Joe B wrote...
> Sorry to hear of this situation, David-
>
> HIV would not be much of an issue I believe
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/qa/qa35.htm
Believe anything you want, all the prestigious CDC scientists who wrote
the report wouldn't dare to touch the blood without protective gear, no
many how propaganda slogans they chant claiming it's harmless.
Much like the city's water utility engineer who proclaims the local tap
water safe to drink as he sips from a bottle of Dasani.
> Hep appears to be more of a problem. I'd suggest contacting a doctor
> and explaining the extent of your exposure.
>
> http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/common_faqs.htm#5
I've always wondered why Hepatitis isn't granted a special civil right
status like HIV. And as with HIV, the doctors will simply charge her
$500 to "counsel" her that she is at "low" risk of infection, all while
wearing rubber gloves to examine her.
JOHN - 30 May 2007 10:46 GMT
> Joe B wrote...
>> Sorry to hear of this situation, David-
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> the report wouldn't dare to touch the blood without protective gear, no
> many how propaganda slogans they chant claiming it's harmless.
how many scientists go and clear up blood?
anyway, that is a case of believing your own propaganda, and hardly a good
career move to flout the propaganda
see smallpox dangers bollocks http://www.whale.to/v/smallpox2.html