(NaturalNews) The first official case of Ebola has entered the U.S. via the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport in Texas, and neither the U.S. government nor the healthcare system at large is prepared for the possible pandemic that could eventually unfold.

The latest reports indicate that a man by the name of Thomas Eric Duncan, a Liberian national who is now being referred to as "patient zero" by the media, flew into Dallas on United Airlines from Washington Dulles International Airport in Virginia on September 20. This was one of several international layovers that he had while traveling from Liberia to visit family and friends.

When Duncan first began showing symptoms of low-grade fever and abdominal pain on September 24, he reportedly sought care from Presbyterian Hospital Dallas (PHD), which initially refused to admit him. As directed, Duncan returned home to stay with family living in the area, only to quickly develop more severe symptoms that resulted in him having to be rushed back to the hospital via ambulance on September 28.

At this point, emergency medical service workers recognized that Duncan's sickness was abnormal and immediately collaborated with PHD to implement U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) isolation protocols. But it may have already been too late at this point, as Duncan had already been in contact with at least five school-age children and various others in his community.

With a second possible case of Ebola already being reported, many are starting to wonder just how bad things will get, and whether or not our nation has the infrastructure, resources and wisdom necessary to handle a pandemic. The CDC seems to think that we don't, warning that the agency has been operating at a reduced budget for several years now.

"CDC continues to work with reduced financial resources, which similarly affects state, local, and insular public health departments," reads a CDC report issued earlier this year. "These losses make it difficult for state and local health departments to continue to expand their preparedness capabilities, instead forcing them to focus on maintaining their current capabilities."

CDC lying to public about who is at risk from Dallas Ebola victim

The CDC claims that congressional funding for public health emergencies has gradually declined by about $1 billion since its peak period just after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the attempted anthrax attacks that occurred one week after. Nearly 50,000 front-line health emergency jobs have also been scrapped since 2008.

Increasing the CDC's budget likely won't have a positive impact on public health, though. This is the same agency that continues to insist that Ebola-infected individuals aren't a threat until they begin to show symptoms. The science backing this claim is shaky at best, looking only at old data on previous strains of Ebola, which weren't as virulent.

"The distinction between 'incubation' and 'visible symptoms' is a continuum, not discrete in nature," explains a recent report by Global Research. "[A] few droplets might not be rain, but they're not indicative of fully clear skies either--so the boundary drawn by the CDC is, like nearly everything else the U.S. government does, arbitrary."

Asymptomatic Ebola transmission simply can't be ruled out, in other words, as a possible infection vector based on the speed and pattern at which the disease is currently spreading. And the CDC's capricious dismissal of the this possibility demonstrates that the last thing this corrupt agency needs is another cash infusion, at least now without systematic reform, anyway.

To learn more about how to prepare for a potential Ebola crisis here in the U.S., be sure to check out:
BioDefense.com.

Sources:

http://www.washingtontimes.com

http://www.cnn.com

http://washingtonexaminer.com

http://www.wfaa.com

http://www.globalresearch.ca