed comments about Cuba doing this very thing - preventing any infected workers from returning until cured. Funny how his brain works, eh?


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

screature said:


> Wow.
> 
> Interesting stuff, good enough for another thread but this one is supposed to be about Ebola so maybe we could get back to the original subject.
> 
> Don't mean to be a post/thread cop, but it just seems to me that someone should mention it at this point, if not earlier.


*If* we had active mods, perhaps calving off this part of the thread to create a seprate thread would be a good idea. But this is one of the more active discussions this site has had in a long time, do we really want to be reeling that in just because the topic has changed?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

heavyall said:


> *Where is it? *


The website of the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, Inc. explains that most of the exports are food and building materials, but more on the order of shipping flour, not burrito wraps, so you would not see the branding.

U.S. - Cuba Trade and Economic Council, Inc

Click on "U.S. Agricultural/Food Export Statistics For Cuba 2001-Present"for some interesting info.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

CubaMark said:


> It is not unreasonable to expect someone who has spent decades studying a subject to have specialized knowledge that the average person may not, logical fallacy or no.


Nor is it unreasonable to assume that a moron who gets a PhD is still a moron.

I don't respect initials behind a name. They mean nothing to me. I respect how one lays out their argument & defends it. That is important to me.

I also certainly do not respect anyone who says, "Trust me, I've got a PhD" or "I know more than you because I have a PhD" or some other similar claptrap. Such arrogance shows the true moral fibre of the character uttering it.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

For those interested in more in-depth information (in English) of Cuba's work to address the Ebola outbreak, a new website has been created by the MEDICC group (an excellent U.S.-based NGO working with Cuba in the field of health research).

*Ebola Media Resource Center*


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Australia comes close.

Australia prompts outrage by becoming first Western country to ban visitors from Ebola-hit areas of Africa



> In a dramatic move announced today, the government said it would refuse entry to anyone travelling from Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leona - the countries most severely hit by the epidemic - despite there being no known cases of the virus in Australia.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Starting to sink in elsewhere.

New Yorkers and New Jersey not dumb…



> Alarmed by the case of an Ebola-infected New York doctor, the governors of New Jersey and New York on Friday ordered a mandatory, 21-day quarantine for all medical workers and other arriving travelers who have had contact with victims of the deadly disease in West Africa.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Canada gets it.

Canada won't issue visas to residents of countries with widespread Ebola



> Canada is following in Australia's footsteps and has closed its doors, effectively immediately, to people from the West African countries battling Ebola.
> 
> In a move that puts Canada at odds with the World Health Organization, the federal government said Friday it is suspending the issuance of visas for residents and nationals of countries with "widespread and persistent-intense transmission" of Ebola virus disease. As well, work on permanent residence applications for people from the affected countries is also being suspended.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

This is just common sense. Anything else is a manifestation of the disease of "progressivism."

President Ebola doesn't like it though:

White House Pushes Back On State Ebola Quarantines - WSJ - WSJ



> The White House pushed back against the governors of New York, New Jersey, Illinois and other states that instituted procedures to forcibly quarantine medical workers returning from West Africa, deepening an emotional debate brought on by recent Ebola cases in the U.S.
> 
> A senior administration official said Sunday that new federal guidelines under development would protect Americans from imported cases of the disease but not interfere with the flow of U.S. health workers to and from West Africa to fight the epidemic there.
> 
> “We have let the governors of New York, New Jersey and other states know that we have concerns with the unintended consequences... [that quarantine] policies not grounded in science may have on efforts to combat Ebola at its source,” the official said.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

So, while the news has been filled with Ferguson & other distractions, this little tidbit slides by un-noticed.

Hey, media: How come we’re just finding out now that 1400 people are being monitored for Ebola in the U.S.?

Amazing. What ever happend to "It's only one person..."?


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Jeebus. Talk about adding insult to injury...

*Ebola Survivors Should Use Condoms Indefinitely*

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have warned the public that the Ebola virus may survive in semen long after it is undetectable in other bodily fluids. Consequently, they have recommended that men who survive Ebola use condoms after recovery until more is known about transmission through this mechanism.

The announcement comes after a Liberian woman contracted Ebola, apparently through sex with a man who had recovered from the disease. Tests of the man’s semen revealed the presence of the virus five months after his recovery, a point at which transmission was previously thought highly unlikely.

In a document cheerily titled “You’ve survived Ebola! What’s next?,” the CDC warns: "Men, to protect your partner, don’t have sex (oral, vaginal, or anal) with anyone until we know more.” However, mindful of the dismal success rate of abstinence-only sex education, the booklet adds. “If you do have sex, use a condom the right way every time. There is a small risk of spreading Ebola if you use condoms.” The document also notes that the virus can survive in breast milk after symptoms have passed.​
(IFLScience)


----------

