WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency • Hacker News Board

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#231

Post by rob_c » Mon, May 18, 2026, 2:37 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #42

rob_c wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> how about countries with these risks take action to reduce these risks With what money? There's a reason they're dependent on USAID. > I'm sure there's a parable about teaching someone to fish rather than feeding them Unfortunately the priorities of USAID (and European foreign aid as well) aren't exactly aligned with that paradigm. It's the worst expressed in agriculture because we just dumped our excess production…

> With what money? There's a reason they're dependent on USAID.

How much does BASIC hygiene cost it's like manners. It's education (which is more than well funded at a "throw cash at it problem".

> we just dumped our excess production

Well in a nutshell, yes we'd dumping quite a lot on Africa, that doesn't mean we should shore up the system with yet another western derived screw-up. At this point I'll go for the good old star trek perspective of impacting a cultures development by suddenly advancing their technological position.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#232

Post by rob_c » Mon, May 18, 2026, 2:38 PM UTC

throw1234567891 wrote: post #223

rob_c wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it raises the question of what is going wrong if you've spent the last x years teaching them to fish and they still refuse to. Either your approach, their willingness or something else has clearly gone wrong here.

Them not willing to fish still puts your people at risk. At the end of the day you guys still haven’t managed to build the wall and keep “aliens” away…

> you guys

I'm a wonderful citizen of heir u-turn starmer unfortunately so plenty of wanting to clear the waterways here :P

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#233

Post by rob_c » Mon, May 18, 2026, 2:41 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #159

dpark wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while remaining hopelessly non-skeptical of all the other manipulators You insist on assuming based on a one-line comment that the person is a gullible sheeple. And maybe they are, but I fail to see how you have established this.

It's the exact same one line comment made by lots of other people advocating a particularly malevolent political movement, so yes this is the reasonable inference (your inflammatory description notwithstanding). If OP intended some nuanced point, they didn't do the work to expound upon it. And while I certainly have sympathy for how intellectual libertarian discussion points get colonized by populist authoritarian mo…

> some nuanced point

it's not nuanced to point out a very large statement which at the time was very VERY anti-trumpian and pro ultra-left, lest not forget "hug a tourist", "lets change the popular naming conventions to technical" and, "oh crap too late now human to human is higher than anything we've seen before" which is basically all memory holed now

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#234

Post by readthenotes1 » Mon, May 18, 2026, 2:50 PM UTC

iJohnDoe wrote: post #203

saati wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ebola will never create an epidemic anywhere with a working health care system. And it's not mincing words, a few countries on a single continent is not global in any form, the WHO never said global, that's just something the nyt made up.

What constitutes a working health system? I would say the definition varies wildly.

In this case, it'd be one that says "if you're going to allow people from those countries to enter your country make sure they're quarantined until clear" without being stopped by "it so nazi racist"

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#235

Post by mos_basik » Mon, May 18, 2026, 2:53 PM UTC

throwaway27448 wrote: post #144

sofixa wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To expand on this, it's universally accepted that they're a group backed by Rwanda, and are there for the resources that the DRC has, which are being trafficked to Rwanda for export.

> and are there for the resources that the DRC has Oh dear. This has found its way on to HN. Since finding resources that clearly explain the situation is difficult from the west and difficult in english, the situation is many times more complicated. It's true that some of the resources that flow out of the eastern DRC flow out through Rwanda. It's true that M23 is clearly backed by Rwandan people and money. And for…

Thank you for the pointers to all those resources!

I spent my childhood in the Kasaï-Oriental - my parents were aid workers - and though I lived through some of the key periods of the country (Kabila Sr's rise and assassination) I was young and had no idea of the more general goings-on beyond our town. I've been trying to learn more about the period and I imagine these will be very helpful.

I wonder if my French is still good enough for Les guerres à l'est de la RD Congo...

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#236

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, May 18, 2026, 3:22 PM UTC

rob_c wrote: post #193

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sure there's a parable about teaching someone to fish rather than feeding them This is less about feeding a neighbor than digging them a latrine so they stop crapping in your water supply.

and yet they still do. by that logic move away and stop them visiting. conclusion drawn from your arguments...

> move away and stop them visiting

This is a valid strategic conclusion. It would require America ceding Africa and probably the Middle East as strategic theatres to China and, to a lesser degree, Russia and maybe France. (This may be worth the cost.)

It would also require trade and travel decoupling from both China and Europe, as well as from the Middle East and probably South America and Canada, too, given the transmission vectors inherent in those flows. (This isn’t worth the cost.)

So yes, if Americans accept lower living standards this equilibrium theoretically works. (Even if it’s stupid.) If we want to capitalize on global trade, and be able to vacation and do business wherever we please and have a reasonable expectation of being allowed to return home, on the other hand, and pay a fraction of the gains from the former to safeguard our health, this strategy fails.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#237

Post by beng-nl » Mon, May 18, 2026, 4:13 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #183

PunchyHamster wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's that simple... in first world countries. Lacks in infrastructure and educatin make it harder

COVID spread didn’t break down into first world vs third world countries because first world countries infrastructure isn’t built with pandemics in mind. Instead a great deal of modern infrastructure like subway systems makes things more difficult not less.

I’m not an epidemiologist, but Ebola isn’t airborne like COVID is, so that isn’t a comparison that can be made.

infrastructure density matters, but it doesn’t affect both the same way.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#238

Post by mindslight » Mon, May 18, 2026, 4:54 PM UTC

rob_c wrote: post #233

mindslight wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the exact same one line comment made by lots of other people advocating a particularly malevolent political movement, so yes this is the reasonable inference (your inflammatory description notwithstanding). If OP intended some nuanced point, they didn't do the work to expound upon it. And while I certainly have sympathy for how intellectual libertarian discussion points get colonized by populist authoritarian mo…

> some nuanced point it's not nuanced to point out a very large statement which at the time was very VERY anti-trumpian and pro ultra-left, lest not forget "hug a tourist", "lets change the popular naming conventions to technical" and, "oh crap too late now human to human is higher than anything we've seen before" which is basically all memory holed now

[flagged]

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#239

Post by afthonos » Mon, May 18, 2026, 4:59 PM UTC

mystraline wrote: post #83

lejalv wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Let me make this clear: To hell with your historical collective guilt machine. I honestly dont care what people did before I was born. I had absolutely no decision in anything of theirs. Had no choice in any of that. Nor did I enslave or torture or murder people. My parents didnt either. Their parents didnt either. And somehow, Im responsible for shit that happened hundreds of years ago? Whatever. I dont mind helping…

Let me make this clear:

The United States predates you, and will almost certainly outlive you.

You, an individual with a microscopic lifespan and negligible influence in the grand sweep of history, do not in fact share any guilt for the things your ancestors did, nor do you deserve credit for the greatness they wrought. The United States, however, deserves blame where guilty and praise where worthy for what it did during its lifespan, which expands hundreds of years into the past, and with luck will continue into the future.

It’s not all about you.

Re: WHO declares Ebola outbreak a global health emergency

#240

Post by mindslight » Mon, May 18, 2026, 5:47 PM UTC

trunkiedozer wrote: post #229

mindslight wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By "imported ebola" you of course mean repatriated a fine American citizen: > Brantly attended Abilene Christian University in Texas, where he earned an undergraduate degree in biblical text in 2003. It was here, at ACU, where he pledged Pi Kappa, a men's social club founded on a deep sense of Christian brotherhood, regardless of which denomination that member belonged to Say what you or I will about religion, this i…

A fine American citizen with ebola

Yes, that was implied by the context. We get it - in your societal arsonist worldview, there is always some reason to other someone else, leave them to fend for themselves, and relish in their suffering as just desserts. And so you begrudge a halfway-competent government that didn't let that happen.