Ebola (1 Viewer)

[Fennis]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

Cant be too careful. The American death count is up to zero.

http://deadhomersociety.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/snow2.png

 

[jon_mx]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

 

[3C's]

So when our troops come back from the area do we sequester them in an airport office for 7 hours, quarantine them for 21 days?

 

[Apple Jack]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

 

[jon_mx]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

 

[Sinn Fein]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

I'm pretty sure flamethrowers are out of the question.

 

[Apple Jack]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

How many volunteers have returned and "spread the disease?"

 

[jon_mx]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

I'm pretty sure flamethrowers are out of the question.

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

 

[jon_mx]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

How many volunteers have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not talking about volunteers either. I was talking about residents of the country should be going nowhere. It only took two people traveling from Guinea to Liberia to spread the virus there and now there are over 10,000 people infected and will be over 100,000 in a few months.

 

[3C's]

There are 547 U.S. troops there, primarily in Liberia though some are in Senegal, according to the Pentagon. Their assignments include building 17 treatment centers in Liberia, training local professionals in how to handle Ebola patients and conducting tests to verify diagnoses of the virus.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/17/ebola-military-pentagon-reservists-liberia/17426929/

 

[3C's]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

How many volunteers have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not talking about volunteers either. I was talking about residents of the country should be going nowhere. It only took two people traveling from Guinea to Liberia to spread the virus there and now there are over 10,000 people infected and will be over 100,000 in a few months.

How do you stop people in 3rd world countries who live in "villages" from crossing borders when they wish? In the video that was posted a few days ago there was a person who was suspected to be infected. Being taken to a treatment center frightened him so he ran off into the jungle when the crew came to get him. Word was he kept going into a neighboring country.

 

[Fennis]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

How many volunteers have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not talking about volunteers either. I was talking about residents of the country should be going nowhere. It only took two people traveling from Guinea to Liberia to spread the virus there and now there are over 10,000 people infected and will be over 100,000 in a few months.

You

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

I'm pretty sure flamethrowers are out of the question.

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

 

[3C's]

A handful of volunteers going there for a few weeks is not is what is going to get this under control. It has to be a larger more organized effort with all the proper protocol gear and logistics to support a sustained effort for at least 6-12 months. Probably a multi-national effort. It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more. And it does not make sense to treat those who do go over there like criminals.

How many doctors have returned and "spread the disease?"

I was not even talking about doctors in that sentence.

Suggestion: be specific then instead of cryptic. It's almost like you're purposely doing word dances to incite arguments. A lot of the recent talk here has been about the doctor and nurse coming back here. So when you say "It does not make sense to allow those from the epidemic areas to freely travel and spread the disease even more." right after people are discussing issues here you lead others to misinterpret your point.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

 

[Fennis]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of volunteers go for a month or less. What will that do to the effort if they need to spend 3 of their 4 weeks volunteer time in isolation?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

So when our troops come back from the area do we sequester them in an airport office for 7 hours, quarantine them for 21 days?

This is what I'm talking about. You throw that out there as if it's some kind of reductio ad absurdem. If troops were exposed to Ebola (no idea if they have been), especially without protective gear (again, no idea) what would be the big deal with paying them to stay in a particular part of the base and watch tv for a few weeks? Think of it as a three-week extension of their mission.

It's very likely that there are logistical concerns that I'm overlooking, but I think the costs of quarantining civilians is quite a bit higher than the cost of quarantining troops. Civilians didn't sign on for that, whereas troops actually did. And they'd get paid for their time while civilians presumably don't.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of volunteers go for a month or less. What will that do to the effort if they need to spend 3 of their 4 weeks volunteer time in isolation?

I think it would probably be pretty damaging. I feel like I have a reasonably good handle on the downsides to quarantining doctors. Neither you nor I have any serious idea of the benefits.

 

[jon_mx]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of volunteers go for a month or less. What will that do to the effort if they need to spend 3 of their 4 weeks volunteer time in isolation?

As praise-worthy as their effort may be, that is not the kind of effort that is going to make much of a difference. Even what our troops are doing is just a start of the kind of effort that will be required.

 

[Fennis]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of volunteers go for a month or less. What will that do to the effort if they need to spend 3 of their 4 weeks volunteer time in isolation?

I think it would probably be pretty damaging. I feel like I have a reasonably good handle on the downsides to quarantining doctors. Neither you nor I have any serious idea of the benefits.

the benefit is 1 person would not have been in his apartment when his fever was high due to Ebola, but rather in a government run facility.

 

[Fennis]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

 

[jon_mx]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

The military building treatment centers is a start. We need more of that, plus some staff for oversight. They will need food and medical supplies and such to sustain those facilities. Ideally we could coordinate a large multi-national effort to help both treat and isolate the problem.

 

[3C's]

So when our troops come back from the area do we sequester them in an airport office for 7 hours, quarantine them for 21 days?

This is what I'm talking about. You throw that out there as if it's some kind of reductio ad absurdem. If troops were exposed to Ebola (no idea if they have been), especially without protective gear (again, no idea) what would be the big deal with paying them to stay in a particular part of the base and watch tv for a few weeks? Think of it as a three-week extension of their mission.

It's very likely that there are logistical concerns that I'm overlooking, but I think the costs of quarantining civilians is quite a bit higher than the cost of quarantining troops. Civilians didn't sign on for that, whereas troops actually did. And they'd get paid for their time while civilians presumably don't.

The folks in Africa are primarily reservists. So when they come back they have their normal jobs to go to, bills to pay, etc.

 

[Fennis]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

The military building treatment centers is a start. We need more of that, plus some staff for oversight. They will need food and medical supplies and such to sustain those facilities. Ideally we could coordinate a large multi-national effort to help both treat and isolate the problem.

Great ideas. Who form the US going to staff this effort? Military? NGOs? Where and how are you going to find additional people to do this who aren't already doing it?

 

[3C's]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

The military building treatment centers is a start. We need more of that, plus some staff for oversight. They will need food and medical supplies and such to sustain those facilities. Ideally we could coordinate a large multi-national effort to help both treat and isolate the problem.

Great ideas. Who form the US going to staff this effort? Military? NGOs? Where and how are you going to find additional people to do this who aren't already doing it?

Sounds like we need to add people to this effort exponentially.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

CDC has already decided that quarantines are not necessary. And, yet here we sit with people who volunteered their time and energy to go help fight this issue at ground zero - all being told, great, now go sit over in that corner for 3 weeks, we'll get back to you.

Its when people who wan tot assume the worst case scenario, and then embellish it a bit, that you get fed mongering going on, and NY and NJ shutting their borders, because they know best.

 

[matuski]

http://www.dallasnews.com/ebola/headlines/20141025-uta-grad-isolated-at-new-jersey-hospital-as-part-of-ebola-quarantine.ece

I had spent a month watching children die, alone. I had witnessed human tragedy unfold before my eyes. I had tried to help when much of the world has looked on and done nothing.

I sat alone in the isolation tent and thought of many colleagues who will return home to America and face the same ordeal. Will they be made to feel like criminals and prisoners?

"I spent the last several months watching people die from this illness, and I just don't understand why public health experts want to verify that I'm not carrying the same disease before I stroll back into the country."

Public health EXPERTS seem to agree if you're not showing symptoms you are not a risk of spreading the disease.

And yet hospitals are quarantining people who came into contact with the Ebola victims despite showing no symptoms.

Edit: I'm talking specifically about the three people who came into contact with the NY doctor who were subsequently quarantined. From what I can tell, one of them has already been cleared/released while the other two are still being held.

Precautions are not some indication contradicting what we know to be the case regarding spreading the virus. It is just that, a precaution.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

The military building treatment centers is a start. We need more of that, plus some staff for oversight. They will need food and medical supplies and such to sustain those facilities. Ideally we could coordinate a large multi-national effort to help both treat and isolate the problem.

The nurse's mom said she was treated worse than a dog. To prevent this complain, people should be given a giant hug when they are released from quarantine.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

So when our troops come back from the area do we sequester them in an airport office for 7 hours, quarantine them for 21 days?

This is what I'm talking about. You throw that out there as if it's some kind of reductio ad absurdem. If troops were exposed to Ebola (no idea if they have been), especially without protective gear (again, no idea) what would be the big deal with paying them to stay in a particular part of the base and watch tv for a few weeks? Think of it as a three-week extension of their mission.

It's very likely that there are logistical concerns that I'm overlooking, but I think the costs of quarantining civilians is quite a bit higher than the cost of quarantining troops. Civilians didn't sign on for that, whereas troops actually did. And they'd get paid for their time while civilians presumably don't.

I had suggested house arrest with the angle bracelets. What's wrong with this idea?

 

[jon_mx]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

The military building treatment centers is a start. We need more of that, plus some staff for oversight. They will need food and medical supplies and such to sustain those facilities. Ideally we could coordinate a large multi-national effort to help both treat and isolate the problem.

The nurse's mom said she was treated worse than a dog. To prevent this complain, people should be given a giant hug when they are released from quarantine.

Hugs from Obama?

 

[Rohn Jambo]

The nurse may be justified in what she said, but it does not sounds like she has the ideal personality FBGs look for in a girlfriend or wife.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/26/health/new-jersey-quarantined-nurse/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/quarantined-nurse-blasts-gov-christie-doctor-article-1.1987584

I doubt she'll wear a sexy Ebola nurse costume for Halloween.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

I seem to be one of the few on this thread who is even remotely concerned with what is going on in Africa and proposing to take an aggressive action to treat and isolate the epidemic. Seems to be many who only want to continually harp on the fact that no Americans have died.

What is your solution to treating the disease in Africa?

The military building treatment centers is a start. We need more of that, plus some staff for oversight. They will need food and medical supplies and such to sustain those facilities. Ideally we could coordinate a large multi-national effort to help both treat and isolate the problem.

The nurse's mom said she was treated worse than a dog. To prevent this complain, people should be given a giant hug when they are released from quarantine.

Hugs from Obama?

Looks like the answer is no: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/27/nyregion/ebola-quarantine.html

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

CDC has already decided that quarantines are not necessary. And, yet here we sit with people who volunteered their time and energy to go help fight this issue at ground zero - all being told, great, now go sit over in that corner for 3 weeks, we'll get back to you.

Its when people who wan tot assume the worst case scenario, and then embellish it a bit, that you get fed mongering going on, and NY and NJ shutting their borders, because they know best.

There are different types of quarantines for different kinds of people, and I think we're making a mistake by conflating all quarantines into exactly the same thing.

I'm open to argument on all of these, but here's what I'm currently thinking:

1) Travel ban to and from infected regions of Africa. I have a hard time imagining that the benefits outweigh the cost. This policy would almost eliminate the possibility of civilian humanitarian aid and severely disrupt the personal business of folks who come nowhere near Ebola. On the benefit side, it would probably prevent a non-zero number of carriers coming into the US. But we can deal with those.

2) Quarantine of all aid workers (including nurses and doctors) arriving home from infected regions. I'm skeptical of this because it seems as if the costs outweigh the benefits, but it's not a crazy idea and merits discussion. This is what drew me into this thread. It greatly disincentives humanitarian aid, which is a large cost. I'm not sure to what degree returning health care workers pose a threat. It's obviously a non-zero threat, but we're dealing with a very small sample size. And in a country with a very good health care infrastructure. I'm inclined to say no, but people who say yes have a pretty strong case too.

3) Quarantine of all people (domestic civilians) who come into close contact with Ebola patients. Again, I think this is open for discussion. But whereas humanitarian workers took appropriate precautions, these folks didn't, and that makes a quarantine more attractive. "They" did these in NY in response to the Eboloa-positive doctor before Christie-Cuomo got involved, so it seems science-driven and not political to me. Open to argument, but it seems to me that this is a yes.

4) Quarantine of people who were exposed to Ebola and who are showing Eboloa symptoms. No-brainer, and I haven't seen anyone arguing against this.

What I strongly object to are categorical arguments about how quarantines are always bad because they infringe on personal liberty or how travel bans are clearly justified because no risk is ever worth it. There's too much of that floating around.

 

[jon_mx]

CDC also has insufficient protocols in place for hospitals until recently, after it was too late for patient #1.

 

[jon_mx]

I hope doctor and nurses stop going to Africa to help.

I mean this is 'Murica, and we have to look after our own. #### everyone else. We just like to be fat, drunk and stupid.

I disagree very strongly with this. I'm proud of the fact that the US (along with other nations) helps out to contain these sorts of outbreaks even if didn't involve our national interests at all. That kind of humanitarian aid is great IMO.

What I don't think you quite a few other posters in this thread get is that there are a lot of people like me who strongly support these efforts, in part, because we know that if Ebola (or some other disease) happened to make its way back here, we have a public health system that can do what is necessary to stop the disease from spreading. I'm not concerned about Ebola spreading out of control because we have the infrastructure to track down potential carriers and get them off the street. When you guys talk as if quarantines are completely crazy and make analogies to "guilty until proven innocent" and generally make it sound as if you think that people exposed to a disease like Ebola should be free to walk around as they see fit, you actually undermine support for the humanitarian efforts that you and I both favor.

I'm sure folks at WHO, the CDC, and other organizations will use what we learn from this episode to strengthen protocols. If they decide that quarantining people exposed to Ebola (doctors being a special case of course because they presumably protected themselves while providing treatment) isn't necessary, that's great.

CDC has already decided that quarantines are not necessary. And, yet here we sit with people who volunteered their time and energy to go help fight this issue at ground zero - all being told, great, now go sit over in that corner for 3 weeks, we'll get back to you.

Its when people who wan tot assume the worst case scenario, and then embellish it a bit, that you get fed mongering going on, and NY and NJ shutting their borders, because they know best.

There are different types of quarantines for different kinds of people, and I think we're making a mistake by conflating all quarantines into exactly the same thing.

I'm open to argument on all of these, but here's what I'm currently thinking:

1) Travel ban to and from infected regions of Africa. I have a hard time imagining that the benefits outweigh the cost. This policy would almost eliminate the possibility of civilian humanitarian aid and severely disrupt the personal business of folks who come nowhere near Ebola. On the benefit side, it would probably prevent a non-zero number of carriers coming into the US. But we can deal with those.

I don't think anyone is advocating a complete travel ban to and from the region keeping humanitarian aid out, but a ban on residents from traveling to other countries.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

I looked into volunteering in West Africa but they only want people with medical experience.

 

[Smack Tripper]

Christie is an embarassment for this...obviously playing this for political points...Quarantine needs to be better thought out then a tent in Newark

 

[shadyridr]

If she tested negative for ebola does that mean shes free amd clear?

 

[matuski]

CDC also has insufficient protocols in place for hospitals until recently, after it was too late for patient #1.

Common sense is protocol enough for the most part. We know this when we walk into a room - protect yourself.

If I am outside a room with an infected patient (Ebola or otherwise), I don't walk in until I am wearing proper PPE.

Or I can go in anyway then cry about protocol.

 

[Fennis]

If she tested negative for ebola does that mean shes free amd clear?

You can test negative, but later develop the disease. This period lasts 21 days (although in a small number of cases it apparently can be longer). After you have ebola, once you test negative for 3 days in a row you are in the clear. You are also likely immune to that same strain of ebola.

 

[jon_mx]

CDC also has insufficient protocols in place for hospitals until recently, after it was too late for patient #1.

Common sense is protocol enough for the most part. We know this when we walk into a room - protect yourself.

If I am outside a room with an infected patient (Ebola or otherwise), I don't walk in until I am wearing proper PPE.

Or I can go in anyway then cry about protocol.

If you watched 60 Minutes last night you would have seen they followed CDC protocol in place at the time and two of them got it. Then the CDC modified the protocol.

 

[ghostguy123]

CDC also has insufficient protocols in place for hospitals until recently, after it was too late for patient #1.

Common sense is protocol enough for the most part. We know this when we walk into a room - protect yourself.

If I am outside a room with an infected patient (Ebola or otherwise), I don't walk in until I am wearing proper PPE.

Or I can go in anyway then cry about protocol.

If you watched 60 Minutes last night you would have seen they followed CDC protocol in place at the time and two of them got it. Then the CDC modified the protocol.

This is correct. The problem they ran into was when they were taking off the PPE.

Thought this was all covered like 2 weeks ago though.

 

[matuski]

As I said all along, the CDC's new "rigorous" training will revolve around not being a complete moron.

Tightened Guidance for U.S. Healthcare Workers on Personal Protective Equipment for EbolaThe enhanced guidance is centered on three principles:

• All healthcare workers undergo rigorous training and are practiced and competent with PPE, including putting it on and taking it off in a systemic manner
• No skin exposure when PPE is worn
• All workers are supervised by a trained monitor who watches each worker putting PPE on and taking it off.

This is to say Ebola is so hard to get you have to damn near try to do so... by exposing yourself to it directly.

To bump again jon and ghosts "NEW" CDC protocols.

The "NEW" part? A stronger recommendation to protect yourself.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

How about the Nurse in New Jersey...She has spent like two days in quarantine and she already sounds like she is going to crack...

 

[jon_mx]

As I said all along, the CDC's new "rigorous" training will revolve around not being a complete moron.

Tightened Guidance for U.S. Healthcare Workers on Personal Protective Equipment for EbolaThe enhanced guidance is centered on three principles:

• All healthcare workers undergo rigorous training and are practiced and competent with PPE, including putting it on and taking it off in a systemic manner
• No skin exposure when PPE is worn
• All workers are supervised by a trained monitor who watches each worker putting PPE on and taking it off.

This is to say Ebola is so hard to get you have to damn near try to do so... by exposing yourself to it directly.

To bump again jon and ghosts "NEW" CDC protocols.

The "NEW" part? A stronger recommendation to protect yourself.

I am sure all those 10,000 people in West Africa wer trying damn hard to get it. You are unbelievable.

 

[3C's]

Again with the West Africa comment when someone is talking about over here. Weird...

 

[jon_mx]

Again with the West Africa comment when someone is talking about over here. Weird...

I am pretty sure the virus works the same regardless of the contienent it is on. I highly suspect the virus is even unaware of its location.

 

[msommer]

Again with the West Africa comment when someone is talking about over here. Weird...

I am pretty sure the virus works the same regardless of the contienent it is on. I highly suspect the virus is even unaware of its location.

I thought it was settled that it didn't want to go to Britain

 

[3C's]

Again with the West Africa comment when someone is talking about over here. Weird...

I am pretty sure the virus works the same regardless of the contienent it is on. I highly suspect the virus is even unaware of its location.

I thought it was settled that it didn't want to go to Britain

True, they're boring.

 

[3C's]

Again with the West Africa comment when someone is talking about over here. Weird...

I am pretty sure the virus works the same regardless of the contienent it is on. I highly suspect the virus is even unaware of its location.

What does that have to do with CDC protocols?

 

[Doug B]

I am sure all those 10,000 people in West Africa wer trying damn hard to get it. You are unbelievable.

Kind of addressing a point you've not made explicitly, but are sort of dancing around: Ebola is not spreading in West Africa through the usual cold/flu transmission vectors, either.

First off, there's kind of a cultural denial going on in some West African families and communities about Ebola. There is great incentive to deny having it, or to deny that a family member has it. This has led to a pervasive attitude of "Well, if authorities don't know it, I don't have Ebola" (cf. "Cops didn't see it, I didn't do it").

Accordingly, much (probably "most", but I can't cite numbers) Ebola care is done in the home, without equipment or medicine. The risk there in even something as simple as bathing an Ebola patient is obvious.

Further, the local culture strongly favors a ritual funeral dressing of the corpse that involves a lot of up-close handling. The virus is being spread quite a lot this way, as well.

Maybe all this is stuff people in this thread already know, but there are a lot of people in the wider world who are positive that Ebola moves through a population in exactly the same way as colds and flu. Anf that's just not true.