freeworldgroup.com

mmm wrote:Ebola only spreads in areas with poor sanitation practices. The more developed countries are completely safe.

oh, so the whole of africa, middle east, india, most of asia, and south and central america are the only ones that need to worry. phew, I thought we were in trouble for a moment.

mmm wrote:Ebola only spreads in areas with poor sanitation practices. The more developed countries are completely safe.

Don't mean to start an argument here, but sometimes the cleanest places are the places with the poorest sanitation practices, if that makes any sense. For example, I went over to someone's house to babysit, and their house is the cleanest house I've ever been to. But before the parents left, one of the children dropped a goldfish on the ground outside and the mother let the child pick it up and eat it. I can understand it psychologically. You're so used to everything being clean that it never occurs to you that something might be dirty, if that makes any sense.

Ahem wrote:

mmm wrote:Ebola only spreads in areas with poor sanitation practices. The more developed countries are completely safe.

Don't mean to start an argument here, but sometimes the cleanest places are the places with the poorest sanitation practices, if that makes any sense. For example, I went over to someone's house to babysit, and their house is the cleanest house I've ever been to. But before the parents left, one of the children dropped a goldfish on the ground outside and the mother let the child pick it up and eat it. I can understand it psychologically. You're so used to everything being clean that it never occurs to you that something might be dirty, if that makes any sense.

No.

Shadowstar1922 wrote:

Ahem wrote:

mmm wrote:Ebola only spreads in areas with poor sanitation practices. The more developed countries are completely safe.

Don't mean to start an argument here, but sometimes the cleanest places are the places with the poorest sanitation practices, if that makes any sense. For example, I went over to someone's house to babysit, and their house is the cleanest house I've ever been to. But before the parents left, one of the children dropped a goldfish on the ground outside and the mother let the child pick it up and eat it. I can understand it psychologically. You're so used to everything being clean that it never occurs to you that something might be dirty, if that makes any sense.

No.

^
As in constant exposure to bodily fluids poor. That means you have to have no (or a very terrible) sewer system.

FWG Leader wrote:

mmm wrote:Ebola only spreads in areas with poor sanitation practices. The more developed countries are completely safe.

oh, so the whole of africa, middle east, india, most of asia, and south and central america are the only ones that need to worry. phew, I thought we were in trouble for a moment.

Saying the whole of Africa has poor sanitation practices or the whole of India does, is kinda false, considering southern Africa and certain cities in India.

Anyways, mmm is essentially right. As long as a country has good sanitation practice, its all k.
Yes that still means most of the world will have problems, population wise.
Hopefully that will show people that you can't help 3rd world countries simply by giving them a dollar or two, but they need to force the government to sacrifice the well being of the country for the well being of third world countries.

Then again, that ain't happening, so most of the third world might as well die, and that will widely be considered a tragedy, for like 1-10 years then people will move on. Sad, really. Let's just hope Ebola doesn't spread.

first case of ebola in the US - texas....

"The United States has diagnosed its first case of the deadly Ebola virus, a man who became infected in Liberia and travelled to Texas, US health officials say.

The patient was hospitalised with symptoms that were confirmed to be caused by Ebola, a Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spokesman said.

Further details are to be released during in a press conference at 7:30am (AEST).

Earlier, the Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas said it had placed in strict isolation a person based on "symptoms and recent travel history".

The patient is the first to be diagnosed with Ebola in the United States, although a handful of US medical workers who were infected in West Africa were flown back to the US for treatment, and have since recovered.

The world's largest outbreak of Ebola has infected 6,574 people across five West African countries, and killed 3,091, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO).
"

Its in Texas, because texas is the only state that can put an end to it in the USA. On a serious note, should I be scared?

Excalibur wrote:Its in Texas, because texas is the only state that can put an end to it in the USA. On a serious note, should I be scared?

There was a doctor who caught it and returned to my state, Massachusetts and was flown out of the city to be cured (and he was).

And no, you shouldn't be. The discussion beforehand just explained why sanitary nations are safe.

Shadowstar1922 wrote:

Excalibur wrote:Its in Texas, because texas is the only state that can put an end to it in the USA. On a serious note, should I be scared?

There was a doctor who caught it and returned to my state, Massachusetts and was flown out of the city to be cured (and he was).

And no, you shouldn't be. The discussion beforehand just explained why sanitary nations are safe.

O-o *cough*
actually the only reason that guy was cured was because the experimental drug just happened to work with him. With anyone else, it would have not had the same effects. It's a miracle that guy didn't end up dying from the effects of the disease.
And unless you have been in contact with the people the guy was in contact with, you should be fine.

Lamb wrote:

Shadowstar1922 wrote:

Excalibur wrote:Its in Texas, because texas is the only state that can put an end to it in the USA. On a serious note, should I be scared?

There was a doctor who caught it and returned to my state, Massachusetts and was flown out of the city to be cured (and he was).

And no, you shouldn't be. The discussion beforehand just explained why sanitary nations are safe.

O-o *cough*
actually the only reason that guy was cured was because the experimental drug just happened to work with him. With anyone else, it would have not had the same effects. It's a miracle that guy didn't end up dying from the effects of the disease.
And unless you have been in contact with the people the guy was in contact with, you should be fine.

Cured? Yes, that's rare. But survived? The mortality rate is 50% worldwide, much less in more developed countries. Another patient was treated in Georgia not too long ago (but not cured).
I can't stress how safe people are if they're not in close contact with sick people.