But the examples I have given are not conspiracy; they are documented, not speculative--that because of this it, might be that, and because of that, which might be possible (when it often isn't, but all things are, n'est-ce pas?, so all things can be otherwise, and therefore must be), it therefore shows that we don't have to believe a thing, and also that they are doing that.
Long ago, I studied the history and philosophy of science ( I have an MA in it-- not that this matters anymore); and when I first started teaching, taught a course called technologies of power. So, I am fully aware what errors have been made by, amongst others, leaders of the institutions of western science, scientists and their technologies; and am aware that "normal" and big science is riddled with deceit and with forms of self-interested and accumulated power linked to personal ambition, problematic, even appalling ethics and the norms of capitalist power. What's new? There are, then, sufficient grounds for skepticism about many claims made by those spokespersons in the citadels of science in power; and if I would prefer not to be proven wrong about Ebola, I remain convinced that some the contrary questions often asked about it do not always add up to very much.
I always admire your skeptical caustic brevity, and on many things I am with you. Just not this one.
Best,
Pablo
On 2014-09-14 7:39 PM, Emeagwali, Gloria (History) wrote:
'There's much the the CDC has gotten and done wrong, and there's ample evidence of their (or people within it) collusion with drug companies, as there is of the historical record and evidence about the atrocities and usages of experimentation on African Americans (see, for example, Harriet A. Washington's exposure books, amongst others, Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present and Deadly Monopolies). There is also examples of genocidal intent in Africa, such as Wouter Basson's Project Coast, and even the experiments on Africans during polio trials in the Congo (one of the claims of the origins of HIV, by the way), amongst many many others that we know about.' Why would you believe all of the above? They sound like conspiracy theory. Professor Gloria Emeagwali ________________________________ From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Pablo [pidahosa@yorku.ca] Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2014 6:44 PM To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Animals could spread Ebola to 15 more African countries (Oxford scientists) Yes, Ken, they were, and there are examples, or species of it, which are non-lethal non-pathogens for humans-- Ebola/ Reston (Virginia, where to was discovered/found) variety found first in a U.S. primate colony, and recently isolated from ill pigs in the Philippines, which, by the way, became the basis of some of the conspiracy theories about bio-experimentation. We only know that the first "known" outbreak into humans and in the sense that western virology heard about and classified its status as a filovirus, which took place the 1976 in Sudan and Congo. It is likely, though, that local people knew about it, and basically knew what to do-- that is isolate and quarantine infected people. The talk is of bats being a "reservoir" and a carrier, although of course they do not appear to be affected. It is humans, apes, and simians that are; and it isn't about people eating them, but rather contact with the animals through bodily fluids or by inadvertent contact via needles. There have been various outbreaks of hemorrhaging fevers; some of you might remember ther panic in West Af! rica over Lassa (that was carried by rodent feces) fever in the 70s and eighties; but the fact of the matter is that they always appear as a result of some breakdown appears to have happened is a breakdown of that and /or sufficient has happened is a breakdown of that It's impossible not to agree with the sagacious OA on the need for a vaccine or serum. This, however, may be a while off, at least in sufficient quantities, not least of all because big pharma is notorious about not creating drugs for widespread use in areas where there are low profits-- that is, people or governments that cannot afford them, and often generating enough for using them for front-line (read Western aid workers--not that is intrinsically bad, but we all know of the moral and ethical dilemmas they present--e.g Dr. Sheik Umar Khan). Surveillance is important, nonetheless; it is part of any long term planning about control, and targeting people in even the most rudimentary physical and sanitary protections in local systems that medical workers might have have to deal with it. Moreover, efficient surveillance systems in "target species" like ourselves increases the detection probability of the cross over emergence. The thin, as it were, boundaries betwe! en people and animals/livestock in tropical ecosystems does not necessarily mean the extensive (that is potentially epidemic) emergence of the pathogen into what is known as an interspecies spill-over and therefore a necessary epidemic intensification of the us as available hosts because of our population densities. In short, despite its virulence and horrible nature, Ebola appears as an inefficient virus, all things holding, one of which is those sanitation systems and medical infrastructure that all of us know to be inadequate in many parts of Africa. There's much the the CDC has gotten and done wrong, and there's ample evidence of their (or people within it) collusion with drug companies, as there is of the historical record and evidence about the atrocities and usages of experimentation on African Americans (see, for example, Harriet A. Washington's exposure books, amongst others, Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present and Deadly Monopolies). There is also examples of genocidal intent in Africa, such as Wouter Basson's Project Coast, and even the experiments on Africans during polio trials in the Congo (one of the claims of the origins of HIV, by the way), amongst many many others that we know about. Still, I find the conspiracy-theory of experimentation, for example that deploying Ebola in bio-weapons experiments in West Africa, very, very unhelpful. Best, Pablo On 2014-09-13 7:56 PM, kenneth harrow wrote: i think i heard that ebola has been present in animal populations for a very long time, so the communicable form must have become more recent. the fact that bats travel far doesn't mean they will be transmitting more frequently than they've done in the past. ken On 9/13/14, 7:33 PM, Pablo wrote: What could the nature of this modelling of this zoonotic vector be? My understanding from one of my colleagues who studies bats is that while they are specific to particular ecological zones, they migrate in and out, like birds, depending upon where food is, sometimes over quite a range. The other animals that feed off food/seeds they drop, or the bats themselves, do not travel but, of course, could be affected. Much depends on their sources of food and whether and how they can be disrupted. Thus, this report doesn't sound like sensationalism to me, but it still is not enough to claim an epidemic. So, so much depends upon diagnosis medical infrastructure and capacities humane isolation and for monitoring and surveillance, which many African states do not have. Zoonotic diseases are not uncommon, indeed they are very common in that we are constant proximity of humans to animals. It's just that Ebola is so garishly dramatic and has such a high rate of likely death, even if it is not spread as easily as people might believe. However, if ever we needed another reminder what destructions of, or disruptions in, environments can do, this disease is a drastic example one. Pablo Sent from my grandfather's typewriter On Sep 13, 2014, at 2:47 PM, "Emeagwali, Gloria (History)" <emeagwali@mail.ccsu.edu><mailto:emeagwali@mail.ccsu.edu> wrote: ..... and to the rest of the world? Birds are known to do trans- Atlantic flights. .How far do bats fly? GE .............................................................. http://www.naturalnews.com/046834_Ebola_Africa_animal_transmission.html Animals could spread Ebola to 15 more African countries, warn Oxford scientists Thursday, September 11, 2014 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer Tags: Ebola<http://www.naturalnews.com/Ebola.html><http://www.naturalnews.com/Ebola.html>, Africa<http://www.naturalnews.com/Africa.html><http://www.naturalnews.com/Africa.html>, animal transmission (NaturalNews) At least 15 African countries, primarily in the central regions of the continent, are at high risk of Ebola being spread by animals, in addition to the previous seven countries that have reported cases of zoonotic transmission of the disease, according to new research out of the UK. Predictive models created by researchers from Oxford University suggest that the current Ebola outbreak will eventually be spread eastward by wildlife, affecting countries like Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon in the coming months. Since the believed-to-be strain of Ebola currently spreading originated out of Central Africa, it remains a mystery how it ended up sparking the worst outbreak in history on Africa's western coast. But experts say it will eventually return to its homeland, where tens of thousands of people face infection and possible death. According to the research, which was published in the journal eLife, fruit bats, the primary vector for the disease, will likely spread the disease to humans living in Africa's central region. It is believed that multiple species of fruit bats are capable of carrying the disease, some without symptoms, and that these creatures will infect other bats and animals such as monkeys and rodents. .......................................................... http://www.naturalnews.com/046331_Ebola_government_propaganda_medical_questions.html 21 Questions about Ebola -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin. For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com<mailto:USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue- unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe@googlegroups.com> --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin. For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue- unsubscribe@googlegroups.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment