Libertarianism in the time of Ebola

That's not money spent on Ebola research. It's money spent on epidemiology research of all kinds.

It's looking more like the government medical agencies spend several $billions a year and a lot of it is on really silly stuff like lesbian obesity, massaging rabbits, jazzercize, and the like.

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/10/17/here...unded-instead-of-developing-an-ebola-vaccine/

 

I read the link. They don't break the spending down so you can tell how much specifically for Enola and not for other infectious diseases as well.

The writer is pulling numbers out his ass. So to speak.

 

Let me put it another way... I don't think a google docs spreadsheet with 10 numbers added up in it is a good source for the data. Ya know?

That's what your article links to.

 

That's a weird thing to say. The writer's name is Katie, so she's probably a her not a him.
But anyway, she says:

So, do you think the author is lying about that, or fudged the numbers she got, or do you think the NIAID spokesman was wrong?

barfo

 

I think much of the money spent was dual (or more than dual) purpose. Like for Ebola and Plague and quite a few other infectious diseases. They're not going to build labs and clinics and emergency facilities separate for each of those things. They're going to build one set and treat whatever comes their way from those facilities.

The government is trying to cover its ass by saying it spent more. And democrats are trying to make it look like funding was cut due to sequester.

Meanwhile, we have $300M+ in commitments specifically directed to Ebola cure and treatment from Mr. Allen and J&J. There's probably much more in the private sector than those two.

 

Yeah, you think that, but you don't have any evidence to support your position, do you?

Hmm, didn't think so.

barfo

 

No, the author of that article doesn't have any evidence.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-about-ebola-funding-111820.html#.VFDhpodFNmg

And

http://www.hhs.gov/open/recordsandreports/prevention/index.html
(Doesn't even mention Ebola, LOL)

 

http://www.ibtimes.com/ebola-outbre...-funded-more-us-government-big-pharma-1674182

According to government records, U.S. agencies have spent more than $170 million on contracts and grants to companies and medical schools doing research on dangerous hemorrhagic fevers like the Marburg virus and Lassa fever, with another $91 million specifically allocated to Ebola.

(Since 2001)

 

Your evidence is an op-ed by Bobby Jindal? Give me a break.

And the second thing appears to be one part of our overall spending, not the entirety.

barfo

 

The second part is more trustworthy than a google docs spreadsheet.

They mentioned all the multi $million grants. That is all there is.

And Jindal knows more about policy than you or a politic act "journalist."

 

That's all there is in that one funding program, yes. It isn't the entire budget of the NIH, CDC, etc.

barfo

 

It's all the ebola study grants. What other spending are you desperately imagining?

 

For a trivial example, the $91 M you identified in the other post is not included.

barfo

 

Yes it is. That's all there is.

 

Sorry. If you actually read the text, you'll see that those are just the numbers for the Prevention and Public Health fund, which was established by....Obamacare.

So, how are grants to companies going back to 2001 covered by that fund? A: they aren't.

But you go on asserting that you are correct. That's very convincing.

barfo

 

I read the text. It's all the grants.

 

Go on asserting that you are correct. It's very convincing.

barfo

 

You must have learned to read in a public school. That explains it.

When the article talks about grants in 2004 and how govt. funded infectious disease research as a response to 9/11, it's hard to believe you read it.

 

Uh, ok, whatever you say. Don't see what you just said has to do with the point I was making, but whatever. Probably my public school education.

barfo