{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"15404160","dateCreated":"1255486345","smartDate":"Oct 13, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"richardbrancato","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/richardbrancato","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhcscience2010.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/15404160"},"dateDigested":1532254115,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"OUTBREAK: Level of Preparedness","description":"The movie prompts us to think about what the United States -- or any country -- would do if a virus such as Motaba really showed up within our borders and began spreading.
\n
\nThink about this question:
\n
\nDoes the United States have a plan in place for managing an outbreak such as the one in the movie, and do you know what that plan is? Visit the CDC website for starters and see what you find. http:\/\/www.cdc.gov\/<\/a>","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"15401234","dateCreated":"1255482593","smartDate":"Oct 13, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"richardbrancato","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/richardbrancato","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhcscience2010.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/15401234"},"dateDigested":1532254115,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"OUTBREAK: The Virus is Changing","description":"In the movie, the original virus changes and there are two indicators that prove this. First, when looked at under an electron microscope, the structure of the virus is similar but not identical. Second, the mode of viral transfer changes from fluid-born to air-born.
\n
\nAre you aware of other cases where viruses change?
\n
\nBased on your previous knowledge, why do you think this is the case?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"15638218","body":" The Swine Flu or H1N1 had mutated identical to how the ebola virus in the movie had mutated. The reason why it is called Swine Flu is because the original virus only infected pigs. It then mutated and went on to infect humans. Another example is the Avian Flu; it began as just infecting birds and also moved on to infect people as well.
\n I think that viruses mutate in order to keep there existence. From what I gather, the only action that they perform within their "lives" is reproduction- they infect the cells of their host by taking control of them and using them as "factories" to create more of their kind. Therefore, if all of the species that they are able to infect have already been infected, they must mutate in order to continue reproduction.","dateCreated":"1255992275","smartDate":"Oct 19, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"MernoffRachel","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/MernoffRachel","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15773660","body":" Most all viruses change. One of the more well known ones that change are the flu and the swine flu. Even the common cold will change over time.
\n The viruses change because our bodies become immune to them. Once we get a virus once, we can't get it again because our bodies form antibodies to protect us from them. We can never get the exact same virus twice. Viruses are smart. Once they know that we are immune to them, they mutate. Even by making the simplist change, it makes our antibodies usless.
\n That's the only reason we can get a similar virus twice. Every time we get a cold, it's not exactly the same. Every time we get the flu, the virus has changed. We can especially see this with the swine flu. I have heard many people talking about how the virus has changed (maybe for the worse). So in order for us to get the moderatly same virus twice, it has to mutate and change.","dateCreated":"1256214183","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"ShoreCorey","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/ShoreCorey","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"15401188","dateCreated":"1255482538","smartDate":"Oct 13, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"richardbrancato","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/richardbrancato","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhcscience2010.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/15401188"},"dateDigested":1532254115,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"OUTBREAK: Viral Transfer","description":"The viral outbreak was started by the transmission of viruses from animals to human beings.
\n
\n1. Are you aware of any similar cases in real life?
\n
\n2. Should we ban the use of wild animals as pets?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"15812480","body":"1. I think swine flu used to only affect pigs and then it mutated so humans could get it too.
\n
\n2. I think it's okay to have pets because no matter if the animal is wild or tamed if the virus mutates the virus will get to human beings becuase some people like farmers own animals and they aren't the farmer's pets. This is why it doesn't matter if we have pets or not becuase we come in contact with animals and we need to do this in order to survive because they provide us with many important things that help us survive.","dateCreated":"1256256288","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"FinnMatthew","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/FinnMatthew","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15814836","body":"1. Yes, you can get "Rabies" from animals. Rabies is a fatal disease you can get by being bitten by an animal.
\n
\n2. Having a wild animal for a pet depends on the animal. If you see a stray dog and give it a house and train it thats fine. But there was a story with a girl who had a monkey and it went crazy and killed her friend and ripped her face off. So it really depends on the animal.","dateCreated":"1256258302","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"BerishJordan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BerishJordan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15814946","body":"1. A similar case that I am aware of is \u201cSwine Flu\u201d or H1N1. This disease has spread from pigs or from swine to humans.
\n2. I think that wild animals should be banned from being pets on the other hand regular animals (i.e. fish, dog, cat,) are okay to keep as pets.","dateCreated":"1256258396","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"RadbilKeren","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/RadbilKeren","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1256070500\/RadbilKeren-lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15814950","body":"There are two example that I can think of such as swine flu (h1n1) and avian bird flu which spread very quickly once it could infect humans. The viruses had originated from animals and then spread to humans.
\n
\n2 I think that wild animals should not be allowed to be kept as house pets before they are tested for infections and are trained. I don't see a reason that a healthy animals cannot be kept as a pet. Animals that are wild that are infected or possibly infected should not be able to be kept as a pet.","dateCreated":"1256258397","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"BorkanAidan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BorkanAidan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15815990","body":"1. There's a disease called plague that is cause by bacterium. Small mammals such as rats, beavers, squirrels, chipmunks, and prairie dogs are the ones to most likely be carrying the plague. The disease used to spread in large quantities but now it is more irregular and occurs mostly individually. Humans recieve this disease by being bitten by a flee that has previously bitten a mammal that is a carrier of the disease. There are severe and mild symptoms but can be treated by a doctor.
\n
\n2. I think that wild animals should definately be banned from being house pets because there are too many risks of getting a disease. However, if the animal is brought to a specialist and you're told that the animal has good health and no diseases, then it's fine to have a wild animal as a pet.","dateCreated":"1256259282","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"GoodwinBenjamin","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/GoodwinBenjamin","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15817430","body":"1.The West Nile virus is a disease that is sent from mosquitos to humans. Once they bite you,if they are infected, you then recieve the virus and become infected.
\n2. I don't belive we should ban the animals that we know are dangerous. Until we can find a cure or vaccine, we should handle these animals with care. If the disease is contained to a few animals, I think it would be justifiable to put them to sleep.","dateCreated":"1256260517","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"GoldbergRebecca","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/GoldbergRebecca","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15817648","body":"1. Avian influenza originated from birds and chickens. They mutate and then transfer from birds to humans.
\n
\n2. Yes, I think we should ban the use of wild animals as pets because it's too risky if even just one animal spread a fast-spreading, deadly disease that could transfer from the animal to humans.","dateCreated":"1256260669","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"LiebermanTamar","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/LiebermanTamar","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15823128","body":"1. The H1N1, otherwise known as the swine flu, started in pigs but then became a virus in humans. This was the case because the virus mutated and altered into a form that could infect humans.
\n2. I think that wild animals should be checked for diseases before they are taken in as pets in order to prevent any diseases from spreading. I think that there should be a law passed for this very reason and if it is not, then having wild animals as pets should be banned. This is because it not only causes the owner to be in danger but everybody else since it could largely spread.","dateCreated":"1256266675","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"GodlinHannah","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/GodlinHannah","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15823592","body":"1. There is of course swine flu, but there is also a disease called "Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy" which is more commonly known as the mad cow disease. The mad cow disease is usually caused by cattle eating dead cattle in a meat and bone meal (MBM). Humans can get the mad cow disease by eating the brain or spinal cord of an infected carcass. In humans, however, it is called the Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD or nvCJD).
\n
\n2. I do not think that we should ban the use of wild animals as pets. I do think that if a person wants a wild animal as a pet, they should get it properly vaccinated, but I do not think that all wild animals carry deadly diseases. Not every animal is like the monkey from Outbreak. That was an extreme case.","dateCreated":"1256267445","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"HershmanElana","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/HershmanElana","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15873898","body":"1. As many of my peers have already stated there have been many cases in which the virus began in animals and mutated to infect humans. One of the most recent cases being swine flu.
\n
\n2. I understand that some people would want to have a wild animal fresh of the boat from some disease ridden country, for whatever reason that may be. However unless these animals can be tested for disease, which they most likely can't considering the animal may be carrying a new virus, they should not be allowed in the country for the sake of everyone's health.","dateCreated":"1256388554","smartDate":"Oct 24, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"SloaneBeth","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/SloaneBeth","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15884120","body":"Beth, You make a good point that some animals cannot be tested for disease because it is new. But it is unfair to ban animals from a specific country that we think of as "disease ridden" without proof that they are diseased. If you ban all animals from coming for fear of disease, you might as well ban all people from that country coming here. If your going to say there should be no wild animals from Africa, you need also to say no people from Africa,because they are as likely to spread disease.","dateCreated":"1256427523","smartDate":"Oct 24, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"AronsonEthan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/AronsonEthan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"16082873","body":"Ethan, you say that it's unfair to ban animal testing from one country when labled as "disease ridden." What about testing them in their own country? Would that be okay? Isn't the disease already there?","dateCreated":"1256775490","smartDate":"Oct 28, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"TibbettsDanielle","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/TibbettsDanielle","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1256775107\/TibbettsDanielle-lg.jpg"}}],"more":10}]},{"id":"15401104","dateCreated":"1255482465","smartDate":"Oct 13, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"richardbrancato","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/richardbrancato","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/bhcscience2010.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/15401104"},"dateDigested":1532254117,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"OUTBREAK: Ethical Considerations","description":"The movie Outbreak raises several ethical considerations such as:
\n
\n1. What is the price that should be paid in order to save a nation from a disaster? More specifically, was the decision to bomb Cedar Creek ethical?
\n
\n2. Should viruses and bacteria be used as weapons(bio-terror)?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"15794656","body":"I think that bombing the town was not ethical. the price That should have been that they should have been spending money for a vaccine. it is better to tell the nation so that we could work together to get the cure than to kill inocents.
\nbio terror is not a wise idea because it can do more harm than thought.","dateCreated":"1256238243","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"BrennerCameron","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BrennerCameron","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15801126","body":"1. What is the price that should be paid in order to save a nation from a disaster? More specifically, was the decision to bomb Cedar Creek ethical?
\nI don\u2019t think that the decision was ethical because it killed people who weren\u2019t suffering from the virus. The people who were healthy should have been moved to another place so that they wouldn\u2019t die and wouldn\u2019t get the virus.
\n
\n2. Should viruses and bacteria be used as weapons (bio-terror)?
\nI don\u2019t think that viruses and bacteria should be used because if there is no cure then someone will die from it in the future and they will have a very painful rest of their lives. If someone killed another person, and they died, they didn\u2019t really suffer any pain unlike the virus and bacteria people.","dateCreated":"1256244713","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"AvnorLital","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/AvnorLital","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1256244799\/AvnorLital-lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15810142","body":" 1I think that people should do what ever they need to do in order to save a nation although I believe that bombing an area to disinfect it should be the last resort. They should look for a cure before deciding to bomb the area. I think that it would be acceptable for infected people to die if there is no other choice. If these people dieing would save the lives of others. I do not think that the decision to bomb cedar creek was not ethical. If a cure had not been found and this would endanger other towns this would have been an acceptable choice.This decision would have taken many Innocent lives and the infected persons could have been cured. It was not ethical because they had found a cure and there was no reason for these people to die
\n
\n2 The idea of using bio-terror to me is not a smart decision and should not be used.This will not only infect the enemy but also Innocent civilians. This would also be bad for you if you did not have a cure. This would not only infect the enemy, it could also infect you. Using bio-terror as a wepon against the enemy should not be used as a wepon","dateCreated":"1256254147","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"BorkanAidan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BorkanAidan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15810674","body":"1. I think that the decision to bomb Cedar Creek was not ethnical, because if you did bomb it then people without the virus would die for no reason. I think that the people without the virus should be transported away from the people with the virus.
\n
\n2. I think that viruses and bacteria should not be used for weapons because it would be a very long time to suffer, but if you were shot by a bullet it would be instant death.","dateCreated":"1256254601","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"LopezSarah","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/LopezSarah","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15812060","body":"1. I think that the decision to bomb Ceder Creek was not ethical because not everyone in the town had the virus. Also bombing a town with innocent people isn't a good idea because people wouldn't want that to happen and there would be conflicts about the decision. I think they should have evacuated the people without the virus in Ceder Creek and in surrounding towns so no one else would get the virus.
\n
\n2. I think that viruses and diseases shouldn't be used as weapons because if the people who it's given to spread the virus it could become a problem becuase then anyone could get it. The only way I think you can use viruses as weapons is if the people who it's given to are in a contained space in the middle of no where and they can't get out of the space.","dateCreated":"1256255894","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"FinnMatthew","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/FinnMatthew","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15816470","body":"1. I think that the decision to bomb Cedar Creek was ethical because if they hadn't bombed the town, the disease would have spread, and this disease is very deadly and fast spreading. The disease would soon be spread all over the world causing everyone to die. Bombing is a terrible thing to do, but in this situation, it's better that one town dies rather then everyone in the world dying.
\n
\n2. Viruses and bacteria should not be used as weapons because it can spread to many more countries, many innocent people would get sick and maybe die, and it's not a fast and affective way to kill or fight with another country.","dateCreated":"1256259729","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"LiebermanTamar","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/LiebermanTamar","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15817024","body":"1. I believe that it was completely unethical to decide to bomb Cedar Creek. Killing the hosts is an effective way of destroying holders of the illness but does not stop it from growing back. If we killed everyone that had an infectious disease, we would be left with no one on Earth. Everyone in the movie should have made the effort to find a vaccine. (Maybe a vaccine that acts as fast as the virus.) The price that should have been paid was for others to sacrifice themselves to find a cure. Those are the greatest heroes.
\n2. I don't believe that bio-terror is a good tactic to use. The disease used could probably spread very easily (we wouldn't use it if it wasn't), which could spread and infected those we don't want infected. It could not only infect the intended victims, but the people who we want to protect as well.","dateCreated":"1256260219","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"GoldbergRebecca","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/GoldbergRebecca","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15822432","body":"1. I think that bombing as a means to disinfect is not ethical, but is in some cases necessary. If people did not ever bomb places with fast spreading diseases, then at some point, everyone would be harmed or killed by the disease. It would be better if a perfect vaccine was created and given to the people who were suffering from the disease, and certainly more ethical, but the best way to save a larger number of people from the disease would be to bomb the place.
\n
\n2. I do not think that bio-terror should ever be used in battle. For one reason, it could cause the people using it as an offense to get the disease or be harmed by the bacteria. Also, bio-terror is the opposite of bombing to disinfect. Bombing helps stop diseases from spreading, but bio-terror spreads diseases. It is both unethical and harmful.","dateCreated":"1256265578","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"HershmanElana","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/HershmanElana","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15822476","body":"1. I believe that the bombing of Cedar Creek was ethical since it prevented the virus from spreading and affecting masses of people. I am aware that the virus still managed to spread even after they bombed Cedar Creek. However, the case would have been much worse and completely uncontrollable if the carriers were still alive and they didn\u2019t bomb the infected area. I am also aware that vaccinations help to prevent viruses from spreading but it takes awhile to make the vaccinations. The people didn\u2019t have time and needed to act rapidly and effectively for it was really contagious.
\n2. I don\u2019t believe that using bacteria and viruses as weapons is a good tactic. If you were destroying a nation and used bacteria and viruses, the attackers would not be successful in wiping out the nation since some people may be immune to the virus and it would not affect them.","dateCreated":"1256265659","smartDate":"Oct 22, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"GodlinHannah","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/GodlinHannah","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"15874172","body":"1. I agree with Hannah but I also think that bombing should be a last resort. In the case in Outbreak they were informed that there was a vaccine and the bombing should have been stopped or postponed. Thanks to the pilots in the plane Cedar Creek was not bombed but it otherwise would have been.
\n
\n2. I think that bio-terror is not a good idea because diseases are so uncontrollable. If one minute mistake occurs then it can spread to unintended sources and it can come back to our country or alli countries ruinining our relationship with those countries because our's would have killed many of their people.","dateCreated":"1256390580","smartDate":"Oct 24, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"SloaneBeth","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/SloaneBeth","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"16082183","body":"1.I agree with Beth. Bombing should be a last resort. Also the the city in the beginning, and there were people there that hadn't been sick.
\n
\n2.I agree with Elana. Also, If it spreads really fast and is in the air,a lot of people could get it. Mayb evn whole cities, and states. And, if that was te case, andthey used bombs, they would needa lot of them. And they might not even get ri of all of it.","dateCreated":"1256774792","smartDate":"Oct 28, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"TibbettsDanielle","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/TibbettsDanielle","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1256775107\/TibbettsDanielle-lg.jpg"}},{"id":"16858299","body":"1. The choice to bomb Cedar Creek was not a good decision. If the people bombed Cedar Creek made the right decision if they bombed and killed alot of people only to kill one virus.
\n
\n2 To use a virus as a threat is not a good idea because people could die if some one made a mistake and the virus morfs and becomes a very harmful virus. Unless people are 100% sure that they will not make a mistake it is not good to use a bacteria as a threat.","dateCreated":"1258135738","smartDate":"Nov 13, 2009","userCreated":{"username":"ElovitzNoah","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/ElovitzNoah","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":10}]}],"more":false},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}