The Goat Pen

eCat,

The quarantined nurses opinion of saying that Christie isn't a medical professional rings hollow when he can shoot back and say "your profession was not prepared for ebola treatment in regards to interacting with ebola from Africa" - what can she say to that?

A quarantine is to protect the public-at-large. There is no evidence that the public is at risk or has ever been at risk in the US - just medical staff caring for people who are very ill. And the CDC did make a mistake with their PPE requirements for the medical staff. They should have adopted the more stringent WHO standards, who has never wavered in their recs of the protective equipment.

In the end, an asymptomatic person who has tested negative is NOT contagious. Home monitoring is the correct precaution and I'm glad that NY and the rest have listened and adopted those standards. It is the conservative choice, even though many epidemiologists feel that mandatory home isolation for those people is going too far.

Now, if we're saying that the WHO, for some other reason, can't be trusted (they support the home isolation), and because of that, we should ignore them and go to forced hospital quarantine, then why would we trust the scientists with 21 days? Why not 42? Or 100, or even more? Or do we trust them with 21-days and not with the home isolation for some reason?

Jungle Rat wrote:DS is marrying a chink from China. I dont ever want to hear him complain about illegals again.

DS' girl is a white broad from Match.com. He can continue on any manner of rants on illegals...just not big girls.

my point is the doctors/nurses have shown they are incapable of caring for the ebola patients without a much higher risk of contracting the disease.

Now if there is a test that shows you don't have it, fine - then go on about your day and do whatever you want - however if the test just shows you don't have it *now* and its still possible that in 10 or 12 days you could get a fever ( and I understand that even then you aren't contagious) then I'm going to support a 21 day quarantine - so that you don't take the train to a meatball shop and go bowling , or go get take out food, or get on a plane to go dress shopping in Cleveland.

If I am a medical professional treating a contagious disease - especially one that is wiping out people left and right in West Africa, do I really need to contact the WHO or CDC to determine the level of protection and appropriate measure to insure I don't contract the disease?

so yes, the quarantine is to protect the public at large - from doctors/nurses who are returning from West Africa and may not have taken the necessary precautions to prevent contracting the disease.

I understand completely how you get the disease. I also understand that I don't trust the medical professionals to act responsibility after returning from West Africa.

and I bet dollars to donuts that is what is driving the 21 day quarantine.

my point is the doctors/nurses have shown they are incapable of caring for the ebola patients without a much higher risk of contracting the disease.

Yes. You come in contact with body fluids of someone who is deathly ill or dead from Ebola you are at a higher risk of contracting the disease. Other than eating an infected bat or chimp, it's about the only way to get the disease.

Now if there is a test that shows you don't have it, fine - then go on about your day and do whatever you want - however if the test just shows you don't have it *now* and its still possible that in 10 or 12 days you could get a fever ( and I understand that even then you aren't contagious) then I'm going to support a 21 day quarantine - so that you don't take the train to a meatball shop and go bowling , or go get take out food, or get on a plane to go dress shopping in Cleveland.

The test only shows a negative viral load now. It is possible that it will develop later. Why 21 days? While 21 days of isolation is the accepted recommendation. so is at-home monitoring. Why one and not the other? Let's not trust the WHO on anything!

Of the plane ride, and the bowling alley, and the jogging and meatball subs shops and whatever, thousands of citizens came in contact with the various healthcare providers, how many of those thousands have contracted Ebola in the public? Ebola has been going on for years in Africa and we've been sending people over there and back. This latest foray of coverage is hysteria fueled by Fox News and CNN. Remember, We've had more Americans die from Killer Bee attacks this month.

If am a medical professional treating a contagious disease - especially one that is wiping out people left and right in West Africa, do I really need to contact the WHO or CDC to determine the level of protection and appropriate measure to insure I don't contract the disease?

The infection control team of a hospital in the US follows the CDC rec. the average team member doesn't get to pick and choose which suit is provided.

so yes, the quarantine is to protect the public at large - from doctors/nurses who are returning from West Africa and may not have taken the necessary precautions to prevent contracting the disease.

I don't understand that. The only logical factor is the question "Are they contagious?" If the answer is no, then detainment in a facility is unnecessary. Home monitoring is more than enough.

I understand completely how you get the disease. I also understand that I don't trust the medical professionals to act responsibility after returning from West Africa.

You think they would let themselves get deathly ill and fling their Ebola poop on the public? Even if they wanted to, they wouldn't have the strength, probably.

and I bet dollars to donuts that is what is driving the 21 day quarantine.

There is no mandated 21-day quarantine, in any state, including NJ, for asymptomatic people who have tested negative. The reason for the 21-day window for home monitoring is because science. 20.1 days is the longest suspected incubation time ever recorded.

The only thing that kept the nurse in NJ quarantined was that her original forehead monitor showed that she had a temp. All subsequent oral readings showed her as afebrile. So she was released to Maine.

Honestly, though, it wouldn't surprise me if she tested positive at some point. But right now, as long as she was negative in labs and asymptomatic, I'd share a pizza with her. Heck, I'd even let her give me a BJ.

The second she got sick, though, I'd probably want a condom though. And she'd have to get her own pizza.

Ironically, that's exactly what Dr. Oz said.

"You think they would let themselves get deathly ill and fling their Ebola poop on the public? Even if they wanted to, they wouldn't have the strength, probably."

I'm not sure what to think but what I do know is I expect more caution from them than what I've seen to date.

If I know I'm not contagious, I doubt I'd show a lot of mock caution, either. If I do test positive and/or have any symptoms, I'd be the most cautious person you ever hoped to meet.


Bklyn,

Never seen Dr. Oz. Know nothing about him. Is he into epidemiology/virology?

Shine a laser pointer at an Aussie police copter like a moron, get arrested.



[youtube]SaOhD2r-Y8c[/youtube]

that is impressive - especially how still the picture is.

You know he was like, "No way they can track me here, mate!"

I'm not sure what to think but what I do know is I expect more caution from them than what I've seen to date.

The public is not going to get Ebola from sitting next to somebody on a flight or a train or from wearing the bowling shoes that some dude turned in. There is no public threat from asymptomatic people going about their daily lives, and certainly no threat from them staying at home and monitoring themselves. Quarantining someone who is no threat just to make a show and feel better (and if your Chris Christie go ahead and lie about it to justify it, he was quoted multiple times saying the lady in New Jersey was sick, when she never was, likely because IT WAS AGAINST THE FUCKING LAW to detain someone who wasn't sick) is sickening, and I certainly don't want the government to hold onto an organizational memory of "remember that time when we imprisoned people in tents for the ebola? We can use that again!"

This is how I see bklyn's life must be...

http://nypost.com/2014/10/29/investor-h ... nged-wife/

Just look at that tie knot! Obviously, he should get the kids.

aTm wrote:

I'm not sure what to think but what I do know is I expect more caution from them than what I've seen to date.

The public is not going to get Ebola from sitting next to somebody on a flight or a train or from wearing the bowling shoes that some dude turned in. There is no public threat from asymptomatic people going about their daily lives, and certainly no threat from them staying at home and monitoring themselves. Quarantining someone who is no threat just to make a show and feel better (and if your Chris Christie go ahead and lie about it to justify it, he was quoted multiple times saying the lady in New Jersey was sick, when she never was, likely because IT WAS AGAINST THE FUCKING LAW to detain someone who wasn't sick) is sickening, and I certainly don't want the government to hold onto an organizational memory of "remember that time when we imprisoned people in tents for the ebola? We can use that again!"

its not about catching ebola from someone who is showing no signs with the symptoms - I'm not addressing the hysteria of having someone sneeze on you while you're sitting next to them on an airplane.

But I don't think there is hysteria in knowing that a person who has been exposed to ebola, especially a medical professional can't be counted on to isolate themselves. I'm aware that when you are contagious with ebola, chances are you aren't going to feel like getting out - but that doesn't mean that you can't be trusted to not come in contact with people.

And the sad thing is, these should be the people showing the most precautions from this. Maybe we aren't hearing about the 100 or so medical professionals that have returned back to the states from ebola infected countries and only the 4 that have returned because they contracted it. But I don't have any qualms isolating a person (with pay, without any job loss, without any sacrifices in quality of life other than they can't go anywhere) until we are certain there is no chance of them developing symptoms.

Isolation is an effective measure - and while ebola is a minor blip, its has the ability to become a major one

The CDC is authorized to detain, medically examine, and release persons arriving into the United States and traveling between states who are suspected of carrying these communicable diseases.

States have police power functions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of persons within their borders. To control the spread of disease within their borders, states have laws to enforce the use of isolation and quarantine. These laws can vary from state to state and can be specific or broad. In some states, local health authorities implement state law. In most states, breaking a quarantine order is a criminal misdemeanor.

"Anyway, eCat, I'm not looking for an argument on Ebola. I respect your opinion even if I disagree with it."

That's a unusual in here, where most people disrespect someone's opinion even when they agree with it...

eCat is a good guy and he's certainly not the only American swept up in the Ebola hysteria.

Each state's quarantine laws must still pass constitutional muster when challenged and I highly doubt that forcibly detaining someone whom medical science will say is not contagious, and whom the government cannot even prove is sick or will get sick, (much less the relatively low communicability of the disease even after the person shows symptoms) will be shown to be the least restrictive means that the government could use to keep the public safe.

Spacer is probably a good person to ask his opinion, but you ran his ass off.

I've taught a fucking infectious disease class at a major university and you're gonna ask spacer's opinion?

FUCK YOU!!!!