Accomac
What effect would gathering closely in one place likely have on those praying in such times?
Pinehurst
The original "scientific" explanations were bad air and bad blood. This discouraged gatherings and encouraged leeching.
Gadsden
People knew that back then, diseases were spread from person to person because they shunned the lepers and other people with contagious diseases, but when they were in church, they thought that God would protect them. Priests told them that God would protect them from catching illnesses in church in order to get more church patrons to give them money during times of epidemic.
Offutt AFB
No. Even though people did not understand germs, they clearly observed that if you were with someone who was very ill you had a greater chance of getting sick. So they stayed home. Look at how people treated lepers in biblical times. They had to stay away, and call out "unclean" if they were passing through a town. Also, there were few resources outside of the home. If you had a family member who was sick, you had to stay home and care for them yourself. You couldn't go running off to church. People often prayed for relief, but they did that privately not en masse.
Cedar Point
For those who are missing it, he's saying that praying in a church b/c you're afraid of the plague would help the plague spread faster RIGHT THERE IN THE CHURCH. And he's right. Of course, from what I hear about the sanitation and living conditions back then, it probably wouldn't have made much difference anyway. Of course, anyone who believes in God would just say that God magically kept the church free of disease so they would be instantly cured. Eh.
Yadkinville
People gather in churches to pray all the time. It also does wonders for the spread of disease."Bless you brother, would you like some of my smallpox"?
Tavernier
More than likely that is what they did yes. It would give encouragement and hope to those who did so.
Pitkin
Allowed the disease to spread more quickly.
Sutherland
They touched their selves.
Carnesville
black plaque - ppl normally didn't stay around ppl that they knew had it
Amity Gardens
People still pray for healing
Bangor
They still do. Sad, but true.
Hingham
Yes, and a great many died there.
San Bernardino
They all died faster.
Ochlocknee
just look at the Black Plague
Showing posts with label infectious disease updates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label infectious disease updates. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Saturday, February 5, 2011
How can a person obtain an infectious disease ?
Pettibone
Through the transfer of bodily fluids, from a bite or scratch, it could be airborne, or from inhalation.
Coffey
Orally, through bodily fluids, inhaling the disease...etc, etc. It depends on the infectious disease itself, though.
Lincolnville
Contact or shared air.
Through the transfer of bodily fluids, from a bite or scratch, it could be airborne, or from inhalation.
Coffey
Orally, through bodily fluids, inhaling the disease...etc, etc. It depends on the infectious disease itself, though.
Lincolnville
Contact or shared air.
Monday, January 17, 2011
How can a nonliving chemical or virus cause infectious disease?
Barrington Hills
They can't. Pathogens are microorganisms - such as bacteria and viruses - that cause disease. Dead viruses can be used to protect us from an infectious disease. Even "killed" viruses are recognized by our immune system. Our immune system memorizes (using antibody memory cells) these dead viruses and plans an attack incase we are ever infected with the living version. Unlike human cells or bacteria, viruses do not contain the chemical machinery (enzymes) needed to carry out the chemical reactions for life. Instead, viruses carry only one or two enzymes that decode their genetic instructions. So, a virus must have a host cell (bacteria, plant or animal) in which to live and make more viruses. Outside of a host cell, viruses cannot function. For this reason, viruses tread the fine line that separates living things from nonliving things. There are two levels whereby chemicals cause disease, particularly cancer. The first is by direct irritation, causing change at the cellular and DNA level. A chemical that is a potential carcinogen [cancer causing agent] may actually bind to the DNA in the cell nucleus and/or in the mitochondria, thereby altering its structure and potential for normal duplication. It may also make the DNA more vulnerable to the same or other carcinogens. Cancer is not an infectious disease
They can't. Pathogens are microorganisms - such as bacteria and viruses - that cause disease. Dead viruses can be used to protect us from an infectious disease. Even "killed" viruses are recognized by our immune system. Our immune system memorizes (using antibody memory cells) these dead viruses and plans an attack incase we are ever infected with the living version. Unlike human cells or bacteria, viruses do not contain the chemical machinery (enzymes) needed to carry out the chemical reactions for life. Instead, viruses carry only one or two enzymes that decode their genetic instructions. So, a virus must have a host cell (bacteria, plant or animal) in which to live and make more viruses. Outside of a host cell, viruses cannot function. For this reason, viruses tread the fine line that separates living things from nonliving things. There are two levels whereby chemicals cause disease, particularly cancer. The first is by direct irritation, causing change at the cellular and DNA level. A chemical that is a potential carcinogen [cancer causing agent] may actually bind to the DNA in the cell nucleus and/or in the mitochondria, thereby altering its structure and potential for normal duplication. It may also make the DNA more vulnerable to the same or other carcinogens. Cancer is not an infectious disease
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Are there any medical schools with a solid infectious disease program?
McKenney
A variety of different medical schools have really good programs. The University of Virginia - Charlottseville is a great school for Cancer research. The University of Utah - SLC has a great pathology program (infectious diseases)The University of Wisconsin (Madison) is a major research facility which would have a great deal of research opportunities and learning opportunities for infectious diseases. I would recommend any of those above.
Jonesville
All medical schools teach the same material for the first two years. I would be more concerned with doing well in whatever medical school you think would give you the greatest clout when applying to residencies. Spanking the boards would be helpful as well. An exception to the above would be if you were interested in an md/phd. Then picking a top research school in infectious disease would be very important. Could someone at the CDC help out. I know that schools with high at risk patients might be good, like USC in California.
Kelso
They all have solid infectious disease programs. See the above advice about residencies. The University of Pennsylvania has experts in travel medicine and its veterinary school does great work in parasitology. Of course, if you really want to have fun you can go to school in a country where infectious diseases are rampant!
Latrobe
In my opinion, infectious disease is a dying discipline. The greater growth is in chronic disease (cancer, diabetes, gerontology) because we simply don't get a lot of really fascinating infectious diseases in the industrialized world. If you want to study ID in the US, I highly recommend Tulane because they have their School of Tropical Medicine. Very cool. However, after Hurricane Katrina, they decimated their faculty, so it may be hard to get what you need till they rebuild their infrastructure. You may also want to consider schools in Puerto Rico, the Caribbean and Mexico if you want to study ID -- these regions have a lot of infectious disease burden, so you will see interesting cases firsthand, and have lots of experience training on and treating them.
A variety of different medical schools have really good programs. The University of Virginia - Charlottseville is a great school for Cancer research. The University of Utah - SLC has a great pathology program (infectious diseases)The University of Wisconsin (Madison) is a major research facility which would have a great deal of research opportunities and learning opportunities for infectious diseases. I would recommend any of those above.
Jonesville
All medical schools teach the same material for the first two years. I would be more concerned with doing well in whatever medical school you think would give you the greatest clout when applying to residencies. Spanking the boards would be helpful as well. An exception to the above would be if you were interested in an md/phd. Then picking a top research school in infectious disease would be very important. Could someone at the CDC help out. I know that schools with high at risk patients might be good, like USC in California.
Kelso
They all have solid infectious disease programs. See the above advice about residencies. The University of Pennsylvania has experts in travel medicine and its veterinary school does great work in parasitology. Of course, if you really want to have fun you can go to school in a country where infectious diseases are rampant!
Latrobe
In my opinion, infectious disease is a dying discipline. The greater growth is in chronic disease (cancer, diabetes, gerontology) because we simply don't get a lot of really fascinating infectious diseases in the industrialized world. If you want to study ID in the US, I highly recommend Tulane because they have their School of Tropical Medicine. Very cool. However, after Hurricane Katrina, they decimated their faculty, so it may be hard to get what you need till they rebuild their infrastructure. You may also want to consider schools in Puerto Rico, the Caribbean and Mexico if you want to study ID -- these regions have a lot of infectious disease burden, so you will see interesting cases firsthand, and have lots of experience training on and treating them.
Creationists how come penicillin didn't end infectious disease?
Medford
Penicillin, the first antibiotic, was, at the time, labeled as the "wonder drug."it single-handedly reduced the death rate from diseases such as pneumonia by 1,800%. (statistics come from the comparison of death rates of world war 1 to after the use of penicillin in world war 2)if evolution is as ridiculous as you all say it is, then please explain to me how ~3/5 of all staph infections were penicillin resistant (statistic is derived from a post WWII analysis) in just 6 years after the mass production and mass use of this drug (since, due to the earlier statistic, only ~5.6% or 1/18 before were resistant.) where did the other 55.4% come from?
Jefferson
They forgot to rub Jesus wafers over most of the penicillin supply and so it wasn't as good
Loring AFB
This is the basic of the science: organisms can vary within kind or/and devolve. These Scientific facts validates Biblical accounts. Thus, gene pools can become extinct but cannot reappear/evolve. Two gene pools from two different area can recombine & vary within kind to become more viable, but extinct (not separated) gene pools are gone forever. Devolution such as mutation is the opposite of evolution. Devolution is science. Evolution is against science. People got malaria. People with sickle cell anemia do not get malaria. Is sickle cell anemia the result of evolution process? If not, how come the people resist malaria? Think. Think, The answer: sickle cell anemia is not an evolution process. Sickle cell anemia is a devolution (mutation or degenerative) process that causes immunity to malaria. Now think about all those scientific facts and think how penicillin can become ineffective? Is it like malaria?
Grandview
Because we all know viruses mutate when people talk about evolution as nonsense they are talking about macro evolution, the ones that mention animals and humans evolved from one animal to another, this is only speculation and has not be observed by the human eye.
Bono
Many creationists accept that organisms can adapt slightly, yet they can't accept the fact that enough time worth of adaptions can lead to the emergence of new species.
Needham
From what I've read, most of them believe in micro-evolution, the little changes, but not macro, the big changes.
Mount Clemens
Simple adaptation. God made all his creation to be very adaptable. It has nothing to do with evolution.
Wilburton
My fundie sister uses words like micro evolution and adaptation. Aren't they cute?
Castorland
Don't make them say the E word, that is more than they can handle.
Norco
Wow, you have totally demolished the straw man you set up. Beautiful, but worthless. Creationists have always believed in the great variety of information held within DNA such that viruses, bacteria, plants and animals can change within their species. The evidence for such change, as you so cleverly note, is obvious to the most casual observer. However, no one has ever produced any significant evidence that one species can change into another species. Consider the 10s of thousands of generations that fruit flies have gone through in the arena of science. All that radiation and the other DNA transforming assaults...and what do we have....fruit flies.... some pretty bizarre fruit flies, but fruit flies.... science has never even made a fruit fly produce a house fly. Game, set, match.
Penicillin, the first antibiotic, was, at the time, labeled as the "wonder drug."it single-handedly reduced the death rate from diseases such as pneumonia by 1,800%. (statistics come from the comparison of death rates of world war 1 to after the use of penicillin in world war 2)if evolution is as ridiculous as you all say it is, then please explain to me how ~3/5 of all staph infections were penicillin resistant (statistic is derived from a post WWII analysis) in just 6 years after the mass production and mass use of this drug (since, due to the earlier statistic, only ~5.6% or 1/18 before were resistant.) where did the other 55.4% come from?
Jefferson
They forgot to rub Jesus wafers over most of the penicillin supply and so it wasn't as good
Loring AFB
This is the basic of the science: organisms can vary within kind or/and devolve. These Scientific facts validates Biblical accounts. Thus, gene pools can become extinct but cannot reappear/evolve. Two gene pools from two different area can recombine & vary within kind to become more viable, but extinct (not separated) gene pools are gone forever. Devolution such as mutation is the opposite of evolution. Devolution is science. Evolution is against science. People got malaria. People with sickle cell anemia do not get malaria. Is sickle cell anemia the result of evolution process? If not, how come the people resist malaria? Think. Think, The answer: sickle cell anemia is not an evolution process. Sickle cell anemia is a devolution (mutation or degenerative) process that causes immunity to malaria. Now think about all those scientific facts and think how penicillin can become ineffective? Is it like malaria?
Grandview
Because we all know viruses mutate when people talk about evolution as nonsense they are talking about macro evolution, the ones that mention animals and humans evolved from one animal to another, this is only speculation and has not be observed by the human eye.
Bono
Many creationists accept that organisms can adapt slightly, yet they can't accept the fact that enough time worth of adaptions can lead to the emergence of new species.
Needham
From what I've read, most of them believe in micro-evolution, the little changes, but not macro, the big changes.
Mount Clemens
Simple adaptation. God made all his creation to be very adaptable. It has nothing to do with evolution.
Wilburton
My fundie sister uses words like micro evolution and adaptation. Aren't they cute?
Castorland
Don't make them say the E word, that is more than they can handle.
Norco
Wow, you have totally demolished the straw man you set up. Beautiful, but worthless. Creationists have always believed in the great variety of information held within DNA such that viruses, bacteria, plants and animals can change within their species. The evidence for such change, as you so cleverly note, is obvious to the most casual observer. However, no one has ever produced any significant evidence that one species can change into another species. Consider the 10s of thousands of generations that fruit flies have gone through in the arena of science. All that radiation and the other DNA transforming assaults...and what do we have....fruit flies.... some pretty bizarre fruit flies, but fruit flies.... science has never even made a fruit fly produce a house fly. Game, set, match.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
