Recently, in south-west Africa Ebola viruses are broken up. Not only Africans are infected but many foreigners are infected too. On August in USA, the argue about returning of doctor Kent Brantly who contracted the Ebola virus at Liberia was hot issue. At this point, we have to consider whether infectious disease, like Ebola, patient should return to their home country. Most countries make the patient return to their home country although there is a undeniable hazard, flow of the infectious disease to the country. Of course, there is not just a bad situation when the infectious patient returned to their country. The returned patient sometimes get better than before thanks to his or her country's great medical system. Nonetheless, there is one fact that is nothing to sneeze, flow of the disease. I think that the unconditional return of Ebola patient should not be allowed.
Before I start to argue, I want to give some information of Ebola and examples of flow of communicable disease from abroad. Ebola virus disease (called simply Ebola) is a communicable disease of humans and other primates caused by ebolaviruses. Symptoms appear between two days and three weeks after contracting the virus. Symptoms are fever, sore throats, muscle pain and headache like normal cold. Then, vomiting, diarrhea and rash follow and some patients begin to bleed externally and internally. The study for vaccine has been ongoing all around the world. Some successful results of clinical demonstration are reported but there are no certain result that the vaccine is really helpful to treat the Ebola viruses. I think I give you enough information to understand my arguments. From now on, I want to emphasize the serious of flow of communicable disease from abroad by examples. In fact, the rates of flow of communicable disease are increased, increasing abroad travelers or volunteers. There are 1108 cases of flow of communicable disease from 2001 to 2008. Cases of Malaria are the most cases as 340 and Dengue follows as 262. There are no examples of the spread of communicable disease through return of communicable disease. The number of cases said that Korea is very vulnerable to flow of disease from abroad.
The government have a duty to protect their people. According to article 10 Constitution of Korea, All citizens shall be assured of human dignity and worth and have the right to pursue happiness. It is the duty of the State to confirm and guarantee the fundamental and inviolable human rights of individuals. People have rights to be safety for their happiness. It is inviolable human rights, so the state has a duty to protect their people. To this thesis, many opponents would criticize that the patient is also their people. In this thesis, my focused point is the safety. The government have to protect their people from many danger. For example, the government should protect their people from Ebola disease. The government should keep in mind that Ebola has powerful contagiousness and there is no appropriate vaccine.
There are few countries which have systematic disease control system. Especially Korea has very vulnerable disease control system. The reason that USA let patients return to the USA is that they have systematic control disease center and they are convinced their control disease system can do their role. However, the Korea control disease center doesn't have enough information about Ebola and they don't have much experience that control the serious infectious disease. The USA CDC has studied Ebola virus and vaccine for a long time and they have various experience. In addition, I can't trust the Korea's CDC. There are some examples; Last august one man entered to the Korea in Busan. The man was from Liberia where the Ebola virus is spread. Suddenly, the man disappeared. People were anxious and criticized the government. The government should keep in mind the man's location and identity because he is possible to be a Ebola patient. This case showed that the government doesn't do their role well. Like this the Korea CDC are not systematic and effective. How people trust them and let the patient return to Korea?
Many opponents would criticize my opinion. They argue that the government couldn't ignore their people's death and the protection of the government is ethical. In addition, they support their argument by USA's return. The patient who is returned to the USA was treated well and got better than before. It is unignorable fact, but it is the case of the USA. As i said before, the USA has the greatest medical system and control disease center. They have studied ebola virus and vaccine for a long time. Their studies is not compatible to other countries, so the patient could get better. In Korea,there is not enough studies about Ebola. If the patients are returned to the Korea, there would be more dangerous than lucky. Furthermore, the government consider which choice can be more effective and safe. To protect people from infectious disease, the best way is to blockade. It sounds too violent and unethical. I just express my idea. I don't think my opinion is always truth. I propose just one hypothesis. In my opinion, the ebola patient's return is not right.
I argue whether the Ebola patient should return to their country unconditionally. This topic is very important because the Ebola virus is now a very serious issue in the world. The Ebola virus spread very fast. Nonetheless, the appropriate vaccine have not invented yet. In this case, prevention is the best way to protect people from the disease. To do so, the government should reconsider the patient's return. Also they have to try to build systematic and effective medical system and control disease center. My argument could sounds violent and unethical, but this way is the effective way to us in this situation. Through my argument, I want the government review their system and the opportunity to protect people from enormous danger. There is adage, 'Look before you leap'. I think this time is to look before you leap.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기