The following stories are about ways in which the CDC has made false assumptions about Ebola, the infection becoming widespread in Africa and threatening , as yet, a few places in the United States. But, beyond making false assumptions about Ebola as a disease, we are disserved by the CDC because it has misrepresented the science involving Ebola as being of one mind. The CDC would have us believe there is only its own understanding of Ebola, and anyone who would disagree would have so backing for their view. So, The CDC would have us believe that it would be difficult to get Ebola if one was just standing or sitting next to an Ebola-infected person. Yet, it has been suggested that Ebola virus can exist within the sputum coughed into the air in droplet form, and that if this material should get in contact with people the disease can thereby spread. This method of transmission is common. It does not seem implausible for a virus to so spread. It is a misrepresentation of the science to suggest, as the CDC has been doing, that there is no controversy amongst the scientific community about how to understand Ebola, and what to do about it. Given that there are disagreements, as I will show in the following arguments, the prudent position for the CDC and the American people is to err, if at all, on the side of caution. The CDC has seemed to only recommend less than the most cautious strategies against the disease. In doing this it seems to me, and the writers represented below, that the CDC is doing us a disservice. It actually might be causing people harm.
I want to present these arguments as a way to discuss the problem of Ebola, and infections in general, in order to show that Americans are like “Ma Barker,” and in denial, not just because the boys rob banks when they leave the house, but because the world is an unpleasant place in many other ways , too. “Ma,” unfortunately, can’t handle any of it.
The problem with the war in Viet Nam, etc., or the epidemic in Africa, is that Americans are most accurately described as being like the Barker gang. Ma Barker stayed at home while her boys went out to rob banks. They refuse to deal with reality. Ma, representing the people left at home, were in denial about what the boys did when they left the house. In order for us as political and philosophical activists to do something about the wars, or the health catastrophes, one not only has to do something about what the boys are doing when they leave the house, that is, get them to stop robbing banks, but, also, one has to get Americans to do something about the boys, and not just actively ignore or enable their criminality. This makes political or philosophical activism difficult. Not only do you have to stop the robberies, but you have to somehow get the people who have the power to stop them to actively do that when it seems to these Americans that their existence depends on not doing so. It’s the boys and their bank robberies, after all, who bring home the bacon and pay for all the other “nice” things around the house.
…Here are the five dangerous -- even deadly -- assumptions still being made by the CDC, an agency that is clearly behaving in a way that threatens the health and safety of the American people:
Assumption #1) Ebola only spreads via "direct contact"The CDC continues to dangerously assert that Ebola only spread through "direct contact." This false claim openly encourages health and government officials to avoid donning necessary isolation gear (such as full face respirators) when mingling near infected Ebola patients.
It also makes the idea of touching Ebola-contaminated surfaces (such as doorknobs, bed sheets, countertops and even vehicle door handles) seem perfectly safe. But virologists are now openly questioning this dangerous CDC assumption. As reported by the LA Times: 
...some also question the official assertion that Ebola cannot be transmitted through the air. In late 1989, virus researcher Charles L. Bailey supervised the government's response to an outbreak of Ebola among several dozen rhesus monkeys housed for research in Reston, Va., a suburb of Washington.
What Bailey learned from the episode informs his suspicion that the current strain of Ebola afflicting humans might be spread through tiny liquid droplets propelled into the air by coughing or sneezing. "We know for a fact that the virus occurs in sputum and no one has ever done a study [disproving that] coughing or sneezing is a viable means of transmitting," he said. Unqualified assurances that Ebola is not spread through the air, Bailey said, are "misleading."
Peters, whose CDC team studied cases from 27 households that emerged during a 1995 Ebola outbreak in Democratic Republic of Congo, said that while most could be attributed to contact with infected late-stage patients or their bodily fluids, "some" infections may have occurred via "aerosol transmission."