As far as I'm aware the treatment/quarantine centre for ebola in the UK is in London. I would be desperate to have any ebola victims out of the UK, it only takes one to start it all off here.
Yeah me too Sivam so why the rhetoric, it's a bit unnecessary really. In this case London is one of the regional centres for contagious disease control so even if Scotland didn't have it's own it's likely this person would have transferred anyway would have
Do you think that had Scotland voted "yes" folk would not be treated outwith Scotland regardless of their condition if there were more appropriate facilities elsewhere? There are many instances of folk being treated outwith their own country but it does not reflect badly on that country's right to be an independent nation.
Regardless of how this issue is being used in this thread, it occurs to me that there really ought to be more than one treatment/quarantine centre in the UK. Ebola (or any other) patients taken to the nearest.
One could suggest that we (the UK) are equipped with sufficient cover for infectious diseases having a major centre in London. BUT an outbreak of Ebola or similar on an epidemic scale would really stretch resources. Old_Geezer I agree there could be more centres in various UK locations equipt to deal with this.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.