Ebola: Many questions, so little answers.

As many know, Ebola has been just ravaging West Africa, and the United States military is even leading a $750, ooo,ooo fight against Ebola in the country, which has been highly praised by Global health experts and international aid groups(http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-military-to-lead-ebola-fight/2014/09/15/69db3da0-3d32-11e4-b0ea-8141703bbf6f_story.html). The ever growing questions, though, as the death toll from this terrible disease continue to rise, are should the U.S have intervened earlier? Should the U.S really be utilizing all their resources to help? As this disease continues to spread, should there be more thorough health screenings of one’s who may have come in contact with a person with Ebola?(This, of course, comes on the heels of the Ebola case in Texas, in which a man coming from Liberia was only questioned on if he came in contact with someone with Ebola.)

“Should the U.S have intervened earlier?” Well, quite honestly, I do not know. Of course the U.S has more resources than West Africa, but could that have been enough to stop the disease before it got completely out of hand? No one really knows what causes the virus, so how would they be able to control it, or, better yet, completely stop it? Now that there is more information and research going into the virus, and how it is contracted, there is a better chance that U.S military action/$750,000,000 will be successful, but in the beginning, who knows, the U.S could have just been blowing away hundreds of millions of dollars, and could quite possibly have risked losing 3,000 soldiers, all the while getting nothing accomplished.

“Should the U.S really be utilizing all those resources?” The simple answer is yes, yes they should. Hopefully, with much time and effort, they can figure out what causes Ebola, and what exactly is needed to at least treat it and stop the spreading of it to other countries. Some people may argue that the U.S should stay out of there, in fear of them bringing it back to the states. Sorry to tell them, but it is here! What those people do not know is that you are more likely to get and be killed by something that affects thousands of Americans each year: The Flu. More than 226,000 Americans are hospitalized with flu and approximately 36,000 die from flu-related complications every year, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Ebola-s-bad-but-flu-is-worse-5800296.php).

“ Should there be more thorough health screenings of one’s who may have come in contact with a person with Ebola?” This is just the most recent question to be posed by people everywhere after a man coming from Liberia lied on a questionnaire. When the man in question flew out of Roberts International Airport in Monrovia, the Liberian capital, on Sept. 19, he answered “no” to a question about whether he had had contact with any person who might have been stricken with Ebola in the past 21 days, the maximum period of incubation for Ebola(http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/world/africa/dallas-ebola-patient-thomas-duncan-airport-screening.html?_r=0). The answer to this is yes. Any person that may have even had the slightest chance of being in contact with someone that has Ebola (anybody coming from West Africa in general, for instance) should not be trusted enough to tell the truth on a questionnaire when 1: they probably really want to get home, and 2: When it is a disease that has been spreading rapidly, and everyone is trying all they can to keep it contained in the area it is in. That has failed, and now it is assumed that at least 100 people have been in contact with the man, 5 of them being students(http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/texas-ebola-patient-thomas-eric-duncan-may-have-had-contact-with-up-to-100-people/2014/10/02/1a36f7aa-4a37-11e4-891d-713f052086a0_story.html).