At least it’s a real epidemic


Still on Ebola,

The City is also providing an update on the number of individuals under active monitoring in New York City. As of Wednesday, November 5th, 357 individuals are being actively monitored by the Health Department. The vast majority of these individuals are travelers arriving in New York City within the past 21 days from the three Ebola-affected countries who are being monitored post-arrival, as well as Bellevue Hospital staff caring for Dr. Spencer.  The list also includes FDNY EMS staff who transported Dr. Spencer to Bellevue and the lab workers who conducted Dr. Spencer’s blood test.  All of these individuals are being monitored out of an abundance of caution, and none are showing any symptoms.  The number of individuals who will be actively monitored will continue to fluctuate as people arrive or depart New York City, we learn more about people’s exposures, and 21 days of monitoring has passed.

and Obama is asking for a lot of money to fight Ebola

Today, the Administration announced it is seeking $6.18 billion through an emergency funding request to Congress to enhance our comprehensive efforts to address this urgent situation.  To help meet both immediate and longer-term requirements, $4.64 billion is requested for immediate response and $1.54 billion is requested as a Contingency Fund to ensure that there are resources available to meet the evolving nature of the epidemic.

At least it’s a real epidemic rather than a fake one.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to At least it’s a real epidemic

  1. Paul Austin says:

    Six Billion in ADDITIONAL funding?!!!!!!!! The public health experts had better clean up their act before the generosity of the taxpayers will give them another penny:

  2. waltc says:

    That requested Ebola fund will undoubtedly be pissed away on an Ebola conference to be held somewhere in Palm Beach in February. Fact is, they had a Department with a huge budget in place for years that was supposed to deal w preparedness for epidemics, including Ebola that has nothing to show for itself after a decade of pissed-away money.

    From yesterday:
    Brigitte, I didn’t get any video out of the McConnel link, only a sentence of prose. Is there one or was that it?

    Also yesterday from jltrader on why they hate and fear tobacco but love pot:

    My state senator, in favor of legalization of what they call Recreational Use is buying into the new meme that marijuana is safer than both alcohol and tobacco. In an emailing, she even said that , unlike tobacco, smoking pot has no ill effects on the lungs and does not cause cancer. This is the new junk science being promoted here by some while opponents are still playing the Reefer Madness cartoon. This is science as “What time would you like it to be?” Or IOW, there is no science anymore, just rationalizations for political agendas.

    • Frank Davis says:

      unlike tobacco, smoking pot has no ill effects on the lungs and does not cause cancer.

      This was being said back in the 1960s. The US Surgeon General had fingered tobacco alone as carcinogenic, ergo pot was okay. In fact pot was said to cure more or less everything.

      This isn’t junk science. It’s zero science. But antismoking science isn’t science either.

      I am, incidentally, in favour of legalising pot. I’ve smoked enough of the stuff in my lifetime to know that it’s no more dangerous than tobacco. If I don’t smoke it any more, it’s because I don’t particularly want to get stoned.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        I never was a big pot smoker in fact I cant say Ive smoked any in over 30 years. Yet everybody I know who smokes pot! Also smokes tobacco. I think that’s more or less true everywhere and always has been. Yes its time to legalize it along with much other drugs and put them on par with alcohol and regulate it the same way we do drunk driving or being drunk at work…………That gateway drug hype was started by the government and prohibitionists back when REEFER MADNESS was created!

      • waltc says:

        So do I. Agree with legalizing it. I just think the line used to sell legalization is bull. Inhaling lit marijuana can be no more or less “harmful” than inhaling lit tobacco and the mind that can conceive that proposition is simply warped by its agenda. If inhaling maryjane is safe then so’s inhaling tobacco; it’s a simple corrolary but one that bumps into their other agenda. Then, too, depending on how the quality of the weed and how much you use, it’s either on a par with or stronger and certainly quicker than booze.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The video was also about medical marijuana and about growing and legalizing the industrial hemp industry again……….Its been big business in Kentucky before the Federal government outlawed hemp growing in the states in the 1970s. They said you could take the HEMP ROPE us cowboys use to use and smoke it to get high………….Problem is in industrial rope hemp the THC levels is only like 1.5% in strength in that processed rope or hemp itself…………..But they didn’t care back in the 70s they just wanted it all OUTLAWED!

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        We haven’t been able to get a good hemp lariat in years because of that stupid law!

        If you’ve ever tried roping with a nylon rope it totally sucks compared to a grass hemp rope!

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          I don’t expect quick leaps and bounds by Mconnel at the git go. Obamas going to go into executive order mode and become a recluse over the next 2 years,just as Bush ended up doing. Oh a few things will come down for sure maybe even some major changes.

          But the best one is the appropriations comittees where money is generated or in most cases robbed from peter to buy off paul will now be controlled by gop rather than liberal anti-smoking progressives………….Meaning a lot of money can be taken away and used elsewhere instead of the fed funding anti-smoking activities………….

          That’s key!

    • beobrigitte says:

      Is there one or was that it?

      There was a very short clip…

  3. smokingscot says:

    As I suspected, a fair chunk of that money will be given to the drug companies to develop a vaccine, on account it’s not terribly profitable for them to do so otherwise.

    “The National Institutes of Health devotes $30 billion a year to research, mostly given toward competitive grants. But funding has been stagnant in recent years, and the number of grants given to researchers has been declining. Liberals want to blame congressional austerity for delaying an Ebola vaccine. That’s unfair. No one was raising the alarm about Ebola until the latest outbreak.

    But conservatives do need to acknowledge the government has a key role in funding medical research, particularly research that makes no sense for the private sector.”

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The Ebola so called outbreak was what here in America we call the OCTOBER SURPRISE right before a big election! It happens everytime from the opposition and ebola played right into where Obama has his best and biggest cronies!

      Ebola was a political stunt!

      • waltc says:

        No, not a stunt. A pure accident of timing. The epidemic was quite real and since it played against Obama and added to the existing aura of govt incompetence, confusion, and serial lies, it was to some degree a factor in the Dem trouncing. So unless you contemplate a Republican conspiracy, it’s just something that happened. Like Bush’s hurricane .

        The new head of the budget committee will be Jeff Sessions, one of the best guys in DC and I think, or at least hope, there’ll be a lot of defunding

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          I say a stunt for the very simple fact Obama allowed and even encouraged bringing the ebola patients to America for treatment and then refused to ban people from coming to America after having been in he infected countries and then doubly made political by NEW JERSEY AND NEW YORK govenors over quarantining the people of possibly having……….It was in deed politically co-opted for politics…………..

      • beobrigitte says:

        No, not a stunt. A pure accident of timing.

        I agree. An – for Obama (and the WHO) – unfortunate co-incidental occurrance.

        Ebola is not a thing of the past; It might start to ‘burn-itself-out’ in Liberia, however, it gathers pace in Sierra Leone.

  4. harleyrider1978 says:

    The 6 billion would come from special emergency appropriations………..Problem is it can get spent all over the place. Obamas trying a backdoor approach to refund his agenda pushers agendas in anything but Ebola!

  5. harleyrider1978 says:

    California’s pace slows in reducing smoking


    California has long boasted one of the nation’s lowest smoking rates, but a new report reveals the state may no longer be the standard-bearer when it …

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      California has long boasted one of the nation’s lowest smoking rates, but a new report reveals the state may no longer be the standard-bearer when it comes to antitobacco policy. The smoking declines are getting smaller, and political campaign contributions from the tobacco industry are getting bigger.

      These are the findings of a 300-page UCSF study that reviewed the past 25 years of California smoking practice and policy. The state’s adult smoking rate is still one of the nation’s lowest, but smoking rates in other states are now falling faster. And California hasn’t raised its cigarette tax since 1998, making the state’s tax per pack about half the national average. California elected officials from both parties are also more willing to take tobacco funds than previously, though Republicans take more than Democrats.

      “It’s unquestionably concerning to see that where we once were a leader, we are now starting to fall behind,” said Elizabeth Cox, the study’s lead author, in a statement. “The resources just aren’t there anymore, and state leaders are no longer prioritizing tobacco control.”

      The bright spot, the UCSF researchers found, is at the local level, where antismoking legislation is passing. California cities and counties have enacted laws regulating smoking in multiunit housing and banning e-cigarette smoke in public places.

      Here are the numbers:


      California has the second-lowest adult smoking rate in the nation, behind Utah. In 2012, 12.6 percent of California adults were smokers, down from 22.7 percent in 1989.


      The national rate at which cigarette smoking declined from 2004 to 2013, compared with a decline of 28.2 percent in California over the same time period. That’s the reverse of the previous 10-year period. California’s drop in cigarette use, at 40.8 percent, far outpaced the national rate’s 20.5 percent.


      The number of states that have higher cigarette taxes than California’s 87 cents per pack. Between 2007 and 2014, the California Legislature introduced seven bills that would have increased the cigarette excise tax, but none passed.

      $64.5 million

      The amount of money the tobacco industry spent on political activity, including lobbyists and campaign contributions, in California between 2007 and 2013. Republicans accepted eight times more in tobacco campaign contributions than Democrats between 2003-13, but Democrats’ rate of acceptance is growing.


      The number of California cities or counties that had passed their own ordinances restricting smoking in multiunit housing by 2014.

      For the UCSF report:

      — Kathryn Roethel

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Rank 601

        San Francisco city government has a double standard on smoking ostensibly they have rules against it – but should anyone violate them (and repeatedly) they will do nothing about it.

        Just take a look at the ban on smoking at outside dining areas which is meaningless – I ask the civil grand jury to look into the operations and enforcement of this department of public health program as it is scandealous for lack of doing anything about repeated violations…


        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Now we are in the phase of bans where nobody cares about the even to try and enforce them anymore. Yet theres a new story everyday where they say WE ARE GOING TO GET TOUGH ON SMOKING ENFORCEMENT…………Yet most don’t give a shit and call it stupid to even do to start with as in tryig to enforce a stupid law like this to begin with as its impossible. Likely this is what led to the final demise of the smoking bans nationwide……..Nobody cared or gave a shit any longer!

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    Breaking the UTAH smoking ban in 1923

    Which they were, since they—along with McKay, who as a result of some rather undignified snitching by his accomplices in crime was soon to become the object of a similar criminal complaint—openly had violated Section 4, Chapter 145, of the Utah state code. The four men had been smoking in an enclosed public place.

    The story goes even farther and UTAH became a laughing stock of the country for its smoking ban.

    In fact, only one state enacted a new, prohibitory anticigarette and antismoking law during the postwar antismoking campaign. That state was Utah.

    Utah had banned cigarette sales to minors in 1896, but although cigarette prohibition bills were considered in later years, Utah generally muddled through the pre-war crusade without actively joining in. The postwar revival of that crusade found congenial ground in the state, however, particularly within the powerful Mormon church, and in 1920 a church publication hinted that the time had come for all-out war. By February, 1921, the church had lined up enough support to secure easy passage of a bill prohibiting cigarette sales, cigarette advertising, and smoking in any form in certain “enclosed public places,” such as government offices, theaters, and—more germane to this article—cafés and restaurants. The bill sailed through the legislature with little public comment—no one really expected it to be enforced anyway—and was signed by Governor Charles Mabey. By June, 1921, cigarette sales and public after-dinner smokes were illegal in Utah, but as expected the new law affected Utah smokers hardly at all. Restaurant and theater proprietors seemed unwillingly to enforce it themselves, and the sheriff’s office and the police department bickered over who would have the thankless task. In the end, no one enforced it.

    In 1922, however, Mormon church president Heber J. Grant urged Mormon voters to elect officials who would promise to enforce the new laws. Benjamin R. Harries vowed to do just that, and in November, 1922, he was elected Salt Lake County sheriff. Soon after he took office, Sheriff Harries ordered a number of raids on suspected cigarette dealers, whereupon the dealers paid homage to the law by hiding their cigarettes and charging bootleg prices for them. Sheriff Harries obviously decided that more dramatic measures were required, because on February 20, 1923, Mr. Bamberger, Mr. Lynch, and Mr. Newhouse found themselves in jail.

    As if their march down Main Street had not been humiliating enough, the three men were then informed that each would have to post a ten-dollar bond before he could be let go. The implication that so measly a sum could substitute for their word of honor was simply too much; an argument ensued. The three finally were released on their own recognizance by Judge Noel S. Pratt, but not before they had chided deputies Mauss and Harris for not also arresting McKay. That did not help them, but it did result in another complaint being sworn. It was served by telephone, and McKay promised to surrender himself the next morning. Later that day Newhouse told a newspaper reporter that the entire affair was a “frame-up” and a political ploy by Sheriff Harries and his “asinine deputies.” Sheriff Harries dismissed the accusations as “bosh” and ordered his deputies to continue to enforce the law. The next day several deputies raided the Hotel Utah grill room and the state capitol (where the legislature was in session) and arrested six more smokers. The deputies were disappointed when they could find no smoking legislators to arrest.


    he pressure finally proved too much for even the strongest supporters of the antismoking laws. Within a week the Deseret News , a Mormon publication, signaled partial surrender by endorsing a pending revision of the laws to allow cigarette sales to adults and reduce greatly the restrictions on public smoking. The amendment bill streaked through the legislature and was signed by a no doubt relieved Governor Mabey. Charges against Bamberger and his partners in crime were dropped. The Utah crusade was over.

    The Utah anticigarette law was the last of its kind; although North Dakota and Kansas kept theirs until 1925 and 1927, respectively, they were never seriously enforced, Utah having demonstrated that strict enforcement caused more problems than no enforcement at all.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      To find answers history leads the way as human nature never changes it always repeats itself and the bans will be no different! Its time to sit back and wait it out,oh ya continue to fight but the agenda is dead.

    • The Blocked Dwarf says:

      “they were never seriously enforced, Utah having demonstrated that strict enforcement caused more problems than no enforcement at all.”

      Unfortunately the fASHites learned that particular lesson far too well, hence the modern national Smoking Verbots are tailored to punish, draconially, not the smoker himself but the owner of the ,supposedly, public space. If the UK smoking ban had been a criminal matter (ie the police would have had to actually catch a deviant in the very act of smoking) then the result would have mirrored the Utah experience.

      • cherie79 says:

        I wondered at the time how they were going to enforce it and just couldn’t see it working in any of the Glasgow pubs I knew. I never thought for a minute they could make the landlords responsible for the actions of their customers and that is the only reason this idiotic law has been obeyed.

  7. prog says:

    Re jltrader’s post in ‘Ebola Handshake’

    ‘I’ve been looking at the worldwide cancer incidence here at the male data only (because generally men smoke more). Leaving aside the ‘Japanese smoking paradox’ and concentrating only on Europe…it seems that where smoking and lung cancer incidence is low, for example in Sweden, other cancers like prostate more than compensate to bring the overall cancer incidence to similar levels across countries. Using the same distorted logic that prompted Doll to his studies in the 50s, falling smoking rates correlates with rising prostate cancer incidence, therefore, not smoking causes prostate cancer. :)) Austria has a much higher smoking rate than Sweden but the overall cancer incidence is very similar, 295 per 100.000 in Austria vs 296 per 100.000 in Sweden. How’s that for shutting up the anti smoking hysterics ?’

    Quite a user friendly site with drop down box for for pages of specific conditions

  8. Tony says:

    Sorry – Off topic.

    I’m not entirely sure what to make of this but it may be of interest.

    Why the UK has to pay and additional £1.7 billion to the EU:

    At 5 min 30s in: “In the case of the UK, the most relevant change is the inclusion of charities
    This is in the calculation of GNI (Gross national income?) which is then used to apportion EU costs to each nation in the EU.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      That simply means they’ve run out of moneys for their movements and now they are going to shakedown anybody anywhere they can………….Sock puppets beware or are you already bankrupt.

  9. Tony says:

    Sorry again – wrong video. I’ll also try not to imbed this time:

  10. beobrigitte says:

    and Obama is asking for a lot of money to fight Ebola

    Today, the Administration announced it is seeking $6.18 billion through an emergency funding request to Congress to enhance our comprehensive efforts to address this urgent situation.

    For containing this particular strain of Ebola it is far too late. Had the WHO, who HAS been formed to deal with this kind of threat, acted in March this year, when being asked for help by e.g. MSF most of the nearly 5000 people that died from it would still be alive.
    But the WHO was tied up with sugar, obese people, salt, smokers and vapers – and there was a conference in Moscow to sort. There were 5 star hotel rooms to book, making sure there was enough caviar and a sight seeing tour to take care of. You have to get your priorities right!
    That does remind me of a question: HOW MUCH has Tobacco Control been forced to donate to help to deal with this epidemic?

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s