ebola

nyarlothothep

Do you think it will become an uncontainable global pandemic King Mob?

King Mob

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Do you think it will become an uncontainable global pandemic King Mob?

Nope. Probably not. Just like with happened with swine flu, bird flu and SARS.

Do think that ebola will lead to the reduction of freedom or martial law or forced vaccinations any any of the other things that were claimed will happen with those outbreak as well?

Could you outline what exactly the theory is here?

enno99

Exclusive Twitter data shows how conversation about the virus has escalated dramatically

As Ebola has taken more lives and crept into more countries, the virus has come to dominate both news headlines and social media conversation. On Twitter, a whopping 10.5 million tweets mentioning the word “Ebola” were sent between Sept. 16 and Oct. 6 from 170 countries around the world. The map below, based on data TIME obtained exclusively from Twitter, shows how the conversation blew up in early October.

The country where Ebola dominates conversation most is Liberia, where the virus has already claimed more than 2,000 lives. In terms of sheer volume, though, most Ebola tweets are sent from the United States. Global conversation about the disease exploded after a Liberian man was diagnosed with the disease at a Dallas hospital on Sept. 30. On the night of Oct. 1, Twitter users were firing off missives about Ebola at the rate of more than 6,000 per minute, up from about 100 per minute before Sept. 30. Check out the heat map of Ebola tweets below to see how quickly talk of the virus spread following its arrival in the U.S.

Research scientists who study the way we communicate on social networks borrow much of the terminology that’s used by health officials who are trying to control an epidemic. Internet users who pick up misinformation and false rumors are known as the “infected,” and they can infect others with every errant tweet or Facebook post. Much of what has been posted on social media about Ebola has been helpful—the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s illustrated tweet explaining how the virus spreads has been retweeted more than 4,000 times—but there have also been bogus rumors about Ebola reaching Idaho and an unwarranted panic after a passenger became sick on a flight in Newark, N.J

http://time.com/3478452/ebola-twitter/

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

I don't understand because you are being unnecessarily cryptic.

Are you suggesting that the virus would spread more if people are more fearful of it?

Whatever you give intention or attention to ,grows. It maybe an old wives tale but believe me, people in high places take it seriously, hence the question, why inform so many. If you intention was to stop at all cost, you wouldn't be following this line of coverage, just in case. No control benefit in publicity what so ever.

King Mob

euroboom13 wrote: »

Whatever you give intention or attention to ,grows. It maybe an old wives tale but believe me, people in high places take it seriously, hence the question, why inform so many. If you intention was to stop at all cost, you wouldn't be following this line of coverage, just in case. No control benefit in publicity what so ever.

Could you explain how exactly giving media attention to a virus makes it spread?
What are you basing this conclusion on?

Are you suggesting that the authorities should be covering this all up so that it does not spread more?

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

Could you explain how exactly giving media attention to a virus makes it spread?
What are you basing this conclusion on?

King mob,
If you think ,when you turn on your TV/internet that the page with all the facts, are going to be left open for you to read, and that foolish people are fools, because the don't watch the news. Enjoy your soapbox.

News. .. creates as much as informs.

degrassinoel

euroboom you're not making a lot of sense here, take a step back and see the question, not the poster.

King Mob

euroboom13 wrote: »

King mob,
If you think ,when you turn on your TV/internet that the page with all the facts, are going to be left open for you to read, and that foolish people are fools, because the don't watch the news. Enjoy your soapbox.

News. .. creates as much as informs.

So could you please explain how?

A virus is not effected by how much it is talked about on the news.
I don't see it could be, so perhaps you could explain how it is?

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

So could you please explain how?

A virus is not effected by how much it is talked about on the news.
I don't see it could be, so perhaps you could explain how it is?

"A virus is not effected by how much it is talked about" the truth.

Didn't see that on the news but very helpful indeed. most watch more intently in future ,where did you find that nugget?

thanks

King Mob

euroboom13 wrote: »

"A virus is not effected by how much it is talked about" the truth.

Didn't see that on the news but very helpful indeed. most watch more intently in future ,where did you find that nugget?

thanks

I got it from a basic understanding of how viruses and biology work. Media coverage or fear does not make a virus stronger or more virulent.

How do you believe a virus to be effected by it's media coverage?
Please be specific.

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

I got it from a basic understanding of how viruses and biology work. Media coverage or fear does not make a virus stronger or more virulent.

How do you believe a virus to be effected by it's media coverage?
Please be specific.

I have know doubt in your knowledge or your beliefs.(quite the opposite)

.Not everything we learn is 100% fact, and some people go there whole lives quoting facts, that they never considered its validity.

How did you workout that opinion, intention ,feelings ,emotion, reaction have no baring on the patient/population?I am sincerely interested in the subject ,and you seem to have it all figured out ?

King Mob

euroboom13 wrote: »

I have know doubt in your knowledge or your beliefs.(quite the opposite)

.Not everything we learn is 100% fact, and some people go there whole lives quoting facts, that they never considered its validity.

How did you workout that opinion, intention ,feelings ,emotion, reaction have no baring on the patient/population?I am sincerely interested in the subject ,and you seem to have it all figured out ?

A virus is a tiny little thing that hijacks cells to self replicate. It being reported in the media does not effect it's function.

Could you please clarify what you mean and explain how you think that a virus is effected by it's media presence?

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

A virus is a tiny little thing that hijacks cells to self replicate. It being reported in the media does not effect it's function.

Could you please clarify what you mean and explain how you think that a virus is effected by it's media presence?

I couldn't possibly clarify your beliefs, as for mine, they are sound.

So if a man finds out he has an incurable illness whom everyone believes he has no hope, and another man has the same illness but believes it is curable (and all around him agree). Would it be a shock to you that second man died first?

King Mob

euroboom13 wrote: »

I couldn't possibly clarify your beliefs, as for mine, they are sound.

I didn't ask you to clarify my beliefs. I asked to clarify what you meant.

euroboom13 wrote: »

So if a man finds out he has an incurable illness whom everyone believes he has no hope, and another man has the same illness but believes it is curable (and all around him agree). Would it be a shock to you that second man died first?

Again, you are being unnecessarily cryptic.

Are you suggesting that the media presence of the virus is making it more deadly?

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

I didn't ask you to clarify my beliefs. I asked to clarify what you meant.


Again, you are being unnecessarily cryptic.

Are you suggesting that the media presence of the virus is making it more deadly?

Hang on there.

Your true FACT
You said(100% truth) that the media presence has no baring on the virus, which is a common enough perception but is it fact?

I believe mind frame is everything to combat illness, but your NOT saying, that's a loony idea, you are saying its an impossibility.

lagar

euroboom13 wrote: »

Hang on there.

Your true FACT
You said(100% truth) that the media presence has no baring on the virus, which is a common enough perception but is it fact?

I believe mind frame is everything to combat illness, but your NOT saying, that's a loony idea, you are saying its an impossibility.

Informed people make better decisions. If you know you may have a possible lethal virus you may go to your doctor earlier and be more cautious about people around you.

Uninformed people would think they have the flu or whatever, and stay at home until it is too late.

King Mob

euroboom13 wrote: »

Hang on there.

Your true FACT
You said(100% truth) that the media presence has no baring on the virus, which is a common enough perception but is it fact?

I believe mind frame is everything to combat illness, but your NOT saying, that's a loony idea, you are saying its an impossibility.

I said that media presence has no effect on the biological function of the virus, given my understanding of biology.
I thought this was what you were claiming based on your ambiguous posts.

I have not said that any idea is impossible. I have just asked you to clarify your position.
Instead of a direct answer, you have been cryptic and a little patronising.


So again, what impact or effect does the media coverage of ebola have?
Do you believe that it is putting people more at risk? If so, how?

cdoherty86

lagar wrote: »

Informed people make better decisions. If you know you may have a possible lethal virus you may go to your doctor earlier and be more cautious about people around you.

Uninformed people would think they have the flu or whatever, and stay at home until it is too late.

How many people die of Flu every day? In the US CDC estimates ~36k annually. This Ebola story, while killing many people I think is being blown out of proportion. Just more fear mongering if you ask me. There are more people dying of starvation everyday than Ebola.

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

I said that media presence has no effect on the biological function of the virus, given my understanding of biology.
I thought this was what you were claiming based on your ambiguous posts.

I have not said that any idea is impossible. I have just asked you to clarify your position.
Instead of a direct answer, you have been cryptic and a little patronising.


So again, what impact or effect does the media coverage of ebola have?
Do you believe that it is putting people more at risk? If so, how?

I believe that fear, has a lot more power than believed.
You are rating it as 0% impact.
You are saying that it is fact that , a virus in the public conscious has no more virility than one that is not. I am trying to get you too see this is not factual but your too full of knowledge and zero wisdom, to open your mind.

Truth is we don't have proof but its in our culture and tradition, that talk gives legs to all problems .If there is 5% truth in this it would be wrong to promote .

degrassinoel

EB, what you're saying is that illnesses like Ebola don't exist until people begin to fear them through media intervention?

If that's the case, myself having crohn's disease and being diagnosed before i knew what it was and and many others with similar and worse conditions/illnesses are living proof that you're wrong mate.

(Edited to include information which if unedited may have led to the belief that i have ebola as well crohn's disease)

lagar

cdoherty86 wrote: »

How many people die of Flu every day? In the US CDC estimates ~36k annually. This Ebola story, while killing many people I think is being blown out of proportion. Just more fear mongering if you ask me. There are more people dying of starvation everyday than Ebola.

If you want to compare, why don't you compare how many people RECOVER from ebola and how many people from flu?

euroboom13

degrassinoel wrote: »

EB, what you're saying is that illnesses like Ebola don't exist until people begin to fear them through media intervention?

If that's the case, myself having crohn's disease and being diagnosed before i knew what it was and and many others with similar and worse conditions/illnesses are living proof that you're wrong mate.

(Edited to include information which if unedited may have led to the belief that i have ebola as well crohn's disease)

Sorry to hear about your condition.

I am only wrong if you can prove there is not 1 person alive whom developed chron`s disease by fear of it.You only pointed out a couple of normal cases, that consciously were not aware of it prior to being told.

(am saying people are more susceptible to highlighted illness)

lagar

euroboom13 wrote: »

Sorry to hear about your condition.

I am only wrong if you can prove there is not 1 person alive whom developed chron`s disease by fear of it.You only pointed out a couple of normal cases, that consciously were not aware of it prior to being told.

So you really think you can get a virus just because you are afraid of it??? When do you come from? The dark ages?

euroboom13

lagar wrote: »

So you really think you can get a virus just because you are afraid of it??? When do you come from? The dark ages?

No I didn't say that but you make your own truth.

degrassinoel

euroboom13 wrote: »

Sorry to hear about your condition.

I am only wrong if you can prove there is not 1 person alive whom developed chron`s disease by fear of it.You only pointed out a couple of normal cases, that consciously were not aware of it prior to being told.

(am saying people are more susceptible to highlighted illness)

Was using myself as an example, but thanks anyway.
I could and probably should have used the black death as an example, no mass media back in those days and it killed a hefty portion of the population of europe.

I'm willing to be open-minded to theories, but this one truly needs more proof if it's going to stand by itself.

Schrödinger's cat is one thing, but this is entirely different and tbh it's quite insulting to say that people only develop an illness because of a fear of illness. You're effectively saying it's psychosomatic, i know before i was diagnosed i was pretty carefree about such things, so on a personal level i have to disagree with you.

degrassinoel

lagar wrote: »

So you really think you can get a virus just because you are afraid of it??? When do you come from? The dark ages?

lagar, read the charter - no personal abuse again please.

euroboom13

degrassinoel wrote: »

Was using myself as an example, but thanks anyway.
I could and probably should have used the black death as an example, no mass media back in those days and it killed a hefty portion of the population of europe.

I'm willing to be open-minded to theories, but this one truly needs more proof if it's going to stand by itself.

Schrödinger's cat is one thing, but this is entirely different and tbh it's quite insulting to say that people only develop an illness because of a fear of illness.

Where is everyone getting that I said you can developed an illness because of the fear of it, I didn't.

What I said was that fear makes you more susceptible to contracting it. It also makes containment more difficult.Fear is the last thing you should add to any containment protocol .

degrassinoel

euroboom13 wrote: »

Where is everyone getting that I said you can developed an illness because of the fear of it, I didn't.

What I said was that fear makes you more susceptible to contracting it. It also makes containment more difficult.Fear is the last thing you should add to any containment protocol .

Glad you've cleared that up, and really glad you weren't saying the other thing lol

euroboom13

Sorry will clarify.

chrons diseases is a condition not a virus and can be replicated through fear/stress, in my opinion.

Ebola, has to have direct contact but I believe you increase peoples susceptibility and severity through fear.

I also believe we are naïve about how powerful fear is. To put it mildly

jh79

euroboom13 wrote: »

Sorry will clarify.

chrons diseases is a condition not a virus and can be replicated through fear/stress, in my opinion.

Ebola, has to have direct contact but I believe you increase peoples susceptibility and severity through fear.

I also believe we are naïve about how powerful fear is. To put it mildly

When you say susceptibility do you mean a change in our biological defense mechanisms ?

euroboom13

jh79 wrote: »

When you say susceptibility do you mean a change in our biological defense mechanisms ?

Yes, and also by being mindful of it , there is a serendipity effect too.I am not saying that everyone mindful of it is going to get it but that there is an increase in infections directly proportional to awareness.

jh79

euroboom13 wrote: »

Yes, and also by being mindful of it , there is a serendipity effect too.I am not saying that everyone mindful of it is going to get it but that there is an increase in infections directly proportional to awareness.

The increase in infections leads to more awareness not the other way round.

Would agree with you that fear can cause a nurse for example to be less confident and make mistakes, but can't see any reason why fear would help ebola spread through biological reasons.

euroboom13

jh79 wrote: »

The increase in infections leads to more awareness not the other way round.

Would agree with you that fear can cause a nurse for example to be less confident and make mistakes, but can't see any reason why fear would help ebola spread through biological reasons.

Would you agree that when cancer patients ,give up hope the disease increases pace. This is the mind changing the biological defence.

My whole point is that ,if it is possible that fear increases its impact, why increase the fear. The why ,is the conspiracy ,why spread the fear.

Add that to the obvious incompetence of containment, bingo, prime time TV.
God help us.

enno99

Effect on the Immune System

Chronic stress affects the immune system in complicated ways, and may have various results.

Susceptibility to Infections. Chronic stress may have an effect on the immune system's response to infections. Several studies claim that people who are under chronic stress have low white blood cell counts and are more vulnerable to colds. Once a person catches a cold or flu, stress can make symptoms worse. People who carry the herpes virus may be more susceptible to viral activation after they are exposed to stress.

Inflammatory Response. Some evidence suggests that chronic stress triggers an over-production of certain immune factors called cytokines. Such findings may partly explain the association between chronic stress and numerous diseases, including heart disease and asthma.

http://www.nytimes.com/health/guides/symptoms/stress-and-anxiety/possible-complications.html

Is this what you are getting at euroboom13 ?

euroboom13

enno99 wrote: »

Effect on the Immune System

Chronic stress affects the immune system in complicated ways, and may have various results.

Susceptibility to Infections. Chronic stress may have an effect on the immune system's response to infections. Several studies claim that people who are under chronic stress have low white blood cell counts and are more vulnerable to colds. Once a person catches a cold or flu, stress can make symptoms worse. People who carry the herpes virus may be more susceptible to viral activation after they are exposed to stress.

Inflammatory Response. Some evidence suggests that chronic stress triggers an over-production of certain immune factors called cytokines. Such findings may partly explain the association between chronic stress and numerous diseases, including heart disease and asthma.

http://www.nytimes.com/health/guides/symptoms/stress-and-anxiety/possible-complications.html

Is this what you are getting at euroboom13 ?

Thanks enno99

My point was ,why pump the world with this ebola,if there is a chance of increasing the impact.

Now ,even beyond what I am saying , I believe that like biblical stories, intentional fear can evolve the virus, like the power of positive thinking or like mythical legends.

1900 no one believed we could fly,1901 Orwell Wright did it and then people heard about it and it grew legs, from zero to hero. Nothing more powerful than believing something is possible.

Even if you don't agree, it is worth being cautious with fear talk.

jh79

euroboom13 wrote: »

Would you agree that when cancer patients ,give up hope the disease increases pace. This is the mind changing the biological defence.

My whole point is that ,if it is possible that fear increases its impact, why increase the fear. The why ,is the conspiracy ,why spread the fear.

Add that to the obvious incompetence of containment, bingo, prime time TV.
God help us.

Yeah agree with your point re cancer but not that an otherwise healthy person on seeing ebola on the news can become more susceptible to catching it.

If ebola on the news is enough to weaken your immune system then you probably have other issues.

Situations like this need to be monitored and the public have a right to know as it is in the public interest.

euroboom13

jh79 wrote: »

Yeah agree with your point re cancer but not that an otherwise healthy person on seeing ebola on the news can become more susceptible to catching it.

If ebola on the news is enough to weaken your immune system then you probably have other issues.

Situations like this need to be monitored and the public have a right to know as it is in the public interest.

The right to know is one thing, but 24/7 news coverage is doing something more than politely informing.

jh79

euroboom13 wrote: »

The right to know is one thing, but 24/7 news coverage is doing something more than politely informing.

If it wasn't on the news it would be a NWO cover up or something to that effect the authorities can't win with some.

enno99

jh79 wrote: »

If ebola on the news is enough to weaken your immune system then you probably have other issues.

.

A little condecending dont you think

If the news story was about your next door neighbour or someone living close by dont you think it would affect your stress levels

euroboom13

jh79 wrote: »

If it wasn't on the news it would be a NWO cover up or something to that effect the authorities can't win with some.

Agree , there is a balance to censorship .

I still think its doing more empowering than informing .
I will take my dog out of the fight now ,views purveyed

jh79

enno99 wrote: »

A little condecending dont you think

If the news story was about your next door neighbour or someone living close by dont you think it would affect your stress levels

If you come into contact with Ebola can't see stress levels having any effect on your chances of contracting it.

euroboom13

chipsdave wrote: »

too many Blackies being allowed into countries , BARRED , only saying what everyone else thinking

All your chips down in one post Dave.

jh79

enno99 wrote: »

Therefore, Ebola virus might persist as an asymptomatic or subclinical infection in the reservoir species, with little or no transmission, and might be sporadically activated through an appropriate stimulus. The stimulus might be stress, co-infection, change in food sources, and pregnancy, as shown experimentally in vivo and in vitro.35,36 This hypothesis would explain the sporadic nature and periodicity of outbreaks of Ebola haemorrhagic fever in Africa.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3406178/

Only shown in animal studies and refers to activation within a carrier not susceptibility of contracting it.

This doesn't support the theory that a stressed person is more at risk.

enno99

jh79 wrote: »

Only shown in animal studies and refers to activation within a carrier not susceptibility of contracting it.

This doesn't support the theory that a stressed person is more at risk.

oops sorry just realized that

enno99

Was just reading through it for ref to the immune system as mentioned here

. Examination of infected populations indicates many are poorly nourished and present an impaired or ineffective immune system (Feldman et al., 2011). Thus, a compromised immune system and nutritional status exacerbate the potential risk of succumbing to an Ebola infection

and jumped the gun

on second thoughts they published over 30 papers in 2011
probably melt me brain quicker than Ebola

King Mob

So then if they are spreading fear to infect more people, why are they taking any measures at all to contain it?
Wouldn't it be far more effective to keep the whole thing quiet for a while and not announce the infections on the media, let more and more people get infected and spread the virus further, then start the scaremongering once the virus has a good foot hold?

And what is the purpose of spreading the virus in the first place?

Torakx

I'm always telling friends to stop eating sugar when they have the flu as well as take some garlic obviously
Here might be some proof behind that.
http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/870673/Virus_Needs_Sugar_For_Infection.html

I think it's related to cell penetration and the immune system.
I have a compromised immune system( in the gut), but I destroy flu viruses every time.
Low sugar diet(because I can't eat sugar or refined carbs) and garlic always works faster than any other treatment you can offer me.
I won't be licking any ebola patients just yet, but so far I think it's one of the best methods to combat infections.

Still looking for info on Garlic versus ebola. Out of curiosity mostly.
Some scientist must have gotten the idea at some stage to test it against this virus.
Although if the pharma corps are looking for vacine business, this would be the one treatment they would kill over, to keep it quiet.

jh79

Torakx wrote: »

I'm always telling friends to stop eating sugar when they have the flu as well as take some garlic obviously
Here might be some proof behind that.
http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/870673/Virus_Needs_Sugar_For_Infection.html

I think it's related to cell penetration and the immune system.
I have a compromised immune system( in the gut), but I destroy flu viruses every time.
Low sugar diet(because I can't eat sugar or refined carbs) and garlic always works faster than any other treatment you can offer me.
I won't be licking any ebola patients just yet, but so far I think it's one of the best methods to combat infections.

Still looking for info on Garlic versus ebola. Out of curiosity mostly.
Some scientist must have gotten the idea at some stage to test it against this virus.
Although if the pharma corps are looking for vacine business, this would be the one treatment they would kill over, to keep it quiet.

What is your obsession with garlic?, it has no proven medicinal properties at all , sure lots of cultures use garlic in crazy amounts in their food and it doesn't prevent them from viruses.

http://nccam.nih.gov/health/garlic/ataglance.htm

enno99

i

Torakx wrote: »

I'm always telling friends to stop eating sugar when they have the flu as well as take some garlic obviously
Here might be some proof behind that.
http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/news/870673/Virus_Needs_Sugar_For_Infection.html

I think it's related to cell penetration and the immune system.
I have a compromised immune system( in the gut), but I destroy flu viruses every time.
Low sugar diet(because I can't eat sugar or refined carbs) and garlic always works faster than any other treatment you can offer me.
I won't be licking any ebola patients just yet, but so far I think it's one of the best methods to combat infections.

Still looking for info on Garlic versus ebola. Out of curiosity mostly.
Some scientist must have gotten the idea at some stage to test it against this virus.
Although if the pharma corps are looking for vacine business, this would be the one treatment they would kill over, to keep it quiet.

There is a thread here might interest you

Like bird flu, Ebola kills with a cytokine storm - by pushing healthy immune systems into hyperdrive - and making your body kill itself.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1028709/pg1

euroboom13

King Mob wrote: »

So then if they are spreading fear to infect more people, why are they taking any measures at all to contain it?
Wouldn't it be far more effective to keep the whole thing quiet for a while and not announce the infections on the media, let more and more people get infected and spread the virus further, then start the scaremongering once the virus has a good foot hold?

And what is the purpose of spreading the virus in the first place?

Measures to contain are laughable and reckless, and 24/7 coverage is reckless if not intentional.

Smart coverage isn`t being adhered too.