The W.H.O. also explains that “…wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual… could transmit the virus — over a short distance — to another nearby person. This could happen when virus-laden heavy droplets are directly propelled, by coughing or sneezing…”
Despite these warnings, photos captured outside the apartment of Ebola “patient zero” Thomas Duncan show government officials walking in and out of an obviously contaminated apartment while wearing no protective gear whatsoever. The sidewalk where Duncan vomited was power-washed by people wearing no protective gear as well.
Such astonishing events put us all at risk of increased Ebola transmission, and the careless, casual attitude being witnessed right now is a direct result of the CDC knowingly lying to the public about Ebola transmission vectors.
A well-researched story by David Willman, published in the LA Times, seems to be the very first mainstream media story that dares to question the CDC’s official lies. Click here to read that story. Many of the quotes shown below are sourced from this story. Willman deserves to be applauded for having the courage to investigate this story and ask real questions that divert from CDC propaganda.
Here are the five dangerous — even deadly — assumptions still being made by the CDC, an agency that is clearly behaving in a way that threatens the health and safety of the American people:
Assumption #1) Ebola only spreads via “direct contact”
The CDC continues to dangerously assert that Ebola only spread through “direct contact.” This false claim openly encourages health and government officials to avoid donning necessary isolation gear (such as full face respirators) when mingling near infected Ebola patients.
It also makes the idea of touching Ebola-contaminated surfaces (such as doorknobs, bed sheets, countertops and even vehicle door handles) seem perfectly safe. But virologists are now openly questioning this dangerous CDC assumption. As reported by the LA Times: 
…some also question the official assertion that Ebola cannot be transmitted through the air. In late 1989, virus researcher Charles L. Bailey supervised the government’s response to an outbreak of Ebola among several dozen rhesus monkeys housed for research in Reston, Va., a suburb of Washington.
What Bailey learned from the episode informs his suspicion that the current strain of Ebola afflicting humans might be spread through tiny liquid droplets propelled into the air by coughing or sneezing. “We know for a fact that the virus occurs in sputum and no one has ever done a study [disproving that] coughing or sneezing is a viable means of transmitting,” he said. Unqualified assurances that Ebola is not spread through the air, Bailey said, are “misleading.”
Peters, whose CDC team studied cases from 27 households that emerged during a 1995 Ebola outbreak in Democratic Republic of Congo, said that while most could be attributed to contact with infected late-stage patients or their bodily fluids, “some” infections may have occurred via “aerosol transmission.”
“Those monkeys were dying in a pattern that was certainly suggestive of coughing and sneezing — some sort of aerosol movement,” Bailey said. “They were dying and spreading it so quickly from cage to cage. We finally came to the conclusion that the best action was to euthanize them all.”
Dr. Peters and Dr. Russell also warn against the dogma of the CDC, saying: 
Dr. C.J. Peters, who battled a 1989 outbreak of the virus among research monkeys housed in Virginia and who later led the CDC’s most far-reaching study of Ebola’s transmissibility in humans, said he would not rule out the possibility that it spreads through the air in tight quarters. “We just don’t have the data to exclude it…”
“Being dogmatic is, I think, ill-advised, because there are too many unknowns here.” – Dr. Philip K. Russell, an Ebola research virologist and former head of the U.S. Army’s Medical Research and Development Command. “we’re in the middle of the first experiment of multiple, serial passages of Ebola virus in man…. God knows what this virus is going to look like. I don’t.”
Dangerous assumption #2) Ebola patients cannot spread the virus until they are “symptomatic”
Another great leap of faith being made by the CDC is found in the wildly unscientific assertion that Ebola victims can’t spread the disease until they become “symptomatic.” But this wishy-washy term isn’t defined anywhere, nor is it universally understood or applied by medical professionals.
As the LA Times reports:
CDC officials also say that asymptomatic patients cannot spread Ebola. This assumption is crucial for assessing how many people are at risk of getting the disease. …there is no proof that a person infected — but who lacks symptoms — could not spread the virus to others. “It’s really unclear,” said Michael Osterholm, a public health scientist at the University of Minnesota who recently served on the U.S. government’s National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity. “None of us know.”
Russell, who oversaw the Army’s research on Ebola, said he found the epidemiological data unconvincing. “The definition of ‘symptomatic’ is a little difficult to deal with,” he said. “It may be generally true that patients aren’t excreting very much virus until they become ill, but to say that we know the course of [the virus’ entry into the bloodstream] and the course of when a virus appears in the various secretions, I think, is premature.”
The CDC, in other words, is making a huge unscientific leap in claiming that Ebola only spreads after symptoms appear. From a commonsense perspective, any body fluid that contains even tiny amounts of Ebola virus obviously poses a risk of infection to others. Even before symptoms become obvious, the Ebola virus is clearly present at some concentration in a person’s blood, saliva and mucus. Aren’t all these body fluids dangerous even before full-blown symptoms appear?
Even semen has now been identified as carrying the Ebola virus for up to 90 days after a person survives an infection. As Reuters reported today: 
Sex could keep the Ebola epidemic alive even after the World Health Organization (WHO) declares an area free of the disease, one of the discoverers of the deadly virus said on Tuesday. “In a convalescent male, the virus can persist in semen for at least 70 days; one study suggests persistence for more than 90 days,” the WHO said in an information note on Monday.
That same article also says that Ebola “spreads via bodily fluids such as blood and saliva, but it has also been detected in breast milk and urine, as well as semen.”
Dangerous assumption #3) The Ebola strain the world is fighting today is identical to the outbreak strain of 1976
Ever wonder why this particular strain of Ebola is exploding out of control and making huge leaps to infect people who thought they were taking sufficient precautions?
The real answer is that this 2014 Ebola strain isn’t the same strain world health officials battled in 1976 (where it was limited to a few dozen people).
Yet the CDC openly admits it is still fighting today’s Ebola as if it were still 1976: 
Tom Skinner, a spokesman for the CDC in Atlanta, said health officials were basing their response to Ebola on what has been learned from battling the virus since its discovery in central Africa in 1976. The CDC remains confident, he said, that Ebola is transmitted principally by direct physical contact with an ill person or their bodily fluids.
Is it possible that the CDC’s present-day advice is nearly four decades out of date?
Dangerous assumption #4) Airport screening will detect people who are harboring Ebola
Yet another dangerous assumption from the CDC is found in the agency’s ridiculous insistence that airport screening measures are rock-solid. CDC director Frieden makes them sound almost bulletproof. From the LA Times: 
“One hundred percent of the individuals getting on planes are screened for fever before they get on the plane,” Frieden said Sept. 30. “And if they have a fever, they are pulled out of the line, assessed for Ebola, and don’t fly unless Ebola is ruled out.”
But CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen went through this so-called screening process and was shocked to discover that the CDC’s claims were pure nonsense. As CNN reports: 
CNN senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen said she was shocked and horrified at the lack of screening for Ebola at an Atlanta airport after coming back from Liberia. Speaking to HLN on Monday, Cohen described what happened when she was going through customs at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport. “I expected that they were going to take my temperature, they were going to ask me lots of questions, but they didn’t,” Cohen said.
Even more, it turns out to be incredibly easy for travelers to sneak through such screening procedures even if they really did exist like Frieden claims. Simply taking an ibuprofen tablet can lower your temperature and get you through such checkpoints. As the LA Times reports: 
Individuals who have flown recently from one or more of the affected countries suggested that travelers could easily subvert the screening procedures… A person could pass body temperature checks performed at the airports by taking ibuprofen or any common analgesic. And prospective passengers have much to fear from identifying themselves as sick.
Thus, the CDC’s outlandish claim that “one hundred percent” of travelers are carefully screened before boarding an airplane is nothing short of delusional.
Dangerous assumption #5) Vaccines and pharma drugs are the only useful medical tools for preventing the spread of Ebola
Like almost everybody else in the modern medical system today, the CDC leaps to the assumption that there are really only two medical interventions for halting Ebola: Big Pharma drugs (like ZMapp) or vaccines (which are currently being tested in human trials).
But this assumption is extremely shortsighted, and following this false assumption is already putting people’s lives at risk.
In truth, every person who has so far survived Ebola has done so because their own immune system saved them. So why isn’t the CDC recommending that people take steps to boost their immune function in anticipation of possible exposure?
It’s no secret that immune systems are suppressed when the body lacks crucial nutrients like vitamin D, zinc and selenium. Because most Americans are deficient in these nutrients, the simple advice to boost these levels through affordable nutritional intake could make a significant difference in enhancing the population’s immune resistance to viral infections.
A huge number of culinary herbs, medicinal herbs and herbal remedies have well-known antiviral properties. These include common herbs such as basil, oregano, garlic and even popular mint varieties. (Listen to episode six of Pandemic Preparedness for a more complete discussion of antiviral herbs and spices.) Why won’t the CDC encourage increased intake of these foods as a way to support a healthy immune response during a global pandemic that is clearly out of control?
While no nutrient or herb has ever been proven to stop Ebola, it has been proven that the human immune system can stop it. Doesn’t it make sense to support that immune system and give it all the nutrients it needs to function at peak performance? Why is this option not even being entertained by the CDC or even the national media?
The CDC’s dogma may ultimately cause the death of tens of millions
In summary, these five assumptions being made by the CDC are astonishingly irresponsible… even negligent. By spreading these false assumptions as if they were truths, the CDC may ultimately contribute to the deaths of literally millions of innocent Americans.
Here at Natural News, we want to see this outbreak halted and contained. That’s why we launched www.BioDefense.com where you can download free MP3 audio files that teach lifesaving pandemic preparedness skills. But every single day it seems like we are having to counter the ignorance and disinformation being distributed by the CDC, a vaccine-promoting government department that almost seems to be purposefully spreading disinformation about Ebola in the hopes that it might spread even more. Such a crisis would, of course, create a financial windfall for the very vaccine manufacturers that top CDC employees often end up working for, making lucrative salaries like former CDC director Dr. Julie Gerberding.
The conflicts of interest in the CDC’s behavior need to be publicly questioned. And we need to have the courage to stand up and ask the biggest question of all: Is the CDC deliberately downplaying the risk of Ebola transmission in order to encourage an outbreak in the USA that would lead to more vaccine sales and bigger CDC budgets?
We can’t say for sure whether that’s the case, but it’s a question that needs to be seriously entertained at this point.
Sources for this article include: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ebola-qu…