Ebola Denial - who'da thunk it? Fascinating!

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Ebola disbelief widespread...

More than a quarter of people surveyed in Ebola-hit areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo told researchers they do not believe the disease exists.

Some 36% of respondents also believed that the disease had been fabricated to destabilise the country.

That's pretty cool. Explains a lot about the human condition. Maybe they need a candidate to adopt this and he'll get himself elected so he can make lots of money. Really fascinating stuff, and says a lot about the human brain and how it works.

My first thought was that this was an article from the Onion.

 

[southernhybrid]

And, I thought that Idiocracy was just happening in America. Sad.

 

[Gun Nut]

Election officials cited the Ebola outbreak as a reason to cancel the December presidential elections in the affected regions.

That's why.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Ebola seems to have been effectively politicized by potentially locals and the Government. It is absolutely sick that this has happened.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ebola disbelief widespread...

More than a quarter of people surveyed in Ebola-hit areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo told researchers they do not believe the disease exists.

Some 36% of respondents also believed that the disease had been fabricated to destabilise the country.

That's pretty cool. Explains a lot about the human condition. Maybe they need a candidate to adopt this and he'll get himself elected so he can make lots of money. Really fascinating stuff, and says a lot about the human brain and how it works.

My first thought was that this was an article from the Onion.

Since it appears to be being used for political purposes this isn't loony-bin territory. We know it's politicians exploiting the situation (and perhaps even involving actively spreading it) and not total hogwash but how are the uneducated there supposed to know?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Ebola disbelief widespread...

More than a quarter of people surveyed in Ebola-hit areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo told researchers they do not believe the disease exists.

Some 36% of respondents also believed that the disease had been fabricated to destabilise the country.

That's pretty cool. Explains a lot about the human condition. Maybe they need a candidate to adopt this and he'll get himself elected so he can make lots of money. Really fascinating stuff, and says a lot about the human brain and how it works.

My first thought was that this was an article from the Onion.

Since it appears to be being used for political purposes this isn't loony-bin territory. We know it's politicians exploiting the situation (and perhaps even involving actively spreading it) and not total hogwash but how are the uneducated there supposed to know?

Regardless, accusing people of making up Ebola without conclusive evidence is unacceptable. So is, of course, assaulting and killing people for that. And it's been going on for years. It is not limited to local insurgent groups, but rather, there are attacks from locals armed with stones and machetes as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womey_massacre
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/04/ebola-workers-attacked-warns-mistrust-communities/
https://www.spiegel.de/internationa...gest-outbreak-of-ebola-unfolds-a-1258439.html
https://reliefweb.int/report/democr...ot-poison-or-curse-ebola-rumours-spread-congo
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-new-ebola-outbreak-heath-care-workers-come-under-attack-11555260780

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Since it appears to be being used for political purposes this isn't loony-bin territory. We know it's politicians exploiting the situation (and perhaps even involving actively spreading it) and not total hogwash but how are the uneducated there supposed to know?

Regardless, accusing people of making up Ebola without conclusive evidence is unacceptable. So is, of course, assaulting and killing people for that. And it's been going on for years. It is not limited to local insurgent groups, but rather, there are attacks from locals armed with stones and machetes as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womey_massacre
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/04/ebola-workers-attacked-warns-mistrust-communities/
https://www.spiegel.de/internationa...gest-outbreak-of-ebola-unfolds-a-1258439.html
https://reliefweb.int/report/democr...ot-poison-or-curse-ebola-rumours-spread-congo
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-new-ebola-outbreak-heath-care-workers-come-under-attack-11555260780

If they have no other knowledge of Ebola and what they see seems more political than medical I'm not going to call them nuts.

And I'm not at all sure it isn't being deliberately spread.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Since it appears to be being used for political purposes this isn't loony-bin territory. We know it's politicians exploiting the situation (and perhaps even involving actively spreading it) and not total hogwash but how are the uneducated there supposed to know?

Regardless, accusing people of making up Ebola without conclusive evidence is unacceptable. So is, of course, assaulting and killing people for that. And it's been going on for years. It is not limited to local insurgent groups, but rather, there are attacks from locals armed with stones and machetes as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womey_massacre
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/10/04/ebola-workers-attacked-warns-mistrust-communities/
https://www.spiegel.de/internationa...gest-outbreak-of-ebola-unfolds-a-1258439.html
https://reliefweb.int/report/democr...ot-poison-or-curse-ebola-rumours-spread-congo
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-new-ebola-outbreak-heath-care-workers-come-under-attack-11555260780

If they have no other knowledge of Ebola and what they see seems more political than medical I'm not going to call them nuts.

And I'm not at all sure it isn't being deliberately spread.

I'm not going to call them nuts, either. I will call them murderers, or attempted murderers, or people who inflict or intend to inflict grievous bodily injury on others without good reasons, etc., depending on the specific behavior each of them engages in. It's unacceptable behavior. People do get sick and die. It's not okay to just jump to any of the absurd beliefs they hold about Ebola.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If they have no other knowledge of Ebola and what they see seems more political than medical I'm not going to call them nuts.

And I'm not at all sure it isn't being deliberately spread.

I'm not going to call them nuts, either. I will call them murderers, or attempted murderers, or people who inflict or intend to inflict grievous bodily injury on others without good reasons, etc., depending on the specific behavior each of them engages in. It's unacceptable behavior. People do get sick and die. It's not okay to just jump to any of the absurd beliefs they hold about Ebola.

If they believe the people are trying to kill them their actions are flawed self defense.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

If they have no other knowledge of Ebola and what they see seems more political than medical I'm not going to call them nuts.

And I'm not at all sure it isn't being deliberately spread.

I'm not going to call them nuts, either. I will call them murderers, or attempted murderers, or people who inflict or intend to inflict grievous bodily injury on others without good reasons, etc., depending on the specific behavior each of them engages in. It's unacceptable behavior. People do get sick and die. It's not okay to just jump to any of the absurd beliefs they hold about Ebola.

If they believe the people are trying to kill them their actions are flawed self defense.

No, I do not think so, because their belief is unreasonable. And unreasonable beliefs do not justify that. For that matter, if the person who - on the basis of Pizzagate - fired shots in a restaurant had deliberately killed some of the workers in order to save the children he believed were being exploited there, he would have committed murder or manslaughter (depending on the circumstances).

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If they believe the people are trying to kill them their actions are flawed self defense.

No, I do not think so, because their belief is unreasonable. And unreasonable beliefs do not justify that. For that matter, if the person who - on the basis of Pizzagate - fired shots in a restaurant had deliberately killed some of the workers in order to save the children he believed were being exploited there, he would have committed murder or manslaughter (depending on the circumstances).

The thing is it's not an unreasonable belief based on their knowledge.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

If they believe the people are trying to kill them their actions are flawed self defense.

No, I do not think so, because their belief is unreasonable. And unreasonable beliefs do not justify that. For that matter, if the person who - on the basis of Pizzagate - fired shots in a restaurant had deliberately killed some of the workers in order to save the children he believed were being exploited there, he would have committed murder or manslaughter (depending on the circumstances).

The thing is it's not an unreasonable belief based on their knowledge.

I disagree. They do not have conclusive evidence that the doctors, nurses, etc., are out to kill them. But they behave in a punitive way towards them, clearly showing that they believe that they are out to kill them. Now, I do not know who exactly did what, so I'm not accusing specific individuals, but saying that most of the attackers are murderers, or attempted murderers, etc.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The thing is it's not an unreasonable belief based on their knowledge.

I disagree. They do not have conclusive evidence that the doctors, nurses, etc., are out to kill them. But they behave in a punitive way towards them, clearly showing that they believe that they are out to kill them. Now, I do not know who exactly did what, so I'm not accusing specific individuals, but saying that most of the attackers are murderers, or attempted murderers, etc.

If they are being told it's an attempt to kill them and it appears consistent with the facts I have a hard time putting too much blame on them. (Now, the people egging them on are another matter--they certainly are murderers.)

 

[Angra Mainyu]

The thing is it's not an unreasonable belief based on their knowledge.

I disagree. They do not have conclusive evidence that the doctors, nurses, etc., are out to kill them. But they behave in a punitive way towards them, clearly showing that they believe that they are out to kill them. Now, I do not know who exactly did what, so I'm not accusing specific individuals, but saying that most of the attackers are murderers, or attempted murderers, etc.

If they are being told it's an attempt to kill them and it appears consistent with the facts I have a hard time putting too much blame on them. (Now, the people egging them on are another matter--they certainly are murderers.)

Well, any claim that someone is trying to murder them is consistent with the available information, in a strict sense of 'consistent'. For example, it is consistent with the information available to me that Trump, Putin and Xi are all out to kill me together. But it's obviously false, and it would not be reasonable on my part to behave as if they were out to kill me.

But clearly, by "appears consistent with the facts" you do not mean that. You seem to mean something like it's a rational belief to have on the basis of the available information. I do not agree. What is the available information? Well, they have been told that these strangers are out to kill them. The strangers have not made any attempts to kill them. What is the evidence, then, apart from the accusation? And why do you think the people egging on them know better? They may well be being irrational as well.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If they are being told it's an attempt to kill them and it appears consistent with the facts I have a hard time putting too much blame on them. (Now, the people egging them on are another matter--they certainly are murderers.)

Well, any claim that someone is trying to murder them is consistent with the available information, in a strict sense of 'consistent'. For example, it is consistent with the information available to me that Trump, Putin and Xi are all out to kill me together. But it's obviously false, and it would not be reasonable on my part to behave as if they were out to kill me.

But clearly, by "appears consistent with the facts" you do not mean that. You seem to mean something like it's a rational belief to have on the basis of the available information. I do not agree. What is the available information? Well, they have been told that these strangers are out to kill them. The strangers have not made any attempts to kill them. What is the evidence, then, apart from the accusation? And why do you think the people egging on them know better? They may well be being irrational as well.

You forget how low-information their environment is.

There's a fair amount of evidence that Ebola is being used for political ends over there. Those taken away by the Ebola docs almost always die. How much of a jump is it to think maybe the Ebola diagnosis is bogus, it's just a cover for a death camp?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

You forget how low-information their environment is.

There's a fair amount of evidence that Ebola is being used for political ends over there. Those taken away by the Ebola docs almost always die. How much of a jump is it to think maybe the Ebola diagnosis is bogus, it's just a cover for a death camp?

A huge one. Clearly, they do not have conclusive evidence of that. Not even close. For example, those taken away by the Ebola docs die at a lower rate than those who are not taken away after showing symptoms. And moreover, those who are taken away and don't die do not say they escaped a death camp. They usually defend the doctors, unless they're too scared of retaliation by people who are being unreasonable. Moreover, it should be apparent that Ebola is a real illness, since people do get sick and show symptoms and usually die.

On top of that, there is no good evidence in support of any of the alleged motivations of the nurses, doctors, etc., or their actions.

No; it's unreasonable to attack them. The people who do that should know better.