Official Ebola update thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would Obama appoint a LAWYER as an EBOLA CZAR?
I thought that since this is a biologic problem, it would have been nice to have someone in charge who knew BIOLOGY and had some administrative experience, not political.


Maybe a head of an HMO, an ex military health administrator, a public health official from a large state or county.

They don't get it, this is serious. Not a prize position to be handed to someone to enhance his or her career.

Not sure I agree. Seems like this position is primarily going to be about coordination, and a former Chief of Staff knows coordination. And like it or not, Ebola is becoming increasingly political, so it really needs to be someone with some political acumen as well.

Again, there are political and administrative people who ALSO know science.

Maybe. But I still don't think it's a bad choice given the circumstances.

[Anonymous]

Maybe some of the issues involved in containing Ebola on a national scale are really legal ones -- eg, detaining people for quarantines, restraining them if necessary, getting a vaccine through the FDA, etc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe some of the issues involved in containing Ebola on a national scale are really legal ones -- eg, detaining people for quarantines, restraining them if necessary, getting a vaccine through the FDA, etc?

Again, there are people who know both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would Obama appoint a LAWYER as an EBOLA CZAR?
I thought that since this is a biologic problem, it would have been nice to have someone in charge who knew BIOLOGY and had some administrative experience, not political.


Maybe a head of an HMO, an ex military health administrator, a public health official from a large state or county.

They don't get it, this is serious. Not a prize position to be handed to someone to enhance his or her career.

Not sure I agree. Seems like this position is primarily going to be about coordination, and a former Chief of Staff knows coordination. And like it or not, Ebola is becoming increasingly political, so it really needs to be someone with some political acumen as well.

Again, there are political and administrative people who ALSO know science.

Like who? If you're such a genius, give us a list of names of people who: already have a working relationship with the white house; have a reputation of being smart people who get things done; know how to coordinate inter-government responses and respond to crises?

Given the choice between a smart scientist and a saavy manager with deep knowledge of the govt, I'd go with the latter every time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would Obama appoint a LAWYER as an EBOLA CZAR?
I thought that since this is a biologic problem, it would have been nice to have someone in charge who knew BIOLOGY and had some administrative experience, not political.


Maybe a head of an HMO, an ex military health administrator, a public health official from a large state or county.

They don't get it, this is serious. Not a prize position to be handed to someone to enhance his or her career.

Not sure I agree. Seems like this position is primarily going to be about coordination, and a former Chief of Staff knows coordination. And like it or not, Ebola is becoming increasingly political, so it really needs to be someone with some political acumen as well.

Again, there are political and administrative people who ALSO know science.

Like who? If you're such a genius, give us a list of names of people who: already have a working relationship with the white house; have a reputation of being smart people who get things done; know how to coordinate inter-government responses and respond to crises?

Given the choice between a smart scientist and a saavy manager with deep knowledge of the govt, I'd go with the latter every time.

Call Kaiser, call Medstar, call Walter Reed...start there. If Obama wants someone familiar with the White House he is fooling himself. He will need to step out of his comfort zone on this one. This is DIFFERENT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would Obama appoint a LAWYER as an EBOLA CZAR?
I thought that since this is a biologic problem, it would have been nice to have someone in charge who knew BIOLOGY and had some administrative experience, not political.


Maybe a head of an HMO, an ex military health administrator, a public health official from a large state or county.

They don't get it, this is serious. Not a prize position to be handed to someone to enhance his or her career.

Not sure I agree. Seems like this position is primarily going to be about coordination, and a former Chief of Staff knows coordination. And like it or not, Ebola is becoming increasingly political, so it really needs to be someone with some political acumen as well.

Again, there are political and administrative people who ALSO know science.

Like who? If you're such a genius, give us a list of names of people who: already have a working relationship with the white house; have a reputation of being smart people who get things done; know how to coordinate inter-government responses and respond to crises?

Given the choice between a smart scientist and a saavy manager with deep knowledge of the govt, I'd go with the latter every time.

Bill Frist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would Obama appoint a LAWYER as an EBOLA CZAR?
I thought that since this is a biologic problem, it would have been nice to have someone in charge who knew BIOLOGY and had some administrative experience, not political.


Maybe a head of an HMO, an ex military health administrator, a public health official from a large state or county.

They don't get it, this is serious. Not a prize position to be handed to someone to enhance his or her career.

Not sure I agree. Seems like this position is primarily going to be about coordination, and a former Chief of Staff knows coordination. And like it or not, Ebola is becoming increasingly political, so it really needs to be someone with some political acumen as well.

Again, there are political and administrative people who ALSO know science.

Like who? If you're such a genius, give us a list of names of people who: already have a working relationship with the white house; have a reputation of being smart people who get things done; know how to coordinate inter-government responses and respond to crises?

Given the choice between a smart scientist and a saavy manager with deep knowledge of the govt, I'd go with the latter every time.

Call Kaiser, call Medstar, call Walter Reed...start there. If Obama wants someone familiar with the White House he is fooling himself. He will need to step out of his comfort zone on this one. This is DIFFERENT.

No, you completely misunderstand the task at hand. Does the Secretary of Defense have to be a 4-star general? NO, of course not. This is a task that requires somebody who is an enforcer an in whom the President trusts. The information is already out there - we need somebody to figure out how to get things done.

[jsteele]

Rather than people posting the same thing in two threads, let's keep the "czar" posts in the other thread and keep this one focused on the medical side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would Obama appoint a LAWYER as an EBOLA CZAR?
I thought that since this is a biologic problem, it would have been nice to have someone in charge who knew BIOLOGY and had some administrative experience, not political.


Maybe a head of an HMO, an ex military health administrator, a public health official from a large state or county.

They don't get it, this is serious. Not a prize position to be handed to someone to enhance his or her career.

Not sure I agree. Seems like this position is primarily going to be about coordination, and a former Chief of Staff knows coordination. And like it or not, Ebola is becoming increasingly political, so it really needs to be someone with some political acumen as well.

Again, there are political and administrative people who ALSO know science.

Like who? If you're such a genius, give us a list of names of people who: already have a working relationship with the white house; have a reputation of being smart people who get things done; know how to coordinate inter-government responses and respond to crises?

Given the choice between a smart scientist and a saavy manager with deep knowledge of the govt, I'd go with the latter every time.

Bill Frist

I don't think he is the right choice b/c he lacks current relationships with the administration. But it seems like he could have a roll in getting the GOP to dial back the partisanship and Rush Limbaugh histeria.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Rather than people posting the same thing in two threads, let's keep the "czar" posts in the other thread and keep this one focused on the medical side.

OK, but this thread had a lot of posts about the incompetence of the CDC, so I figured that Czar thing followed here too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe some of the issues involved in containing Ebola on a national scale are really legal ones -- eg, detaining people for quarantines, restraining them if necessary, getting a vaccine through the FDA, etc?

Again, there are people who know both.

Names, please. Not everybody is willing to step in an be Ebola czar. Lots of scientists/doctors already have issues they're involved with. There are virtually no Ebola experts anyway. He seems to me to be a valid choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe some of the issues involved in containing Ebola on a national scale are really legal ones -- eg, detaining people for quarantines, restraining them if necessary, getting a vaccine through the FDA, etc?

Again, there are people who know both.

Names, please. Not everybody is willing to step in an be Ebola czar. Lots of scientists/doctors already have issues they're involved with. There are virtually no Ebola experts anyway. He seems to me to be a valid choice.

I never said ebola expert, and besides, there is no such thing in the US. Right now, the ebola experts are all in Africa. I just wanted someone in health (public), any way, Jeff asked us to get off this thread.

[Anonymous]

FYI, a really great and informative interview with one of the doctors who treated Thomas Duncan in Dallas:

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/18/texas-health-presbyterian-doctor-talks-about-ebola-response/17483917/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This CNN article talks about how a travel ban would be unprecedented. It mentions that we implemented no such control for SARS or H1N1. However, the fatality rate for those diseases is much lower. And H1N1 has a vaccine.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/17/politics/ebola-travel-ban-unprecedented/

SARS had a total of 8,000 cases in 8 months, with a fatality rate of 9%

This ebola epidemic in West Africa is predicted to have 10,000 new cases each week as it continues to spread, exponentially, over the next few months, throughout West African countries, where already people are dying from lack of health care for treatable illnesses. And they are running out of food.

The epidemics really are not in any way comparable.

+1
And from what I remember, there were some sort of travel restrictions and pretty strict measures taken with SARS. To this day, you cannot board travel from/ into major airports in Asia with a fever - they have thermal-image scanners. You can argue all you want that it's just the common cold, but they don't allow you on the plane with an elevated temp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FYI, a really great and informative interview with one of the doctors who treated Thomas Duncan in Dallas:

http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/18/texas-health-presbyterian-doctor-talks-about-ebola-response/17483917/

Dumb interview. The interviewer was an idiot!