Official Ebola update thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Your post makes no sense. Asking people to keep out of public and self-monitor for three weeks is hardly treating them like criminals. And certainly allowing potentiall infected people in from affected countries on visas is playing with fire

So again, who are you willing to risk?

Its not a risk. I would have a returning health care worker who had no symptoms over for dinner. No question.

When did we become a country of whiney scaredy cats?

And that would be your choice. Now justify for me why you ridicule others who have the freedom to make their own choices.

In addition, can you pinpoint for me, the exact time symptoms would start and when someone is contageous?

Fever seems to be the first symptom. But people are only marginally contagious at that point. Its as they get sicker and are spewing fluids that they become highly infectious. The sicker they are, the more infectious they are. In fact, the folks in the US who have had Ebola all got it from a patient who died (presumably that was true of the doctors returning from abroad). At the point when patients are highly contagious, they aren't walking around outside.

And this is why its misleading to compare it to other illnesses like smallpox. The level of contagiousness for Ebola is conditional on the level of illness. This is, for example, very different from HIV which people could transmit for years before becoming sick.

You are absolutely free to make your own choices. But you cannot impose your choice on others and restrict their freedom when the science just isn't there.

I continue to believe that one or several of you got some kind of charge from the fear of Ebola and as the facts continue to undermine that fear -- as patients in the US get well and as it turns out they transmitted it to no one outside of the hospital -- you can't let it go.

If you can't pinpoint the moment someone is contagious, then the science is not there - there is risk, even if that risk is low. It's not about fear, it's about the rights of the people not being undermined by the rights of the nurse. they have the right to be free FROM her. If the people in her town want to post photos of her with the words 'avoid contact with this person until X date' they can do so. And you can bet this nurse would further be screaming about HER rights being infringed upon. Because activists don't care about the rights of others - they care about the emotional impact of their 'cause'

She was initially quarantined in Jersey because her temperature at the airport recorded at 101. They had every right to take her to hospital to check the situation out. That's why she was quarantined to begin with

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Your post makes no sense. Asking people to keep out of public and self-monitor for three weeks is hardly treating them like criminals. And certainly allowing potentiall infected people in from affected countries on visas is playing with fire

So again, who are you willing to risk?

Its not a risk. I would have a returning health care worker who had no symptoms over for dinner. No question.

When did we become a country of whiney scaredy cats?

And that would be your choice. Now justify for me why you ridicule others who have the freedom to make their own choices.

In addition, can you pinpoint for me, the exact time symptoms would start and when someone is contageous?

People are contagious when they have symptoms. We have DECADES of research on Ebola to support that. The first symptom to appear is fever. When a person has a fever of 100 F, they need to go to the hospital. They should be treated as contagious at that point, although their contagiousness is not high until later in the illness.

Yet they have not done so. There has been airplane travel and subway travel. So can you pinpoint the exact moment of contagion? If not, why should the rights of the nurse (in this case) trump the rights of the public?

Who has traveled on the subway or the airplane with a fever? Not Amber Hinson, she was carefully self monitoring and was under 100 F when she flew. As soon as she got a temp reading that was above that level she went to the hospital. Same thing with the doctor, he was carefully monitoring himself and followed protocol, calling for someone to take him to the hospital as soon as his temp rose. He was 100.3 when he arrived at the hospital.

Hindon called the CDC and told them she was feverish. She had Ebola. She flew with Ebola. There is no denying that. You are grasing at straws. The NYC doc rode the subways with a low grade, as it turns out.

Can you pinpoint the exact moment of contagion, yes or no

[Anonymous]

100.3 or 103. Truth or lie? You pick

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Your post makes no sense. Asking people to keep out of public and self-monitor for three weeks is hardly treating them like criminals. And certainly allowing potentiall infected people in from affected countries on visas is playing with fire

So again, who are you willing to risk?

Its not a risk. I would have a returning health care worker who had no symptoms over for dinner. No question.

When did we become a country of whiney scaredy cats?

And that would be your choice. Now justify for me why you ridicule others who have the freedom to make their own choices.

In addition, can you pinpoint for me, the exact time symptoms would start and when someone is contageous?

Fever seems to be the first symptom. But people are only marginally contagious at that point. Its as they get sicker and are spewing fluids that they become highly infectious. The sicker they are, the more infectious they are. In fact, the folks in the US who have had Ebola all got it from a patient who died (presumably that was true of the doctors returning from abroad). At the point when patients are highly contagious, they aren't walking around outside.

And this is why its misleading to compare it to other illnesses like smallpox. The level of contagiousness for Ebola is conditional on the level of illness. This is, for example, very different from HIV which people could transmit for years before becoming sick.

You are absolutely free to make your own choices. But you cannot impose your choice on others and restrict their freedom when the science just isn't there.

I continue to believe that one or several of you got some kind of charge from the fear of Ebola and as the facts continue to undermine that fear -- as patients in the US get well and as it turns out they transmitted it to no one outside of the hospital -- you can't let it go.

If you can't pinpoint the moment someone is contagious, then the science is not there - there is risk, even if that risk is low. It's not about fear, it's about the rights of the people not being undermined by the rights of the nurse. they have the right to be free FROM her. If the people in her town want to post photos of her with the words 'avoid contact with this person until X date' they can do so. And you can bet this nurse would further be screaming about HER rights being infringed upon. Because activists don't care about the rights of others - they care about the emotional impact of their 'cause'

She was initially quarantined in Jersey because her temperature at the airport recorded at 101. They had every right to take her to hospital to check the situation out. That's why she was quarantined to begin with

She was quarantined after deplaning, very properly. But it turned out not to be Ebola, so they should have sent her home. Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Your post makes no sense. Asking people to keep out of public and self-monitor for three weeks is hardly treating them like criminals. And certainly allowing potentiall infected people in from affected countries on visas is playing with fire

So again, who are you willing to risk?

Its not a risk. I would have a returning health care worker who had no symptoms over for dinner. No question.

When did we become a country of whiney scaredy cats?

And that would be your choice. Now justify for me why you ridicule others who have the freedom to make their own choices.

In addition, can you pinpoint for me, the exact time symptoms would start and when someone is contageous?

People are contagious when they have symptoms. We have DECADES of research on Ebola to support that. The first symptom to appear is fever. When a person has a fever of 100 F, they need to go to the hospital. They should be treated as contagious at that point, although their contagiousness is not high until later in the illness.

Yet they have not done so. There has been airplane travel and subway travel. So can you pinpoint the exact moment of contagion? If not, why should the rights of the nurse (in this case) trump the rights of the public?

Who has traveled on the subway or the airplane with a fever? Not Amber Hinson, she was carefully self monitoring and was under 100 F when she flew. As soon as she got a temp reading that was above that level she went to the hospital. Same thing with the doctor, he was carefully monitoring himself and followed protocol, calling for someone to take him to the hospital as soon as his temp rose. He was 100.3 when he arrived at the hospital.

And Patrick Sawyer, who died in Nigeria, did not infect anyone on 2 airplanes, even though he was quite ill when he flew.

A few weeks ago I was quite worried about Ebola in the U.S., but I'm not anymore because it's just not that contagious. But it does need to be stopped now in West Africa, otherwise it may spread into other countries in Africa, Asia or Central/South America that don't have the infrastructure to handle an outbreak. Just imagine an Ebola outbreak in the slums of Rio or Mumbai.....<shudder>

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Your post makes no sense. Asking people to keep out of public and self-monitor for three weeks is hardly treating them like criminals. And certainly allowing potentiall infected people in from affected countries on visas is playing with fire

So again, who are you willing to risk?

Its not a risk. I would have a returning health care worker who had no symptoms over for dinner. No question.

When did we become a country of whiney scaredy cats?

And that would be your choice. Now justify for me why you ridicule others who have the freedom to make their own choices.

In addition, can you pinpoint for me, the exact time symptoms would start and when someone is contageous?

People are contagious when they have symptoms. We have DECADES of research on Ebola to support that. The first symptom to appear is fever. When a person has a fever of 100 F, they need to go to the hospital. They should be treated as contagious at that point, although their contagiousness is not high until later in the illness.

Yet they have not done so. There has been airplane travel and subway travel. So can you pinpoint the exact moment of contagion? If not, why should the rights of the nurse (in this case) trump the rights of the public?

Who has traveled on the subway or the airplane with a fever? Not Amber Hinson, she was carefully self monitoring and was under 100 F when she flew. As soon as she got a temp reading that was above that level she went to the hospital. Same thing with the doctor, he was carefully monitoring himself and followed protocol, calling for someone to take him to the hospital as soon as his temp rose. He was 100.3 when he arrived at the hospital.

Hindon called the CDC and told them she was feverish. She had Ebola. She flew with Ebola. There is no denying that. You are grasing at straws. The NYC doc rode the subways with a low grade, as it turns out.

Can you pinpoint the exact moment of contagion, yes or no

The Spanish nurse also traveled with a low fever. We can tell how infectious all these people were -- how many were infected by them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wtf http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/30/cdc-ebola_n_6078072.html

First of all, Huff Post has posted quite a few articles claiming vaccines cause autism. So take anything you read there with a grain of salt.

Second, the point is that Ebola is NOT airborne. This whole think about droplets would mislead the public. NO ONE has contracted Ebola from a sneeze.

You don't know if anyone has contracted it through sneezing.

The science says it is in saliva and mucus. And if that is wrong, the conclusion becomes: we don't know all of "the science" yet.

But we're importing it anyway through casual travel and individual HCW traveling as they please. Hickox wants to bike. Spencer and Vinson chose subway, plane. Do we know their moment of contagiousness?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Your post makes no sense. Asking people to keep out of public and self-monitor for three weeks is hardly treating them like criminals. And certainly allowing potentiall infected people in from affected countries on visas is playing with fire

So again, who are you willing to risk?

Its not a risk. I would have a returning health care worker who had no symptoms over for dinner. No question.

When did we become a country of whiney scaredy cats?

And that would be your choice. Now justify for me why you ridicule others who have the freedom to make their own choices.

In addition, can you pinpoint for me, the exact time symptoms would start and when someone is contageous?

Fever seems to be the first symptom. But people are only marginally contagious at that point. Its as they get sicker and are spewing fluids that they become highly infectious. The sicker they are, the more infectious they are. In fact, the folks in the US who have had Ebola all got it from a patient who died (presumably that was true of the doctors returning from abroad). At the point when patients are highly contagious, they aren't walking around outside.

And this is why its misleading to compare it to other illnesses like smallpox. The level of contagiousness for Ebola is conditional on the level of illness. This is, for example, very different from HIV which people could transmit for years before becoming sick.

You are absolutely free to make your own choices. But you cannot impose your choice on others and restrict their freedom when the science just isn't there.

I continue to believe that one or several of you got some kind of charge from the fear of Ebola and as the facts continue to undermine that fear -- as patients in the US get well and as it turns out they transmitted it to no one outside of the hospital -- you can't let it go.

If you can't pinpoint the moment someone is contagious, then the science is not there - there is risk, even if that risk is low. It's not about fear, it's about the rights of the people not being undermined by the rights of the nurse. they have the right to be free FROM her. If the people in her town want to post photos of her with the words 'avoid contact with this person until X date' they can do so. And you can bet this nurse would further be screaming about HER rights being infringed upon. Because activists don't care about the rights of others - they care about the emotional impact of their 'cause'

She was initially quarantined in Jersey because her temperature at the airport recorded at 101. They had every right to take her to hospital to check the situation out. That's why she was quarantined to begin with

She was quarantined after deplaning, very properly. But it turned out not to be Ebola, so they should have sent her home. Right?

Quarantines are based on exposure, not symptoms. Check the CDC guidelines, it's spelled out there. Once symptoms develop and are confirmed, the proper next step is isolation in a hospital, not home quarantine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we must ask the question...should we detain all healthcare worker? I say yes.

That is an excellent way to allow this epidemic to spread even further.

The way to control it is to control it in Africa. The way to control it in Africa is to send medical workers over to help. And the way to send medical workers is not to treat them like criminals.

The courts will not uphold these quarantines. The case law goes back many decades. the science just won't support it. This is all being driven by hysteria.

Again, quarantines are based on exposure to highly infectious diseases, not symptoms. Under your logic, quarantines would never exist. The fact that this one is narrowly tailored to the incubation period makes it likely to be upheld.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wtf http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/30/cdc-ebola_n_6078072.html

First of all, Huff Post has posted quite a few articles claiming vaccines cause autism. So take anything you read there with a grain of salt.

Second, the point is that Ebola is NOT airborne. This whole think about droplets would mislead the public. NO ONE has contracted Ebola from a sneeze.

You don't know if anyone has contracted it through sneezing.

The science says it is in saliva and mucus. And if that is wrong, the conclusion becomes: we don't know all of "the science" yet.

But we're importing it anyway through casual travel and individual HCW traveling as they please. Hickox wants to bike. Spencer and Vinson chose subway, plane. Do we know their moment of contagiousness?

Sitting next to someone is not going to make you sick. Sitting next to someone bleeding, vomiting or crapping all over the place would be contagious. You don't get a fever and start spewing bodily fluids on the same day. That didn't happen with any of the people who've caught it by self monitoring. They get a fever and report it, having infected no one along the way.

[Anonymous]

The judge in Maine has issued a temporary order based on the CDC guidelines.

A judge in Augusta has told her she must agree to active monitoring, coordinate her travel with health authorities, not be present in public places, not leave Fort Kent and stay at least 3 feet from anyone when she does go out.

CDC guidelines: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/exposure/monitoring-and-movement-of-persons-with-exposure.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wtf http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/30/cdc-ebola_n_6078072.html

First of all, Huff Post has posted quite a few articles claiming vaccines cause autism. So take anything you read there with a grain of salt.

Second, the point is that Ebola is NOT airborne. This whole think about droplets would mislead the public. NO ONE has contracted Ebola from a sneeze.

You don't know if anyone has contracted it through sneezing.

The science says it is in saliva and mucus. And if that is wrong, the conclusion becomes: we don't know all of "the science" yet.

But we're importing it anyway through casual travel and individual HCW traveling as they please. Hickox wants to bike. Spencer and Vinson chose subway, plane. Do we know their moment of contagiousness?

Sitting next to someone is not going to make you sick. Sitting next to someone bleeding, vomiting or crapping all over the place would be contagious. You don't get a fever and start spewing bodily fluids on the same day. That didn't happen with any of the people who've caught it by self monitoring. They get a fever and report it, having infected no one along the way.

Google "Patrick Sawyer," read about the 19 people he infected, directly or indirectly, and then get back to us. Sometimes, people are in denial and continue to go about their daily activities. Dr. Spencer came darn close to doing the same, and that's why he initially lied about the extent of his movements to first responders.

[Anonymous]

I think most reasonable people understand that this deadly virus cannot be contracted until the person who has it is symptomatic. I also think most reasonable people understand that the odds of contracting this virus, even after exposure to someone who has it, is minuscule unless the person is in the latter stages of the virus. I really think most people understand these things.

What they don’t understand is the conflicting information that has been shared by this administration, the CDC and others, combined with the actions taken when something happens (such as people in full hazmat suits disinfecting an area where a person who was in the early stages had resided or visited). When the public gets mixed messages like this, they begin to doubt the “science” of this disease.

To allay public fears, I don’t think it is asking too much for people who have been exposed to this virus by visiting areas in W. Africa where the virus is rampant to observe a 21-day quarantine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most reasonable people understand that this deadly virus cannot be contracted until the person who has it is symptomatic. I also think most reasonable people understand that the odds of contracting this virus, even after exposure to someone who has it, is minuscule unless the person is in the latter stages of the virus. I really think most people understand these things.

What they don’t understand is the conflicting information that has been shared by this administration, the CDC and others, combined with the actions taken when something happens (such as people in full hazmat suits disinfecting an area where a person who was in the early stages had resided or visited). When the public gets mixed messages like this, they begin to doubt the “science” of this disease.

To allay public fears, I don’t think it is asking too much for people who have been exposed to this virus by visiting areas in W. Africa where the virus is rampant to observe a 21-day quarantine.

I agree with this almost entirely and think it is well said. But I'll add what is being asked for is even more narrow, people who were directly caring for ebola patients in Africa, which even the CDC acknowledges is a medium risk category, should observe a 21 day quarantine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wtf http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/30/cdc-ebola_n_6078072.html

First of all, Huff Post has posted quite a few articles claiming vaccines cause autism. So take anything you read there with a grain of salt.

Second, the point is that Ebola is NOT airborne. This whole think about droplets would mislead the public. NO ONE has contracted Ebola from a sneeze.

You don't know if anyone has contracted it through sneezing.

The science says it is in saliva and mucus. And if that is wrong, the conclusion becomes: we don't know all of "the science" yet.

But we're importing it anyway through casual travel and individual HCW traveling as they please. Hickox wants to bike. Spencer and Vinson chose subway, plane. Do we know their moment of contagiousness?

Sitting next to someone is not going to make you sick. Sitting next to someone bleeding, vomiting or crapping all over the place would be contagious. You don't get a fever and start spewing bodily fluids on the same day. That didn't happen with any of the people who've caught it by self monitoring. They get a fever and report it, having infected no one along the way.

Google "Patrick Sawyer," read about the 19 people he infected, directly or indirectly, and then get back to us. Sometimes, people are in denial and continue to go about their daily activities. Dr. Spencer came darn close to doing the same, and that's why he initially lied about the extent of his movements to first responders.

So I did google "Patrick Sawyer" and the people he infected all had direct contact with him. So many HCWs got infected because he lied about his exposure to Ebola and they thought he had malaria - plus he urinated on them. But the 200+ people on the planes with him, when he had diarrhea and vomiting - NONE OF THEM GOT EBOLA. So just chill - it' not that easy to get Ebola.