JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

MidwestTransplant wrote:
If we're going to be quarantining people who may or may not have been exposed to Ebola at some point, despite the doctors and pathologists who claims it's unnecessary and inflammatory, can we also quarantine people who don't vaccinate their children and actually spread disease?

Measles is a larger threat than Ebola, but it doesn't sell ads.

I'd be fine with both. Though remember there is no disease one can fail to get vaccinated for that is more deadly than Ebola.

MidwestTransplant wrote:
If we're going to be quarantining people who may or may not have been exposed to Ebola at some point, despite the doctors and pathologists who claims it's unnecessary and inflammatory, can we also quarantine people who don't vaccinate their children and actually spread disease?

Measles is a larger threat than Ebola, but it doesn't sell ads.

jcguy05 wrote:
The problem is while during incubation period you are not infectious, as humans we don't have built in digital alarms that goes off the second our body becomes infectious. Usually by the time you feel unwell, there is still a delay before you go take a temperature. And let's face it most people will try to tough through the discomfort of a fever until your body can't anymore.

It's wishful thinking everyone will be responsible and stay in their homes with minimum contact until the risk period has passed. we all know in reality that's never true. That moron doc has proved it. Now imagine someone without medical understanding and doesn't know even after they are symptomatic. A sneeze in a crowded subway will cause chaos, and even worse the fear that follows will do major damage to the economy.

While I agree with the nurse they should better prepared the containment housings, I absolutely disagree with her that they allow people from those high risk countries to roam free during incubation period.

Fully support Christie on his decision to quarantine until after the risk period, because the alternative is devastating...especially in high density areas like nyc and jc.

drifterx wrote:
It's funny how you want to employ the 'science' of financial companies. How often do they get it wrong again?

That kind of logic only makes sense when you are treating your patient as a science experiment. Is that what is happening here? Aren't there more effective ways of analyzing ebola than keeping a person in custody because you think she may or may not have ebola? I thought science has already progressed from that over the years. We had our chance to study ebola and we blew it. We removed funding from such research because we thought it did not concern us. State and local officials need to tread carefully because they are falling into the fear pit. If they really want science to solve this, leave it to the scientists and maybe they can find more humane ways to treat the problem.

So now explain to us the science of Christie relenting and agreeing to send her home. Is any of this really scientific or political? Smells like politics to me.

drifterx wrote:
When the CDC didn't get it right, there was acknowledgement and changes. Are we getting that here? That remains to be seen.

The ironic thing is, people in the US die of infectious diseases not named ebola by the hundreds and we don't quarantine for those. We've had what? 9 cases and one death? One death that is arguably preventable if the man was treated properly early on. It is beyond hysteria at this point.

drifterx wrote:
Quarantine is fine if it was done properly. It was not done properly.

If you want to resort to this sort of thing, try not to treat people you only suspect to have ebola like they just came back to the 3rd world country they flew out of. If hospitals can charge patients $22,000 a night for isolation rooms, I'm sure they could do better than a tent.

fikonj wrote:
A long, but very interesting read: 21 Days

borisp wrote:

Quote:

Old-Skool-JC wrote:
Christie has a habit of painting himself into corners. If he continues with this policy he's going to look like a pig-headed, histrionic ignoramus...

To whom? No, really, to WHOM? To people who propose to rely on luck instead of quarantine?

drifterx wrote:
Treating the people who are trying to eradicate the disease like pariahs always go well. /smh

Old-Skool-JC wrote:
Christie has a habit of painting himself into corners. If he continues with this policy he's going to look like a pig-headed, histrionic ignoramus...

ianmac47 wrote:
If a quarantine was necessary, there is a right way to do it. And guess what? NY/NJ failed at that. They have her set up in a tent. She doesn't have running water.

ianmac47 wrote:
I said conservatives cut funding-- not republicans or democrats. People should stop assuming that just because someone is a member of the democratic party, they aren't conservative.

ianmac47 wrote:
And as for links to CATO institute propaganda, weeee!

Old-Skool-JC wrote:
Christie has a habit of painting himself into corners. If he continues with this policy he's going to look like a pig-headed, histrionic ignoramus

HeightsBrat wrote:
...
I had read an online article that stated that though the virus, like many, has mutated, the one thing
that hasn't changed is the mode of transmission. This makes sense as the HIV has not changed its mode of transmission in the at least 70+ years it has been around though it has mutated. I think the news media as well as the CDC likes keeping the general population off kilter & under control. Reseaching on our own & not believing the nonsense we are fed through the media is the only way we will be able to intelligently deal with this.

dtjcview wrote:
We simply don't know enough about Ebola to be believing some of the sweeping statements made by the CDC.

How fast the virus is mutating? Could it become airbone in humans - like it the Ebola Reston strain did in monkeys? Or what happens when someone catches a respiratory infection alongside Ebola?

Past statistics don't predict future outcomes - when so little is really known about the virus.


See http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/12/health/ebola-airborne/

Today, the Ebola virus spreads only through direct contact with bodily fluids, such as blood and vomit. But some of the nation's top infectious disease experts worry that this deadly virus could mutate and be transmitted just by a cough or a sneeze.

"It's the single greatest concern I've ever had in my 40-year public health career," said Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. "I can't imagine anything in my career -- and this includes HIV -- that would be more devastating to the world than a respiratory transmissible Ebola virus."

The World Health Organization says its scientists are unaware of any virus that has dramatically changed its mode of transmission.

"For example, the H5N1 avian influenza virus... has probably circulated through many billions of birds for at least two decades. Its mode of transmission remains basically unchanged. Speculation that Ebola virus disease might mutate into a form that could easily spread among humans through the air is just that: speculation, unsubstantiated by any evidence."

Osterholm and other experts couldn't think of another virus that has made the transition from non-airborne to airborne in humans. They say the chances are relatively small that Ebola will make that jump. But as the virus spreads, they warned, the likelihood increases.

Every time a new person gets Ebola, the virus gets another chance to mutate and develop new capabilities. Osterholm calls it "genetic roulette."

As of October 1, there have been more than 7,100 cases of Ebola, with 3,330 deaths, according to the World Health Organization, which has said the virus is spreading at a much faster rate than it was earlier in the outbreak.

Ebola is an RNA virus, which means every time it copies itself, it makes one or two mutations. Many of those mutations mean nothing, but some of them might be able to change the way the virus behaves inside the human body.
"Imagine every time you copy an essay, you change a word or two. Eventually, it's going to change the meaning of the essay," said Dr. C.J. Peters, one of the heroes featured in "The Hot Zone."

That book chronicles the 1989 outbreak of Ebola Reston, which was transmitted among monkeys by breathing. In 2012, Canadian researchers found that Ebola Zaire, which is involved in the current outbreak, was passed from pigs to monkeys in the air.

Dr. James Le Duc, the director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas, said the problem is that no one is keeping track of the mutations happening across West Africa, so no one really knows what the virus has become.

One group of researchers looked at how Ebola changed over a short period of time in just one area in Sierra Leone early on in the outbreak, before it was spreading as fast as it is now. They found more than 300 genetic changes in the virus.

"It's frightening to look at how much this virus mutated within just three weeks," said Dr. Pardis Sabeti, an associate professor at Harvard and senior associate member of the Broad Institute, where the research was done.
Even without becoming airborne, the virus has overwhelmed efforts to stop it.

Osterholm commended groups like Doctors Without Borders but said uncoordinated efforts by individual organizations are no match for Ebola spreading swiftly through urban areas.

"This is largely dysfunctional. Nobody's in command, and nobody's in charge," he said. "It's like not having air traffic control at an airport. The planes would just crash into each other."