Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   abstinece-only sex education
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6354 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 199 of 306 (313728)
05-19-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Faith
05-19-2006 6:44 PM


Re: Quarantine ha!
At the time the virus had not yet been isolated
identify the carriers of the disease by mandatory testing of at-risk communities
That would have been a really neat trick - identifying carriers by testing for an as-yet unidentified infectious agent.
In normal circumstances, the minimal public health response to an impending epidemic would have been to identify the carriers of the disease by mandatory testing of at-risk communities, closing off "hot zones" of the epidemic
I'm fascinated by the this. Are there any examples of this ever being done for any disease in the US? I'm sceptical of the claim about 'normal circumstances' and 'minimal public health response'.
I can't think of anything in my lifetime in the UK except for animal diseases like foot and mouth a few years ago and H5N1 bird flu currently - certainly nothing in the human population.

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 05-19-2006 6:44 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Coragyps, posted 05-19-2006 10:12 PM MangyTiger has not replied
 Message 203 by jar, posted 05-19-2006 10:17 PM MangyTiger has not replied
 Message 208 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 1:16 AM MangyTiger has replied
 Message 209 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 1:21 AM MangyTiger has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6354 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 234 of 306 (314039)
05-20-2006 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Faith
05-20-2006 1:16 AM


Re: Quarantine ha!
That would have been a really neat trick - identifying carriers by testing for an as-yet unidentified infectious agent.
They had visible lesions, Kaposi's sarcoma, flagrant symptoms of full blown AIDS. There were plenty of gross symptoms to test for. And tracking contacts would have helped identify whom to examine.
That's testing for sufferers, not carriers.
A carrier is defined as someone who has a disease and can pass it to others but displays no symptoms. See the Wiki article here.
You can only identify a carrier if you have identified the infectious agent and have a test for it - neither of which had been done at the time they were talking about.

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 1:16 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 11:26 PM MangyTiger has replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6354 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 237 of 306 (314055)
05-20-2006 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by Faith
05-20-2006 11:26 PM


Re: Quarantine ha!
I don't think I'm nitpicking.
Whenever I've heard the term carrier - on everything from made-for-TV disaster movies to serious documentaries about disease - it refers to someone not showing symptoms.
That's why the statement in the article leapt out at me.

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Faith, posted 05-20-2006 11:26 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by Faith, posted 05-21-2006 12:07 AM MangyTiger has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024