Thread: Ebola

Originally Posted by gssixgun

So do nothing ??

What part of "The Facts don't matter" do you not get ???

May be don't lick the doorknobs and wash your hands before you put them anywhere on your face.
My mother used to tell me that when I was 3 and eventually I started listening.

Originally Posted by gugi

US citizens do not need to get US visa to enter US, they automatically have that right based on citizenship and all they need is a US passport.

Yes as I said above "Each country has it's own rules "


If you start sequestering people based on potential exposure to infectious diseases you're making a rather drastic jump from centuries of established practice and it isn't going to be as easy to make your case in court. There are many infectious diseases far more contagious than ebola. The only special thing about ebola is the high mortality rate.
However the basis of these laws is not high mortality, but high contagiousness.

But yet Australia just did exactly that yesterday

The list of countries is growing that are banning/restricting "Hot Zone" travelers, once again proving that once the trust is broken the facts don't really matter..

Originally Posted by gssixgun

The list of countries is growing that are banning "Hot Zone" travelers, once again proving that once the trust is broken the facts don't really matter..

As much as I often don't agree with Glen, on this one we are in total agreement.
Once the mob is howling, the truth of the matter doesn't really matter anymore.

Now, imo, the best way to battle this is containment. So it is absolutely silly that sick people are being repatriated.

Originally Posted by Bruno

As much as I often don't agree with Glen, on this one we are in total agreement.
Once the mob is howling, the truth of the matter doesn't really matter anymore.

Now, imo, the best way to battle this is containment. So it is absolutely silly that sick people are being repatriated.

***Looks outside for the blue moon***

Originally Posted by gssixgun

This is their own fault they caused it themselves by making stupid statements that turned out to be false and it was reported ..

When you say stupid stuff you gotta deal with the repercussions..

Now the Administrations has caused it's own crisis of confidence and the public at large no longer trusts them, so they need to earn that trust again by an abundance of caution.. The "Facts" no longer matter, that ship sailed with Duncan and the Dallas nurses.. No matter how many guys in white coats with letters after their names say otherwise, they lost the public trust... By calling the public stupid it doesn't help earn back their trust factor..

Politicians are doing exactly what we pay them to do anymore, divide the masses


ps: The exact same thing happened in the 80's here with HIV when the "Smart Guys" in white coats, and the Politicians lost the public trust on that too by mis-informing the public..

Once they lose that trust the truth no longer matters

I wasn't here in the 80s, but I have been for the last decade and know that this is simply not true. It's all two factors (1) the usual media 'big scary news' (2) politics - just look at the governors who decided to establish a quarantine and the way they decided to do it.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Medical people like that Nurse in ME now do not help either, it doesn't matter now what the facts are, she has made it way worse for anyone wanting to go help in the Hot Zones.. Much of that work is funded by charity and peoples wallets will close when they see her attitude, which isn't helping the people she was trying to in the first place.. Sad but still true

Except that it's not how it works. People don't give money for such causes because it doesn't make them feel anywhere as good about themselves as when they give money prompted by images of an earthquake devastation. Those who give money for ebola are doing it more of a reason than emotion and are not that easily swayed by such inconsequential things.
What does have an effect, though, is unreasonable quarantine policies - those do affect the people who make the biggest difference on the ground, start penalizing them for it and you'll get fewer doing it.

Originally Posted by BobH

The last time I traveled to Africa, 2 years ago, my passport was NOT stamped simply Africa. Each and every country I visited clearly stamped my passport with entry and exit dated stamps. You will know darn well which country someone has to been in Africa and the dates.

If the people who go to help affected countries get penalized back home for doing it, there will be less of them willing to go. As a result those countries would stop stamping the passports of these people to counteract that.
This is not a fiction - that's exactly how it works currently with US citizens going to Cuba despite the embargo.

The problem with adversarial measures is that they cause counter reaction and there are plenty of loopholes that would be suddenly employed and new ones developed.
It is complete foolishness to switch from cooperative to adversarial position when it doesn't guarantee you 100% effective prevention which you want, and will dramatically decrease the chances of achieving the real goal.

Basically currently there is a small chance of pandemic - you put restrictions decreasing the ratio of infected people who can get in, but those same restrictions increase the outside pool of infected people, the pressure to get through the restrictions, and the time you have to keep doing this. Since you can not guarantee 100% effectiveness of your restrictions the total result can be the exact opposite of what you're trying to achieve and you'd ultimately get more infected people in, spend a lot more resources doing it, and make everybody's life a lot harder.

Originally Posted by gugi

I wasn't here in the 80s, but I have been for the last decade and know that this is simply not true. It's all two factors (1) the usual media 'big scary news' (2) politics - just look at the governors who decided to establish a quarantine and the way they decided to do it.


Except that it's not how it works. People don't give money for such causes because it doesn't make them feel anywhere as good about themselves as when they give money prompted by images of an earthquake devastation. Those who give money for ebola are doing it more of a reason than emotion and are not that easily swayed by such inconsequential things.
What does have an effect, though, is unreasonable quarantine policies - those do affect the people who make the biggest difference on the ground, start penalizing them for it and you'll get fewer doing it.

I was around for the Public outcry about HIV in the 80's and yes it is true, many business's closed over it the public hysteria was as bad as today if not worse

Sorry but this Nurse is from Doctor's without Borders which is a Charity 501c3 i just checked and watching the newscast from her very small home town will give you a good idea of just how her attitude is having an effect on the public..

Again the facts just don't matter, she broke the public trust her and D w/o B will have to deal with the repercussions

The facts do matter - my guess is that her town's current contribution to doctors without borders is only her personal participation and people have actually contributed zero dollars to that charity (that's based on the budget of DWB and the size of her town). They can't contribute less than zero in the future.

As strange as it may be people don't volunteer with Doctors without borders for the big salary - for that you stay in upper east side injecting botox.

Here comes the Rant,

The question was asked if we should sequester all travelers from Africa. The answer is yes we should. If our own government is going to restrict the service men and women that were ordered to serve in West Africa to be quarantined for 21 days in Italy. Then everyone that has been there or comes from there should have to also! To still be approving visas to come to the USA it not sound thought for anyone that can think past next week.
I have traveled and filled up a passport book you can track all my movements except in the EU but can figure out where I entered and where I left from.

Personally I am very upset over all of this. I am one of the S.O.B. that funds the government and their employees. The fact is I am not beholding to the government for a damn thing they need me and I don’t need them. I don’t get a Free Check, Insurance, Phone, Food, House or Employed by the government. I volunteered and did my time in the Army in the 70’s. Everything I use that the government has a hand in I am taxed for it or in the case of USPS I pay for.

The fact that the federal government is not doing everything they can to protect the American people is a down crime in my eyes.

Many times I have sacrificed my well being for others. I have put myself in harms way so others would not have to. It is time that our leaders man up and worry about the American people and quit being politically correct. If I thought for one second there was a slight chance I had been exposed to Ebola I would be volunteering to go into 21 day quarantine so not to subject others to it.

IMHO any leader that would not consider what this could do to the American people, The Nation down to the neighborhood should be publicly flogged rubbed with rock salt and run out on a rail. I applaud some of the governors in our nation that have a back bone and the Australia government that are concerned for their citizens.

The bottom line is I am the leader and head of home, if I have a gathering at my home and there is a chance you can bring sickness to my family or guest you are not welcome!!! If I find out you lied you will be asked to leave. When you are clear of any possibility of illness please feel free to stop by and we will have some fun. I would never ask anyone to do what I would not do myself; therefore if this offends you, you were never my friend to begin with.

Kevin

My wife is a nurse and remembers the SARS crisis very well and the impact it had on her and her colleagues. At one point, the hospital had living areas ready to be constructed because as a Nurse, she was legislated to come to work or resign, and that if it got worse, she would not be allowed into the greater community, let alone be allowed to come home to our home.

In her opinion, anyone travelling from an area exposed to Ebola should be automatically quarantined for 21 days. Those that decide to travel to an area exposed should be told they do so at their own risk and will be responsible for paying and certifying that they are disease free before being allowed re-entry.

She feels the nurse in this case set a terrible example, that it lends credence to the lack of importance / urgency, and that if in fact she does develop symptoms, the possibility of an exponential exposure is even that much higher.

I'm not qualified in this area, she has an more credible view to this as opposed to my "opinion", but that's her take - this is a serious issue and needs to be treated as such.