Official Ebola update thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under Maine law: " If, based upon clear and convincing evidence, the court finds that a public health threat exists, the court shall issue the requested order for treatment or such other order as may direct the least restrictive measures necessary to effectively protect the public health."

In other words, Maine would be stupid to go to court because no judge is going to order a quarantine. And this is why Christie let her go - he's a good enough lawyer to know he'd lose.

Nope, sorry. Any judge is going to defer heavily to the health dept on what constitutes "clear and convincing evidence" of a threat. There's nothing in this law that requires an actual, current infection. The significant probability of infection, combined with the severity of the disease, is enough to support quarantine. Especially in a case such as this where the nurse has made clear public statements that she intends to defy ANY public health measures whatsoever. In this particular case, her conduct warrants even more restrictive measures.

The judge is NOT going to defer to the health department. Please don't speak about how the court system works, if you don't have any knowledge or experience. The health department has the burden of proof. Both sides are going to put up experts to testify on how this woman affects public health. It's not going to be based on how scared y'all are or preventing panic. It's going to be based on how much risk she poses for infecting others. It's also going to be based on whether a less intrusive method (ie. self-monitoring of temperature) can be used. Since that method has been used to good effect so far and since no HCW has caused an infection, the clear and convincing evidence is that quarantines of asymptomatic HCWs is really, really stupid.

Of course I know how the court system works. Unless you can provide me with a raft of case law directly on point stating that people without active infections cannot be quarantined in Maine (which I assure you does not exist), I'd be the company on my position.

[Anonymous]

MSF needs to get its head out of its butt ASAP! Obama administration is going to freak out over the election implications of Ebola, and the more this nurse makes such a huge deal of defying public health officials IN HER OWN COUNTRY, the more likely it is that the feds will crack down hard.

If MSF took some reasonable leadership and required tough (voluntary) self-quarantine measurse like Samaritans does, then this would all be side-stepped. Set up a luxury compound in the Hamptons and let returning workers wait out their quarantine there.

But if MSF keeps on being stubborn and making this into an anti-US thing, then the US is going to react much more strongly than it would have.

Trust me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you arguing about civil liberties - I don't think there's a single judge in this nation that would not uphold Maine's right to impose a 21 day home quarantine on a returning Ebola health care worker. Not a chance. I don't see this as even a close issue. We just don't have civil liberties fundamentalists on the bench anymore; and even if we do, this is a case where the due process concerns clearly weigh in favor of the state. If someone has another interpretation based on review of actual quarantine caselaw, I'd like to see it.

She is less contagious that a lot of people with HIV spreading it around. The judges need to read biology.

Totally different case. There is a highly rational reason to believe that she will contract a highly contagious (MUCH more contagious than HIV, and much more deadly) disease during the quarantine period.

Not so, it is unlikely that she contracted it. Even if she develops ebola, right now she is not contagious.
HIV was 99% fatal before treatment. There were people running around intentionally infecting people and we did not quarantine. All they had to say was "whoops, I did not know I had it, gosh!"
Ebola is not as lethal, so far in the US, only 1 person has died from it.

The much shorter incubation period for Ebola makes quarantine a possibility worth discussing. You can't quarantine a suspected carrier for months and years. Three weeks (upper limit 42 days) is very doable... unless you're an activist idiot who enjoys taking up the media spotlight at the expense of marginalizing the situation in West Africa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didnt Hickox test free of the Ebola virus? I thought I read that.

The test will be negative until the level of virus in the body rises enough to be detected. Most people become sick within the 21 days. Some have gone 40 days past exposure before the virus has replicated enough to be detected. So one negative test doesn't mean the person is not going to become sick in a few days.

This is why the public wants travel restrictions for all nonessential persons in the region and/or a pause on issuing new visas from the region. A person can fly in free of fever, then become sick weeks after.

But with Hickox being the wagging dog, we've shifted to arguing the history and legality of quarantine instead of continuing to ask why these visas are being granted and which city will be host to the next Duncan.

This is why conservatives and FOX News wants a travel ban, not the general public. The general public doesn't piss its pants quite as quickly as conservatives do.

Well this has made some strange bedfellows of us all, because I'm part of the general public and have never voted R, I, Tea Party in my life, and I want a travel ban.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you arguing about civil liberties - I don't think there's a single judge in this nation that would not uphold Maine's right to impose a 21 day home quarantine on a returning Ebola health care worker. Not a chance. I don't see this as even a close issue. We just don't have civil liberties fundamentalists on the bench anymore; and even if we do, this is a case where the due process concerns clearly weigh in favor of the state. If someone has another interpretation based on review of actual quarantine caselaw, I'd like to see it.

She is less contagious that a lot of people with HIV spreading it around. The judges need to read biology.

Totally different case. There is a highly rational reason to believe that she will contract a highly contagious (MUCH more contagious than HIV, and much more deadly) disease during the quarantine period.

Not so, it is unlikely that she contracted it. Even if she develops ebola, right now she is not contagious.
HIV was 99% fatal before treatment. There were people running around intentionally infecting people and we did not quarantine. All they had to say was "whoops, I did not know I had it, gosh!"
Ebola is not as lethal, so far in the US, only 1 person has died from it.

It is unlikely that she contracted it, yes I can agree with that. But letting her do as she pleases sets bad precedent and eventually you will see another HCW return to the US carrying infection. The statistics are on her side as an individual HCW. The statistics will not be on our side if we don't in some way monitor people returning from hot zones.

She's riding a bicycle - not licking handrails on a metro. Let's be rational.
The quarantine is optional - so she's not defying anything.
It would be more effective if the quarantine restricted her from going to large public gathering places where tracking people would be difficult if not impossible - like a movie theater. But bicycling? Geez.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under Maine law: " If, based upon clear and convincing evidence, the court finds that a public health threat exists, the court shall issue the requested order for treatment or such other order as may direct the least restrictive measures necessary to effectively protect the public health."

In other words, Maine would be stupid to go to court because no judge is going to order a quarantine. And this is why Christie let her go - he's a good enough lawyer to know he'd lose.

Nope, sorry. Any judge is going to defer heavily to the health dept on what constitutes "clear and convincing evidence" of a threat. There's nothing in this law that requires an actual, current infection. The significant probability of infection, combined with the severity of the disease, is enough to support quarantine. Especially in a case such as this where the nurse has made clear public statements that she intends to defy ANY public health measures whatsoever. In this particular case, her conduct warrants even more restrictive measures.

The judge is NOT going to defer to the health department. Please don't speak about how the court system works, if you don't have any knowledge or experience. The health department has the burden of proof. Both sides are going to put up experts to testify on how this woman affects public health. It's not going to be based on how scared y'all are or preventing panic. It's going to be based on how much risk she poses for infecting others. It's also going to be based on whether a less intrusive method (ie. self-monitoring of temperature) can be used. Since that method has been used to good effect so far and since no HCW has caused an infection, the clear and convincing evidence is that quarantines of asymptomatic HCWs is really, really stupid.

Of course I know how the court system works. Unless you can provide me with a raft of case law directly on point stating that people without active infections cannot be quarantined in Maine (which I assure you does not exist), I'd be the company on my position.

Also a lawyer. I think the home quarantine will be upheld given that it is limited to the incubation period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under Maine law: " If, based upon clear and convincing evidence, the court finds that a public health threat exists, the court shall issue the requested order for treatment or such other order as may direct the least restrictive measures necessary to effectively protect the public health."

In other words, Maine would be stupid to go to court because no judge is going to order a quarantine. And this is why Christie let her go - he's a good enough lawyer to know he'd lose.

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/22/title22sec802.html

Extreme Public Health Emergency. Maine Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 22 § 820

Authority. In the event of an actual or threatened epidemic or outbreak of a communicable or occupational disease, the department may declare that a health emergency exists and may adopt emergency rules for the protection of the

public's health relating to procedures for the isolation and placement of infected persons for purposes of care and treatment or infection persons which shall be subject to the supervision and regulations of the department.

Penalties. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 40:6
Penalties. Any person, who neglects, violates or refuses to obey the rules or who willfully obstructs or hinders the execution of the rules, may be ordered by the department, in writing, to cease and desist. In the case of any person who refuses to obey a cease and desist order issued to enforce the rules adopted pursuant to section 802, the department may bring an action in District Court to obtain an injunction enforcing the cease and desist order or to request a civil fine not to exceed $500, or both.

When you have no cases in the state and <10 cases ever in the U.S., it's hardly an "Extreme Public Health Emergency".
Apparently, Maine is going to court to get an order that the nurse be given a blood test - even though she's already had 2 negative blood tests. The governor, in a close reelection race, appears to be trying to save face.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/talks-ebola-nurse-kaci-hickox-fail-governor-full/story?id=26569596

Authority. In the event of an actual or threatened epidemic or outbreak of a communicable or occupational disease, the department may declare that a health emergency exists and may adopt emergency rules for the protection of the

public's health relating to procedures for the isolation and placement of infected persons for purposes of care and treatment or infection persons which shall be subject to the supervision and regulations of the department.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you arguing about civil liberties - I don't think there's a single judge in this nation that would not uphold Maine's right to impose a 21 day home quarantine on a returning Ebola health care worker. Not a chance. I don't see this as even a close issue. We just don't have civil liberties fundamentalists on the bench anymore; and even if we do, this is a case where the due process concerns clearly weigh in favor of the state. If someone has another interpretation based on review of actual quarantine caselaw, I'd like to see it.

She is less contagious that a lot of people with HIV spreading it around. The judges need to read biology.

Totally different case. There is a highly rational reason to believe that she will contract a highly contagious (MUCH more contagious than HIV, and much more deadly) disease during the quarantine period.

Not so, it is unlikely that she contracted it. Even if she develops ebola, right now she is not contagious.
HIV was 99% fatal before treatment. There were people running around intentionally infecting people and we did not quarantine. All they had to say was "whoops, I did not know I had it, gosh!"
Ebola is not as lethal, so far in the US, only 1 person has died from it.

The much shorter incubation period for Ebola makes quarantine a possibility worth discussing. You can't quarantine a suspected carrier for months and years. Three weeks (upper limit 42 days) is very doable... unless you're an activist idiot who enjoys taking up the media spotlight at the expense of marginalizing the situation in West Africa.

But what about making the quarantine "livable"? Like no movie theaters or metro rides, but walking in the park and going for a bike ride are fine.
Honestly, she wouldn't be doing this if they treated her humanely from the start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under Maine law: " If, based upon clear and convincing evidence, the court finds that a public health threat exists, the court shall issue the requested order for treatment or such other order as may direct the least restrictive measures necessary to effectively protect the public health."

In other words, Maine would be stupid to go to court because no judge is going to order a quarantine. And this is why Christie let her go - he's a good enough lawyer to know he'd lose.

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/22/title22sec802.html

Extreme Public Health Emergency. Maine Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 22 § 820

Authority. In the event of an actual or threatened epidemic or outbreak of a communicable or occupational disease, the department may declare that a health emergency exists and may adopt emergency rules for the protection of the

public's health relating to procedures for the isolation and placement of infected persons for purposes of care and treatment or infection persons which shall be subject to the supervision and regulations of the department.

Penalties. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 40:6
Penalties. Any person, who neglects, violates or refuses to obey the rules or who willfully obstructs or hinders the execution of the rules, may be ordered by the department, in writing, to cease and desist. In the case of any person who refuses to obey a cease and desist order issued to enforce the rules adopted pursuant to section 802, the department may bring an action in District Court to obtain an injunction enforcing the cease and desist order or to request a civil fine not to exceed $500, or both.

When you have no cases in the state and <10 cases ever in the U.S., it's hardly an "Extreme Public Health Emergency".
Apparently, Maine is going to court to get an order that the nurse be given a blood test - even though she's already had 2 negative blood tests. The governor, in a close reelection race, appears to be trying to save face.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/talks-ebola-nurse-kaci-hickox-fail-governor-full/story?id=26569596

Authority. In the event of an actual or threatened epidemic or outbreak of a communicable or occupational disease, the department may declare that a health emergency exists and may adopt emergency rules for the protection of the public's health relating to procedures for the isolation and placement of infected persons for purposes of care and treatment or infection persons which shall be subject to the supervision and regulations of the department.

But there has to be proof of a threat. Of the people that were exposed to Eric Duncan, only 2 health care workers got sick. Not his girlfriend and his other relatives. It was literally the people cleaning his diapers, wiping his butt, mopping up his vomit, and wiping away blood that got sick.

[Anonymous]

It's insane not to have a travel ban. Why on earth is the returning military being quarantined and others not? It is incoherent and weird. Do our leaders even understand their own illogic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you arguing about civil liberties - I don't think there's a single judge in this nation that would not uphold Maine's right to impose a 21 day home quarantine on a returning Ebola health care worker. Not a chance. I don't see this as even a close issue. We just don't have civil liberties fundamentalists on the bench anymore; and even if we do, this is a case where the due process concerns clearly weigh in favor of the state. If someone has another interpretation based on review of actual quarantine caselaw, I'd like to see it.

She is less contagious that a lot of people with HIV spreading it around. The judges need to read biology.

Totally different case. There is a highly rational reason to believe that she will contract a highly contagious (MUCH more contagious than HIV, and much more deadly) disease during the quarantine period.

Not so, it is unlikely that she contracted it. Even if she develops ebola, right now she is not contagious.
HIV was 99% fatal before treatment. There were people running around intentionally infecting people and we did not quarantine. All they had to say was "whoops, I did not know I had it, gosh!"
Ebola is not as lethal, so far in the US, only 1 person has died from it.

It is unlikely that she contracted it, yes I can agree with that. But letting her do as she pleases sets bad precedent and eventually you will see another HCW return to the US carrying infection. The statistics are on her side as an individual HCW. The statistics will not be on our side if we don't in some way monitor people returning from hot zones.

She's riding a bicycle - not licking handrails on a metro. Let's be rational.
The quarantine is optional - so she's not defying anything.
It would be more effective if the quarantine restricted her from going to large public gathering places where tracking people would be difficult if not impossible - like a movie theater. But bicycling? Geez.

Of course she chose to ride her bike. She's the town pariah. She knows if she shows up in public, they'll go batshit. But what's the harm in an innocent bike ride? She even wore her helmet. Totally. Orchestrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's insane not to have a travel ban. Why on earth is the returning military being quarantined and others not? It is incoherent and weird. Do our leaders even understand their own illogic?

Because the military have to follow orders. Very simple. And the quarantine isn't being imposed by Congress or the President. It's an internal DoD policy. Just like they require everyone to be vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of you arguing about civil liberties - I don't think there's a single judge in this nation that would not uphold Maine's right to impose a 21 day home quarantine on a returning Ebola health care worker. Not a chance. I don't see this as even a close issue. We just don't have civil liberties fundamentalists on the bench anymore; and even if we do, this is a case where the due process concerns clearly weigh in favor of the state. If someone has another interpretation based on review of actual quarantine caselaw, I'd like to see it.

She is less contagious that a lot of people with HIV spreading it around. The judges need to read biology.

Totally different case. There is a highly rational reason to believe that she will contract a highly contagious (MUCH more contagious than HIV, and much more deadly) disease during the quarantine period.

Not so, it is unlikely that she contracted it. Even if she develops ebola, right now she is not contagious.
HIV was 99% fatal before treatment. There were people running around intentionally infecting people and we did not quarantine. All they had to say was "whoops, I did not know I had it, gosh!"
Ebola is not as lethal, so far in the US, only 1 person has died from it.

It is unlikely that she contracted it, yes I can agree with that. But letting her do as she pleases sets bad precedent and eventually you will see another HCW return to the US carrying infection. The statistics are on her side as an individual HCW. The statistics will not be on our side if we don't in some way monitor people returning from hot zones.

She's riding a bicycle - not licking handrails on a metro. Let's be rational.
The quarantine is optional - so she's not defying anything.
It would be more effective if the quarantine restricted her from going to large public gathering places where tracking people would be difficult if not impossible - like a movie theater. But bicycling? Geez.

Of course she chose to ride her bike. She's the town pariah. She knows if she shows up in public, they'll go batshit. But what's the harm in an innocent bike ride? She even wore her helmet. Totally. Orchestrated.

Or maybe she just wanted to get out of the house and enjoy a beautiful fall day after spending the last couple of months in a hazmat suit in equatorial Africa, followed by a few days in tent in New Jersey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didnt Hickox test free of the Ebola virus? I thought I read that.

The test will be negative until the level of virus in the body rises enough to be detected. Most people become sick within the 21 days. Some have gone 40 days past exposure before the virus has replicated enough to be detected. So one negative test doesn't mean the person is not going to become sick in a few days.

This is why the public wants travel restrictions for all nonessential persons in the region and/or a pause on issuing new visas from the region. A person can fly in free of fever, then become sick weeks after.

But with Hickox being the wagging dog, we've shifted to arguing the history and legality of quarantine instead of continuing to ask why these visas are being granted and which city will be host to the next Duncan.

This is why conservatives and FOX News wants a travel ban, not the general public. The general public doesn't piss its pants quite as quickly as conservatives do.

Well this has made some strange bedfellows of us all, because I'm part of the general public and have never voted R, I, Tea Party in my life, and I want a travel ban.

+1. Life long Democrat, loathe FOX et al, and think a travel ban or at least a quarantine is reasonable. The reasons presented against these measures is specious - there's no reason why healthcare workers can't be granted access to and from the US as long as they maintain some distance from the general public for 21 days. I certainly don't want to be tended to by a nurse or doctor who returned from Sierra Leone five days ago. Supposedly medical workers are "self monitoring" but given the hubris demonstrated by Hickox and others I'm not convinced that actually means anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's insane not to have a travel ban. Why on earth is the returning military being quarantined and others not? It is incoherent and weird. Do our leaders even understand their own illogic?

There is no logic, just politics and gesturing.