Ebola case in Dallas.

Synonym said:

While I get the argument that we can't keep 100 percent of the people out of the country with a travel ban, I also have to point out that it's not just the efficacy of an action that carries weight. It's also the perception that efforts have been made that ease people's worries.

Click to expand...

Accurate information would help ease worries a lot more than a travel ban. Sadly, the public seems a hell of a lot more immune to that than they are to ebola.

Why travel bans are a horrible idea

Mayor of NYC and other officials discussing the New York City ebola patient in a press conference tonight:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news-plus-special-report-220000361.html

raburrell said:

Accurate information would help ease worries a lot more than a travel ban. Sadly, the public seems a hell of a lot more immune to that than they are to ebola.

Why travel bans are a horrible idea

Click to expand...

The public doesn't know what to believe, or who. (Then there's that defense mechanism of ignoring the 'big scary thing', when they feel like it's too much to handle.) I'm sure they're talking about it. But with whom, and at what cost to real knowledge?

Their neighbor, who heard something or other from a second cousin that went to nursing school for two semesters? Conflicting stories caught off the tube, while settling a fight between the kids, and loading laundry?

If you want to get their attention, it's going to take an ad campaign. Which might be hard to squeeze in between all the election stuff right now.

Synonym said:

The public doesn't know what to believe, or who. (Then there's that defense mechanism of ignoring the 'big scary thing', when they feel like it's too much to handle.) I'm sure they're talking about it. But with whom, and at what cost to real knowledge?

Their neighbor, who heard something or other from a second cousin that went to nursing school for two semesters? Conflicting stories caught off the tube, while settling a fight between the kids, and loading laundry?

If you want to get their attention, it's going to take an ad campaign. Which might be hard to squeeze in between all the election stuff right now.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's sorta what I meant by people being immune to accurate information.

Pretty much anything the current North Korean leadership thinks is a good idea, is an idea we should avoid. They just enacted a travel ban, so...

(Considering how few people travel to and from NK, anyway, I'm not sure the ban was really necessary.)

There's this, but I'm wondering if the number of experts CNN can put on TV can double every three weeks:
https://twitter.com/nickbilton/status/525459712335044608

William Haskins said:

yeah but

Click to expand...

What? I understand a lot of people lick their balls....

kaitie said:

I'm actually fairly certain many jobs have rules against firing someone for medical reasons. It's a good way to get sued, from what I've seen.

Second of all, the point is to keep them away from others that they might infect. Children are routinely kept away from school for illnesses. I've been kept home from work for illness. When I had strep throat and pink eye, I was told not to go to work for a week. Same thing for mono. I'm sure not everyone is going to be as considerate of that as I was, but I pretty much stayed away from people because I knew I was very contagious.

When I lived in Japan, we twice shut down the entire school for two weeks at a time because of measles and the flu. That actually made a difference.

I think the idea that it's not possible is just an excuse. Yes, some people might be stupid and go out and do stuff around others anyway. However, you're also taking them away from the two places that illness spreads very quickly--home and work. We spend the majority of our time there in close contact with others.

It basically sounds like you're saying it's pointless to ask international students to come early and then have not allow them to attend class for three weeks. I don't at all see how that would be pointless.

Click to expand...

I think people are far more likely to spread illness out and about than sitting at a desk. Obviously it all depends on what jobs people have and where they live, but still.

It's not possible isn't the only reason - I've said it'd hamper relief efforts, it'd likely cause other things - but it is a large reason. It's a reactionary, useless, needless step. We need to control it there, not put energy into corralling people without it here.

c.e.lawson said:

Having read the article, it seems the doctor was sicker than the two Dallas nurses at the time of admission. He'd been feeling sluggish for two days and was admitted by ambulance with a 103 degree fever and GI symptoms. Uh oh. Early supportive care, especially hydration, is really important.

Click to expand...

He said he felt fatigued, but not so fatigued he couldn't run three miles. He apparently woke up with the high fever and GI symptoms.

Of all the potential infected-person-running-about scenarios that could crop up, the one that worries me least is an MSF worker.

That an MSF worker contracted Ebola at all is shocking, and I believe he's the third, which speaks to how out-of-control this outbreak is. He did everything right - he was taking his temperature twice a day, and when he had actual symptoms, he called 911, told them what was going on, they showed up with all the gear needed, safely transported him to a facility with a full biohazard unit, where he gave detailed information on his movements and contacts the past week. His fiance is in quarantine in hospital, there are health dept. workers on the streets in his neighbourhood handing out information. New York - it ain't Dallas.

OK, a USA article from today states that the 103 temp widely reported yesterday was erroneous, and that the temp was actually 100.3. (huge difference!) The doc apparently stayed in his apartment as soon as he started feeling fatigue, and when he went to the hospital the next day, it was with staff in full protective gear. (not a regular ambulance which was the implication from yesterday) So the scenario is MUCH more consistent with a knowledgeable health care worker than the story from yesterday. I couldn't understand why he would wait until things got so bad before going for treatment. It appears he did not. Thank goodness.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...the-answer-will-be-here-in-12-hours/17786777/

Fortunately, Ebola incubation doesn't matter until it's contagious (with symptoms), so this doctor coming in doesn't bother me. Even that he went bowling

But if we had enough people coming in who were incubating, people could get exposed who just shouldn't. I was so afraid for the kids around Duncan. Or the fiance of the nurse who flew to Chicago (wouldn't they have sex on a romantic visit planning their wedding?).

I don't think 21 days in a dorm (or bootcamp-like) environment would be that horrible a thing to go through, myself. I think a lot of people might be happy to have a place to go for quarantine. In Spain, many of those being monitored did so in the hospital, voluntarily.

Hospitals are expensive, so I'd go with dorms where possible, but a decent place where folks could wait out the waiting period doesn't have to be something they'd hate. The idea would be to keep them isolated enough for a relatively short period of time, imho.

It might end up less costly, because all of these contact-tracing teams don't come cheap! In the US, we've had schools and businesses close for a while due to exposure, too. That seems avoidable to me.

In any case, I don't mean Gitmo or anything

backslashbaby said:

I don't think 21 days in a dorm (or bootcamp-like) environment would be that horrible a thing to go through, myself. I think a lot of people might be happy to have a place to go for quarantine. In Spain, many of those being monitored did so in the hospital, voluntarily.

Hospitals are expensive, so I'd go with dorms where possible, but a decent place where folks could wait out the waiting period doesn't have to be something they'd hate. The idea would be to keep them isolated enough for a relatively short period of time, imho.

Click to expand...

So where exactly are these dorms that are currently standing vacant? Who is paying these people's bills while they are not working?

Yeah, that's the thing. This country is set up so that quarantine is financial suicide.

waylander said:

So where exactly are these dorms that are currently standing vacant? Who is paying these people's bills while they are not working?

Click to expand...

There are plenty of housing and kenneling facilities not currently being used but still on the roster. Many are military, some are former youth facilities or psychiatric facilities that federal money keeps from falling into disrepair in case of future need.

Yes using one is still disruptive and costs the person, government, and economy--but it still beats having a pandemic.

While I get the argument that we can't keep 100 percent of the people out of the country with a travel ban, I also have to point out that it's not just the efficacy of an action that carries weight. It's also the perception that efforts have been made that ease people's worries.

Click to expand...

The thing is, practically unprecendented efforts have been made on the US side by the CDC and various state departments of public health. Your nearest major medical center probably has extensively prepped for this. We started screening patients last week, and all of us docs went to mandatory ebola class this week. The level of precautions taken and the containment procedures are very aggressive. All of this is not as categorical as "lock everybody down" but it's probably more effective.

veinglory said:

There are plenty of housing and kenneling facilities not currently being used but still on the roster. Many are military, some are former youth facilities or psychiatric facilities that federal money keeps from falling into disrepair in case of future need.

Yes using one is still disruptive and costs the person, government, and economy--but it still beats having a pandemic.

Click to expand...

Are they in sufficiently good repair that putting people who have done nothing other than be in the wrong place at the wrong time in them is not a major human rights breech?

waylander said:

Are they in sufficiently good repair that putting people who have done nothing other than be in the wrong place at the wrong time in them is not a major human rights breech?

Click to expand...

It's nothing 'wrong' to have traveled to the hot areas, especially for doctors and similar, but it is usually a big deal nowadays. Preparations have to be made in lots of ways. The folks visiting have to think about how they will protect themselves from the disease while there, etc.

It's not like all this would be a surprise or anything. Ebola is a big deal, and I'm sure people coming from or going to the hot areas are aware that it is. They know better than we do what a big deal it is

Oh, no. Looks like NY and NJ are coming up with their own, knee-jerk state quarantines. Now that will affect the healthcare workers helping stop the epidemic disproportionately, imho.

http://7online.com/health/mandatory...e-returning-to-us-at-ny-area-airports/364779/

So scratch that it wouldn't be a surprise, and that it could be well-thought-out. Looks like the governors are doing their own thing on the fly. Great.

robeiae said:

Click to expand...

Damn straight.



Nurse Nina Pham visits the White House and gets a hug from President Obama.

The only thing we have to fear is Fear Itself. And unprincipled politicians and ratings-hungry hack journalists scaring the hell out of the American people needlessly.

waylander said:

Are they in sufficiently good repair that putting people who have done nothing other than be in the wrong place at the wrong time in them is not a major human rights breech?

Click to expand...

The ones kept in operational order would number in the high hundreds--meaning they are sound, connected, maintained and legally habitable. The government has a huge amount of non-derelict institutional property at any given moment in time.

And if the person is infected and non-compliant and performing behaviors that risk transmission there is legal precedent for putting them in prison or preventive detention in a hospital (from Typhoid Mary to the preventive detention of Johnson Aziga). We do not have the legal right to expose other people to lethal hazards.

c.e.lawson said:

OK, a USA article from today states that the 103 temp widely reported yesterday was erroneous, and that the temp was actually 100.3. (huge difference!) The doc apparently stayed in his apartment as soon as he started feeling fatigue, and when he went to the hospital the next day, it was with staff in full protective gear. (not a regular ambulance which was the implication from yesterday) So the scenario is MUCH more consistent with a knowledgeable health care worker than the story from yesterday. I couldn't understand why he would wait until things got so bad before going for treatment. It appears he did not. Thank goodness.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...the-answer-will-be-here-in-12-hours/17786777/

Click to expand...

What story did you hear yesterday, or rather, where did you hear that?

Yesterday, during daylight, before the blood tests came back, there was footage of the (clearly labelled btw) hazmat ambulance both outside his apt, escorting him inside, with him and the EMTs all in full gear, in traffic, and then in the Bellvue bay.

In other news, I cannot with Cuomo. I expect this level of idiocy from Christie, but Cuomo is not usually oozing dumb.

"
Illinois Joins NY, NJ With Ebola Risk-Flyer Quarantine"

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...antines-for-travelers-with-ebola-contact.html

Illinois has joined New York and New Jersey in deciding to quarantine anyone arriving at its airports who has had direct contact with Ebola patients, even as doctors continue to question the need.
The growing list of states pushing beyond the quarantine guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may heighten debate between elected officials who put stricter policies in place and health-care professionals who say they could deter caregivers from volunteering to fight the disease at its West Africa source....

Click to expand...

I think professionals battling the disease in Africa are aware enough of the first symptoms that they would be the least stringent quarantine. That's not happening, and it's a shame.

One nurse is in a NJ hospital involuntarily, and apparently she'll be in that hospital for the 21 days -- with no warning or ability to make plans.

I was hoping to see quarantines that could also be set up by medical employers, etc, where the idea would be to have safe yet productive isolation for folks fighting the disease in Africa (and others).

Just locking someone in a hospital room is going to be much more costly and won't allow the person the productivity that could have been arranged. It's sad, but it's not totally unexpected

The quarantines still don't restrict those who have less knowledge of the disease than MSF folks, for example. Unfortunately, people escaping the region may lie or be more ignorant about their exposure. So they are completely 'locking down' the reverse group of vectors, imho.

In any case, strict hospital quarantine seems a bit much for folks not showing any symptoms!

backslashbaby said:

"In any case, strict hospital quarantine seems a bit much for folks not showing any symptoms!

Click to expand...

It's not being done for medical reasons. It's being done to calm public fears, irrational or not.

rugcat said:

It's not being done for medical reasons. It's being done to calm public fears, irrational or not.

Click to expand...

Yep, you have to pack those phalanges into every plane or people will panic. Take extra.*

(*Friends reference for those making strange faces at their screen right now.)

Betting on how long the nurse will be in quarantine until she's sprung by a judge is now OPEN!

Step up to the window and place your bets - additional betting on how long the idiot/Cuomo quarantine plan will exist at the second window please.

So Ebola started in Guyana -- really? According to Rep. congressman Issa. Not just a slip of the tongue as he said it THREE times.
Guys, get your geography straight. Or I guess it doesn't matter. Guyana. Guinea. Ghana. As long as it starts with G.