• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Doctor being tested for Ebola in NYC [W:110]

JasperL said:
It's been around for decades and hasn't gone airborne yet. Fact is, if it mutated to change the way it is transmitted, it might become less deadly or mostly benign. In the meantime, all kinds of diseases COULD become deadly overnight (e.g. the flu), HIV COULD become airborne, etc. but public policy treats them as they are, now what our worst fears imagine they might be.
Click to expand...

So, if a person is being tested for HIV but results haven't come back yet, and he has been in known contact sexually with known HIV positive people, he should go out and have as much sex as possible right?

See how dumb that sounds?
 
j-mac said:
So, if a person is being tested for HIV but results haven't come back yet, and he has been in known contact sexually with known HIV positive people, he should go out and have as much sex as possible right?

See how dumb that sounds?
Click to expand...

Sure, because your example is terrible. No one is telling the doctor to go out and have sex with random members of the public or even his girlfriend or spouse or whatever. And the fact is, the doctor posed no risk to the public until he started running a fever. He took his temp regularly, and when it got over 100.4 or whatever, called and checked himself into treatment. It's the same procedure hundreds of others returning from that region have followed, and it's worked.
 
JasperL said:
Sure, because your example is terrible. No one is telling the doctor to go out and have sex with random members of the public or even his girlfriend or spouse or whatever.
Click to expand...

:doh OMG, you can not be that obtuse....You brought up HIV as an analogy, and the way HIV is spread is through direct blood, or sexual fluid contact. With Ebola, we are still finding out things about its transmission, for example how it can survive for up to 70 days in seminal fluid...But you know damned well I wasn't saying that he was told to go out and have sex...

And the fact is, the doctor posed no risk to the public until he started running a fever.
Click to expand...

That is what we are being told right now.....Until that changes.

He took his temp regularly, and when it got over 100.4 or whatever, called and checked himself into treatment.
Click to expand...

Why would a person sworn to "do no harm" take the chance?

It's the same procedure hundreds of others returning from that region have followed, and it's worked.
Click to expand...

Way too early to call.
 
j-mac said:
:doh OMG, you can not be that obtuse....You brought up HIV as an analogy, and the way HIV is spread is through direct blood, or sexual fluid contact. With Ebola, we are still finding out things about its transmission, for example how it can survive for up to 70 days in seminal fluid...But you know damned well I wasn't saying that he was told to go out and have sex...
Click to expand...

As I said, your example was terrible. HIV is transmitted through sex, or blood, and your example was of a possibly HIV person having sex, one way HIV is known to travel. The point is no one supports the doctor bleeding on others, vomiting on others, or spreading his feces around in public, which is how Ebola spreads. And what we know is Ebola isn't airborne, and is spread through contact with bodily fluids, and the risk until someone develops a fever is zero.

That is what we are being told right now.....Until that changes.
Click to expand...

What we are being told is based on decades of experience with the disease.

Why would a person sworn to "do no harm" take the chance?
Click to expand...

Because he was doing no harm. And he's a provider who has a learned, first hand grasp of Ebola and how it spreads, and bases his decisions on the science and not irrational fears.

Way too early to call.
Click to expand...

Fact is providers and other volunteers have been traveling to Ebola regions, treating patients, and returning home by the thousands around the globe. I've looked and can find NO instances of them infecting their home population outside of a healthcare setting. That's compelling evidence, and on the other side is baseless fears and speculation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom