Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 289101112
Results 166 to 179 of 179

Thread: Anyone else worried about Ebola?

  1. #166
    I'm not sure why the New Yorker would limit their commentary to cable news. How about blogs, newspapers, radio, network TV...

    Take a look at the travel restrictions in South Africa and countries local to africa and see if they think their travel ban is only 50%. It's extremely unlikely that it would perform that poorly, just as the argument that it would get worse due to a travel ban from us is farce. A legislative stroke of the pen would put charter planes or military transport in service to move aid workers to and from affected areas.

  2. #167
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Koepke View Post
    From the New Yorker magazine:
    New Yorker has to be the single publication with its nose stuck highest up in the air of any other. They are so funny (to themselves), everything is an inside, elitist joke.

  3. #168
    This is an ideal situation for them, they can look out the rearview mirror, poke fun at people after the fact and then pretend they're above it all.

    If someone in their editorial room was living two apartments over from someone who went to the hospital symptomatic, they probably wouldn't think it was as funny.

    It might look like I'm playing two sides of the coin here, because I have been critical of anyone getting hysterical about what is or what might be but one thing is not in doubt, and that is that people who are symptomatic can give other people ebola. Keeping non-citizens out of the country, those who may become symptomatic, is just common sense unless there are economic reasons that outweigh the human reasons (and there probably are if infected people arrive only one or two at a time but don't infect any or many other people in the interim).

    As it stands now, Nina Pham has been downgraded from good to fair condition. That's probably typical for someone who has ebola as it does damage, but how would we know? It's a shame that she has to be in that situation in the first place. I hope she makes it. (For those who are nurses or docs, does anyone know a typical duration after someone becomes symptomatic but survives?)

    (just looked it up - medscape - whatever that is - says 10-25 days of duration from onset of symptoms to discharge after recovery).
    Last edited by David Weaver; 10-20-2014 at 3:13 PM.

  4. #169
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    A legislative stroke of the pen would put charter planes or military transport in service to move aid workers to and from affected areas.
    Our legislative branch is off on vacation. Apparently they do not think this is as big a threat as the usual suspects have whipped the general public in to a frenzy to believe. Even some of the politicians have been doing the fear mongering in hopes of furthering their own gain.

    I'm not sure why the New Yorker would limit their commentary to cable news. How about blogs, newspapers, radio, network TV...
    The New Yorker piece was satire. It is trying to point to the absolute nonsense of getting all worked up about something that hasn't caused nor is it about to cause the deaths of thousands of Americans.

    Hurricane Sandy caused more than 100 deaths in the U.S. That is more than Ebola has so far, but not much is being done to protect us from future super storms.

    Guns kill about 30 people a day in the U.S. Again, that is more than Ebola. Why aren't we doing something about that?

    Our political system has become one of "pay to play." Who is going to pay our representatives in Congress and the Senate to pass such legislation?

    More likely as you have suggested the interests of the big airlines not wanting a travel ban, they might have already paid Congress to do nothing.

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  5. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Koepke View Post
    Our legislative branch is off on vacation. Apparently they do not think this is as big a threat as the usual suspects have whipped the general public in to a frenzy to believe. Even some of the politicians have been doing the fear mongering in hopes of furthering their own gain.



    The New Yorker piece was satire. It is trying to point to the absolute nonsense of getting all worked up about something that hasn't caused nor is it about to cause the deaths of thousands of Americans.

    Hurricane Sandy caused more than 100 deaths in the U.S. That is more than Ebola has so far, but not much is being done to protect us from future super storms.

    Guns kill about 30 people a day in the U.S. Again, that is more than Ebola. Why aren't we doing something about that?

    Our political system has become one of "pay to play." Who is going to pay our representatives in Congress and the Senate to pass such legislation?

    More likely as you have suggested the interests of the big airlines not wanting a travel ban, they might have already paid Congress to do nothing.

    jtk
    You are comparing something that is a domestic issue to something that involves people who are not citizens. It's irrelevant. No country gives the same rights to non-citizens as it gives to citizens.

  6. #171
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by David Weaver View Post
    You are comparing something that is a domestic issue to something that involves people who are not citizens. It's irrelevant. No country gives the same rights to non-citizens as it gives to citizens.
    Would we ban travel from infected areas to anyone who isn't a U.S. citizen?

    So American citizens who may have been infected would not be banned from travel?

    Not only would the machinations of a travel ban be difficult to enforce, it would likely be easy to get around.

    It will likely be as difficult if not more so to get legislative action to institute a travel ban than it would be to enforce one.

    With the news of people who were in contact with an infected person coming off of a 21 day quarantine, maybe we can now get to making choices based on science instead of mass hysteria.

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  7. #172
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Northern Michigan
    Posts
    4,973
    I'm flying out to Maryland Wednesday, I'll let you know in 21 days how it worked out.......

    I think I'll stop by the gift shop at Metro and get some of those Ebola cough drops.......

    Larry

  8. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Koepke View Post
    Would we ban travel from infected areas to anyone who isn't a U.S. citizen?

    So American citizens who may have been infected would not be banned from travel?

    Not only would the machinations of a travel ban be difficult to enforce, it would likely be easy to get around.

    It will likely be as difficult if not more so to get legislative action to institute a travel ban than it would be to enforce one.

    With the news of people who were in contact with an infected person coming off of a 21 day quarantine, maybe we can now get to making choices based on science instead of mass hysteria.

    jtk
    You're sidestepping the issue. Sure, ban any citizen or put them under monitoring if they come back, write it any way you want to. The travel ban has been effective in guinea and Nigeria, I have no idea why anyone would think it wouldn't be here.

    I'll stick to my comment that "a travel ban making the disease worse" has nothing at all to do with why there's a travel ban.

  9. #174
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Edgerton View Post
    I'm flying out to Maryland Wednesday, I'll let you know in 21 days how it worked out.......

    I think I'll stop by the gift shop at Metro and get some of those Ebola cough drops.......

    Larry
    Just a word of warning. Do NOT joke about Ebola in the airports or on the airplanes. Folks might tend to overreeact and want to quarantine you for 21 days.

  10. #175
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    4,563
    Liberia and the other West African nations currently suffering outbreaks aren't exactly international flight hubs. Flights in and out of those countries only go to a few places, so a little diplomatic leaning on those connected nations could go a long, long ways to keeping things contained.
    Last edited by Keith Outten; 10-21-2014 at 4:54 AM.
    Jason

    "Don't get stuck on stupid." --Lt. Gen. Russel Honore


  11. #176
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    998
    I have a friend who is an epidemiologist at a major hospital -- the Texas infections were caused by lack of proper procedures and training. To suit up and take off the protective gear takes training and two people -- the one suiting up and the person who is watching and making sure the protocol is followed correctly. One hopes that the word has spread about this! Also the CDC is I believe taking a more active role. We are all at much greater risk driving to work....

  12. #177
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Longview WA
    Posts
    27,347
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by David Weaver View Post
    Well, it's not that transmittable. I was talking to a neighbor yesterday, and I'd say find a resort that's just closed due to financial issues and put the people in it. If they get a fever, fly them to one of the expert treatment hospitals and it's solved. The remaining folks could literally have their own rooms or several rooms at such a resort, even if there are hundreds of them, and they would not be exposed to each other. Give them the tools to take their own temperatures and have someone take their temperatures once a day.

    That's easier to do right now than it would be with a lot of people.

    What would such a just-closed resort cost - $50 million? Just pay it. I'll bet you could literally set up a federal paypal account and people in the US would donate enough to do it.

    But get some federal agencies involved and nobody wants to be the person to green light such a thing. They make decisions in weeks, not minutes, and those are small individual decisions. It's clear that many of the folks have a reflexive reaction to place blame on someone else, because they feel they don't have any authority to do anything and thus don't want to take blame, even when they're at fault. I would expect that in a society like ours where information flows freely and academic type folks should be in charge of places like the CDC that have complex fluid problems to deal with that the last thing we would get is political blame-gaming (and I don't mean partisan, I mean spinning blame to someone else) when those folks talk on TV, but it's clear that the messages from everyone, from the hospital to the agency heads are very carefully crafted. Now is not the time for that.
    How many people do you think would actually volunteer to be "imprisoned" in a deserted resort?

    How about we teach medical people and law enforcement a little bit about the geography of Africa?

    The hysteria is running rampant and we have politicians trying to use the fear to advance their positions.

    Here is the latest from Tucson, AZ:

    http://tucson.com/news/local/tucson-...95cfe9da5.html

    Maybe a little education about geography, diseases and how they are spread would be better than quarantining all the usual suspects.

    jtk
    "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
    - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  13. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Koepke View Post
    How many people do you think would actually volunteer to be "imprisoned" in a deserted resort?

    How about we teach medical people and law enforcement a little bit about the geography of Africa?

    The hysteria is running rampant and we have politicians trying to use the fear to advance their positions.

    Here is the latest from Tucson, AZ:

    http://tucson.com/news/local/tucson-...95cfe9da5.html

    Maybe a little education about geography, diseases and how they are spread would be better than quarantining all the usual suspects.

    jtk
    Canada imposed travel restrictions this last week. That is a smart, common-sense approach. Because the Canadians evaluated the situation and came to the only logical conclusion: When containment is the approach that works, you contain.

    If we could go back in time, before Ebola made it to the densely populated cities in W. Africa, wouldn't we work harder to contain? Of course we would, we'd love a do-over, we'd love to prevent Ebola from hitting those cities.

    Everything else is simply politically-correct mumbo jumbo. Again, I urge people to not confuse the PC rhetoric for enlightenment, they aren't one and the same.

  14. #179
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Thien View Post

    Everything else is simply politically-correct mumbo jumbo. Again, I urge people to not confuse the PC rhetoric for enlightenment, they aren't one and the same.
    I agree. The biggest hurdle in the third world seems to be skepticism by people who have no ability to analyze anything (because they're uneducated and superstitious), and they think the government is lying to them or they don't trust that they're getting the entire truth. Thus, they perpetuate the problem by coming in contact with symptomatic people.

    Those same people will get on a plane and come here. That's that. We had a symptomatic doctor in NY who lied also and could have infected someone. It doesn't look so far like he did, but he's just another example. Medical workers who come back should be quarantined 21 days since their last exposure. It simply works. Nothing else necessarily does. The fact that the issue has become political is just stupid. It's a simple problem with a simple solution, and if people don't like being quarantined, by all means pay them for their quarantine time if they were exposed as a medical worker or as an obligation of their job (for anyone doing business in those countries).

    But for everyone else, ban them from coming in from hot zones and quarantine (mandatory) anyone else who's not from a hot zone but who had significant exposure.....at least until people in the third world get their heads on straight and start following protocol.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •