Official Ebola update thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

+1

Being glad that a nurse got Ebola, because you don't like her ROOMMATE, is crazy. Just nucking futz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know if any of the posters who are so fearful of Ebola are the same people who don't vaccinate their kids, or who don't get flu shots. Now that is some scary stuff.

As far as I know, one (uninsured, Liberian, initially untreated) person has died of Ebola in the U.S. Is that right?

Yes. And no one has acquired Ebola in the community. A couple of health care workers acquired Ebola by working with Duncan. A few others acquired Ebola by working with patients in Africa. No healh care worker in the US has transmitted Ebola to another person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

I don't use the phrase 'dumb-ass'. Hickox has been raising quite a ruckus stating how ridiculous we all are, and her roommate falling victim confirms that, indeed, it does happen, and Hickox is not immune. You can believe as you'd like, but telling others how they should believe is arrogance at its finest. Your freedom to be you does not supercede others rights to be free from you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know if any of the posters who are so fearful of Ebola are the same people who don't vaccinate their kids, or who don't get flu shots. Now that is some scary stuff.

As far as I know, one (uninsured, Liberian, initially untreated) person has died of Ebola in the U.S. Is that right?

Yes. And no one has acquired Ebola in the community. A couple of health care workers acquired Ebola by working with Duncan. A few others acquired Ebola by working with patients in Africa. No healh care worker in the US has transmitted Ebola to another person.

Wha's your ultimate point? I agree if Hickock is showing no symptoms, she can ride her bike, whatever. It sounds, though, as if you feel she has the right to go wherever she wants, and those around her have no right to avoid her. And if they choose to avoid her, in your eyes they are ignorant. Is pthis what you are saying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

Link?

Here is the link:http://wagmtv.com/state-of-maine-document-reports-kaci-hickoxs-roommate-in-africa-developed-ebola/ I was the original poster about Kaci (not the one saying she was bitch slapped). I was not trying to disparage her, but merely point out that there is a lack on science. We absolutely know it is hard to catch Ebola, but we don't definitively know how it is transmitted in humans. Anyone who says otherwise is not familiar with the basic tenets of experimental science. Most of our evidence is anecdotal in nature or based on a very limited cadre of small scale animal studies. I do agree with Kaci that our current quarantine measure are probably not as useful as people might think. I merely point out that I disagree with her grasp of the science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

+1

Being glad that a nurse got Ebola, because you don't like her ROOMMATE, is crazy. Just nucking futz.

Glad and karma proving Hickox's reassurance might not be so reassuring is not the same thing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know if any of the posters who are so fearful of Ebola are the same people who don't vaccinate their kids, or who don't get flu shots. Now that is some scary stuff.

As far as I know, one (uninsured, Liberian, initially untreated) person has died of Ebola in the U.S. Is that right?

I vaccinate. You are confusing fear with practicality. And with mistrust due to confusing messages

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know if any of the posters who are so fearful of Ebola are the same people who don't vaccinate their kids, or who don't get flu shots. Now that is some scary stuff.

As far as I know, one (uninsured, Liberian, initially untreated) person has died of Ebola in the U.S. Is that right?

Dem, pro-vax, agnostic. I'm not so worried about catching the disease as concerned about the financial and legal costs we are incurring. It takes thousands of dollars a day to treat one patient in the US. Seems like visa restrictions and comfortable quarantines would make new cases less likely here. For the record, I'm fine with those quarantined going out to exercise or blow off steam.

I AM worried about the rest of the world. Seems to me that if the US followed the lead of Canada and Australia and restricted visas, more countries would become aware and would join in the eradication at the source. A "medical moon mission" is how one doctor described it. The possible spread to places like India, Egypt, Sudan etc. is a concern, because multiple sources means more expense and waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know if any of the posters who are so fearful of Ebola are the same people who don't vaccinate their kids, or who don't get flu shots. Now that is some scary stuff.

As far as I know, one (uninsured, Liberian, initially untreated) person has died of Ebola in the U.S. Is that right?

Dem, pro-vax, agnostic. I'm not so worried about catching the disease as concerned about the financial and legal costs we are incurring. It takes thousands of dollars a day to treat one patient in the US. Seems like visa restrictions and comfortable quarantines would make new cases less likely here. For the record, I'm fine with those quarantined going out to exercise or blow off steam.

I AM worried about the rest of the world. Seems to me that if the US followed the lead of Canada and Australia and restricted visas, more countries would become aware and would join in the eradication at the source. A "medical moon mission" is how one doctor described it. The possible spread to places like India, Egypt, Sudan etc. is a concern, because multiple sources means more expense and waste.

Great post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

I don't use the phrase 'dumb-ass'. Hickox has been raising quite a ruckus stating how ridiculous we all are, and her roommate falling victim confirms that, indeed, it does happen, and Hickox is not immune. You can believe as you'd like, but telling others how they should believe is arrogance at its finest. Your freedom to be you does not supercede others rights to be free from you.

"dumbass" was a comment about the Louisiana folks-- the ones not wanting to accept another state's medical waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

+1

Being glad that a nurse got Ebola, because you don't like her ROOMMATE, is crazy. Just nucking futz.

Glad and karma proving Hickox's reassurance might not be so reassuring is not the same thing

She knows she is at risk. She is treating Ebola patients. What she ALSO knows is that YOU and the general public are not at risk until and less she becomes symptomatic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

+1

Being glad that a nurse got Ebola, because you don't like her ROOMMATE, is crazy. Just nucking futz.

Glad and karma proving Hickox's reassurance might not be so reassuring is not the same thing

She knows she is at risk. She is treating Ebola patients. What she ALSO knows is that YOU and the general public are not at risk until and less she becomes symptomatic.

I'm not the karma OP. But would you want Hickox as your L&D nurse or taking care of your baby right now? Really?

Yes, it's clear that she is probably not infections until she is symptomatic. But this requires us trusting HCW to get to the hospital before they become symptomatic. I'm really not sure that will happen in a failsafe manner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The issues is that we absolutely do not have definitive evidence or science on transmission. There have been no controlled studies on humans (because it would be incredibly unethical). There have been only a few animal studies and they have not been replicated to ensure reliability and validity. Kaci Hickox is right that we don't have evidence to state that she is infectious right now. However, what she fails to comprehend is that we also don't have definitive evidence to state that she is NOT infectious.

On another note, her room-mate from her time in Africa has just been diagnosed with Ebola. That person also has no idea how he/she got infected while caring for patients.

That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

One of the most childish, nastiest posts I've read on DCUM in a long time and that says a lot. Offensive on so many levels.

Oh, and once you call people "dumb ass" you've lost the argument.

+1

Being glad that a nurse got Ebola, because you don't like her ROOMMATE, is crazy. Just nucking futz.

Glad and karma proving Hickox's reassurance might not be so reassuring is not the same thing

She knows she is at risk. She is treating Ebola patients. What she ALSO knows is that YOU and the general public are not at risk until and less she becomes symptomatic.

I could care less about her personally-- she's a blip-- but she's trying very hard to set a precedent. And it's one which is not as safe as a comfortable, temporary quarantine with guaranteed job security at the end of the 3 weeks. Nope, don't trust her.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:That's quite 'another note'. Thank you for posting this. SHickox just got bitch-slapped by karma

I don't see how this affects Hickox at all. The State of Maine's own document says, "Any potential risk to respondent from that incident has passed". It is completely irrelevant whether her roommate had ebola or not because Hickox didn't catch it. The fact that Hickox didn't catch ebola from her roommate is hardly a point against her. If anything, it supports Hickox' case.

There is currently exactly one person in the United States with ebola. It's is going to get pretty difficult for the fear mongers to stay in business at this rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know if any of the posters who are so fearful of Ebola are the same people who don't vaccinate their kids, or who don't get flu shots. Now that is some scary stuff.

As far as I know, one (uninsured, Liberian, initially untreated) person has died of Ebola in the U.S. Is that right?

Dem, pro-vax, agnostic. I'm not so worried about catching the disease as concerned about the financial and legal costs we are incurring. It takes thousands of dollars a day to treat one patient in the US. Seems like visa restrictions and comfortable quarantines would make new cases less likely here. For the record, I'm fine with those quarantined going out to exercise or blow off steam.

I AM worried about the rest of the world. Seems to me that if the US followed the lead of Canada and Australia and restricted visas, more countries would become aware and would join in the eradication at the source. A "medical moon mission" is how one doctor described it. The possible spread to places like India, Egypt, Sudan etc. is a concern, because multiple sources means more expense and waste.

The trouble is, we have known for decades that Ebola would begin to break out of Africa, yet the U.S. and other countries have failed to invest at the level necessary to help contain this and other emerging viruses there. We exist in a state of complete denial and then freak out when one person dies of the disease on our soil.

You worry about the financial costs of a few limited cases, but a much, much bigger public health investment is required to deal with emerging viruses at the source, as well as a real commitment to controlling some of the human causes of these breakouts. The countries that could do so will never make those investments, so our stance will always be reactive and ineffectual.