Is it fair to send 700 military personnel to face Ebola in West Africa

[firemanbob 10]

The two diseases are vastly different.

 

I agree, rabies isn't as bad as ebola and the precautions to prevent the spread of rabies into the UK are more extreme than the measure to prevent the spread of ebola into the UK.

Edited October 11, 2014 by firemanbob

[Halibut 12]

I agree, rabies isn't has bad ebola and the precautions to prevent the spread of rabies into the UK are more extreme than the measure to prevent the spread of ebola into the UK.

 

Surely you agree with the view that the best way to protect the UK is to give as much aid and assistance as possible to tackle the disease in West Africa?

[firemanbob 10]

Surely you agree with the view that the best way to protect the UK is to give as much aid and assistance as possible to tackle the disease in West Africa?

 

Yes providing that aid workers that come into contact with Ebola are treated and quarantined in Africa or on an hospital ships, and not brought back to the UK for treatment. Before they return home they should be quarantined and screened to make sure they are 100% clear of Ebola.

[Halibut 12]

Yes providing that aid workers that come into contact with Ebola are treated and quarantined in Africa or on an hospital ships, and not brought back to the UK for treatment. Before they return home they should be quarantined and screened to make sure they are 100% clear of Ebola.

 

Why not?..........

[firemanbob 10]

Why not?..........

 

Because it needs to be contained not allowed to spread, the further it spreads that harder it will be to contain and our goal should be to stop it spreading round the world.

[Bonzo77 13]

I agree, rabies isn't as bad as ebola and the precautions to prevent the spread of rabies into the UK are more extreme than the measure to prevent the spread of ebola into the UK.

 

Rabies has a 100% mortality rate, Ebola doesn't.

 

---------- Post added 11-10-2014 at 09:41 ----------

 

Because it needs to be contained not allowed to spread, the further it spreads that harder it will be to contain and our goal should be to stop it spreading round the world.

 

It can be easily contained. No contact with the masked patient. You would need direct fluid contact to contract it.

[firemanbob 10]

Rabies has a 100% mortality rate, Ebola doesn't.

 

Only if it isn't treated early, and to date there have been no reported cases of human-to-human transmission of rabies.

 

It can be easily contained.

The evidence suggests otherwise.

 

No contact with the masked patient. You would need direct fluid contact to contract it.

 

But not direct contact with the person infected with Ebola, so Just like the flu it can be spread when they sneeze, cough, bleed, sweat.

Edited October 11, 2014 by firemanbob

[Bonzo77 13]

But not direct contact with the person infected with Ebola, so Just like the flu it can be spread when they sneeze, cough, bleed, sweat.

 

So you don't touch them and you make them wear a surgical mask. Sounds easy enough to me!

[firemanbob 10]

So you don't touch them and you make them wear a surgical mask. Sounds easy enough to me!

 

Its a pity they didn't think of doing that in Africa, just think how many lives could have been saved.

[Bonzo77 13]

Its a pity they didn't think of doing that in Africa, just think how many lives could have been saved.

 

Hindsight, wonderful thing!

[GLASGOWOODS 10]

With the tory/labour governments record of inadequately equipping our armed forces, then NO!

Edited October 13, 2014 by GLASGOWOODS

[Tommo68 10]

Don't forget Spanish Flu like most people do. Up to 100,000,000 killed which was a far sight more than the war itself (less than Black Death).

 

I take your point on spanish flu... which was spread in much the same way as ebola is and of course was airborne too. Any virus can mutate and ebola becoming as airborne as flu is always a possibility

 

I can't really see Ebola being such a high death toll.

 

I see the potential for this to go global as very real and it has the potential for the deaths from spanish flu to pale in comparison.

 

The growth rate of the number of people infected with ebola is exponential with roughly a 50% fatality rate and a threat to us all. When it was more or less confined to small outbreaks in africa the governements throughout the rest of the world largely ingnored it and now it looks as though we may all potentially pay the price for continuing to take little or no action.

 

I'm all for as many measures as extreme as you like to both contain and then tackle this, short of dropping a nuke on the infected areas as they seem to or threaten to in every movie about a virus running wild.

 

Adopting an adpated version of the precautions that used to be in place to prevent rabies seems quite reasonable to me. Quaratine people wishing to enter or re-enter the country, from anywhere, and at their own expense or don't let them in. The same consideration should be applied to all imports too. Which will help considerably to prevent people entering the country illegally. Obviously if these measures were applied universally containment would stand more chance of success. We are fortunate in being an island self-quarantine would not be that difficult to implement when ebola gets established on any of the continents they are going to be in serious trouble.

 

Taking the option of adopting these measures now whilst it is still an option will hopefuly prevent the need for far more extreme and much harder to implement measures later.

 

Then once it is contained we can focus on assisting the people in the infected areas and hopefully eradicating ebola or at least developing a safe vaccine.

 

.

.