Ebola thread--pass it on

[Doc]

I'm not a mass hysteria kind of person and being in my profession I understand contagious diseases, the transmission, how to prevent transmission, etc... so a few things.

1) Of course my feeling towards this president not withstanding, I have NO IDEA why in the hell we would not suspend travel from Western Africa. The idea that it would some how isolate them and make it worse is about as stupid as stupid comes. Rule one about any contagious disease is that you ISOLATE it. Isolating it does not make it worse dumbass! Those who wish to treat it can still get to western Africa. The point is to stop travel FROM Western Africa TO the this country. It is FROM the infected area TO the non-infected, not the other way dumbass. Medical workers, scientist, etc would still be able to get to Africa to offer assistance, and when they want to return you quarantine them.

2) Suspending travel isn't racist, as some morons on the left have suggested. This borders on insulting to even the dumbest of the dumb. I'd post a "face palm" here but a face palm doesn't do the idiocy of this justice. It is interesting that those who suggest that a travel ban is racist are not in Dallas. Those who oppose a travel ban don't reside in Dallas. Wonder why. (not really)

3) Anybody seen this video yet?

A quick synopsis-guy on a plane coughs and thinks its funny to yell he has Ebola and now everybody on the plane is infected. This guy must be a riot at parties. Of course not a shock that the airline took him seriously. Love to see him have to foot the bill for the hazmat suits, the expenses incurred by the airline for the delays, the expenses incurred by the travellers for the delays and the MASSIVE fines

4) What kind of idiots do we have that said this would never make it to this country? Those idiots are running this country. Doesn't that make you feel better?

[PedroDaGr8]

I really don't think closing the borders is a necessary precaution. There was an AMA on Reddit recently with an infectious disease specialist who specifically dealt with Ebola. She said our worries about Ebola are incredibly over dramatic. She said that, we need to be vigilant but not over reacting. She said that entrance screenings from infected areas should be mandatory. That being said, proposing a travel ban is far from racist. Overreaching, yes maybe. Racist, not in the least bit. As for anyone who said it wouldn't make it here, they are truly that an idiot. Even with travel restrictions, it will find a way to make it here. This is why the focus has to be on entry screening and isolation of the infected (because you can't isolate everyone).

Much of the issue with how it spreads in Africa deals with the culture. The way burial rights are performed, communal interactions, etc. Things which do not apply in the western world. Additionally, the high mortality rate is due to the limited health care system. If you get treatment early and actively, the mortality rate drops MUCH MUCH lower. Western medicine is actually very good at treating Ebola in the western world. The issue is that the resources in African countries are limited at best and non-existent at worst. Combine this lack of infrastructure with a lack of education, misinformation (claims that the doctors are intentionally spreading Ebola), etc. and you get the hot bed of activity that you see. Ebola is feared because of its dramatic symptoms but in reality it is a bit of a dumb virus. Ebola in and of itself is actually not a very contagious disease:



While this is the first case of Ebola we have seen on US soil, the other main member of the filoviridae family (Marburg) has appeared here before. It was successfully contained. There are other equally disturbing hemorrhagic fevers from other viral families, such as Arenaviridae (Brazilian Hemorrhagic Fever, Argentinian Hemorrhagic fever, etc) which are found in South America. Do we ban travel from those countries too?

None of this is to downplay the fact that Ebola is VERY VERY serious. Just that it isn't the end all be all apocalyptic nightmare that people are making it out to be.

[Doc]

Let me ask, which virus do you believe is more likely to be transmitted from one host to the next, Ebola or rabies? The answer would be ebola due to method of transmission. But we and other countries ban importation of animals from rabies areas without a second thought. Countries like England, and even the state of Hawaii had a 6 month guarantine on all mammals for decades and effectively prevented the entry of that virus into their county despite it being present worldwide. With the advent of new testing, those quarantine protocols were removed but it illustrates that travel restrictions do work. Rabies is a virus with an incubation of 6 months compared to 3 weeks for Ebola, thus takes a longer period to identify an infected individual. Like Ebola, transmission occurs only during symptomatic phase. A big part of effective control is minimizing the influx of the disease, and when it does make it in (which it would/did) then you eradicate. As for over reaction, I guess were it my child in a school where there might have been exposure, I'm not sure what one would consider as over reaction. Its easy to say one is over reacting from a thousand miles away when you have nothing at risk.

[Doc]

I hate replying on a tablet. Miss half the stuff and hard to edit.

Problem with Ebola is the mortality rate. Unlike SARS, Mumps, Measles, etc, it has a mortality rate of 25-90%

Any recommended ban of travel would be temporary, until the dz was controlled. Based on the relatively short incubation period of 3 weeks, if an aggressive protocol was instituted then then eradication should result in a resolution in a short course. Previous outbreaks have been controlled in a few months. Allowing the disease to spread to other regions makes that more difficult, not less. Isolation is one of the key to disease eradication.

[Darrell KSR]

[IMG]A quick synopsis-guy on a plane coughs and thinks its funny to yell he has Ebola and now everybody on the plane is infected. This guy must be a riot at parties. Of course not a shock that the airline took him seriously. Love to see him have to foot the bill for the hazmat suits, the expenses incurred by the airline for the delays, the expenses incurred by the travellers for the delays and the MASSIVE fines

I'd love to see him suffer every cent of financial cost for the idiocy.

[Doc]

I'd love to see him suffer every cent of financial cost for the idiocy.

I should have noted the plane originated in the USA (Philly) but the incident happened in the Domincian Republic. Would have been nice if it had happened in Turkey since I hear the Turkish Prison system is pretty nice.

[jazyd]

Doc, I agree with you totally

[dan_bgblue]

No disagreement Doc, but I have a question. Why is the CDC seemingly supporting the position of the Potus?

[Doc]

Govt agency

[jazyd]

Same reason EPA and Labor Board

No disagreement Doc, but I have a question. Why is the CDC seemingly supporting the position of the Potus?

[CitizenBBN]

IMO the definition of an overreaction is when the costs outweigh the benefits. IN this case restricting travel to a relatively small region that gets little travel and even less trade doesn't have much impact on the nation as a whole compared to the benefit of stemming the tide of a dangerous disease.

is it a disease we as a nation can fight? Yes, but it is the height of strategy to win without firing a shot. In this case to beat the disease by minimizing its ability to get here. It still will, but we will have isolated it and minimized it and made it easier to contain.

Why run the risk? We could create exceptions for emergency situations as needed, but I doubt there are many. We restrict it for that area, maybe we dodge a few bullets and can survive the others that do make it through. Far better than to have to deal with them all and hope for the best.

[Doc]

No disagreement Doc, but I have a question. Why is the CDC seemingly supporting the position of the Potus?

We will see if their position is the correct one soon enough but early returns are not good as case number two showed up today. A hospital worker in Dallas who worked on patient one, was labelled a "low risk" tested positive. So now comes the test. How many people do you suspect this ER nurse (I believe the new patient is a nurse) exposed? If you get sick or injured in Dallas, what are the chances you go to this hospital for fear of exposure? If you have been to that hospital anytime in the last 2 weeks, are you paranoid?

Getting back to the travel restriction, I see it like Cuba. I you picture Ebola like a Cuban cigar it might help. I have clients who travel to and from Cuba despite a travel ban but its difficult. Imports from Cuba are not to be had in this country in part because of the restrictions but its not impossible to get them or travel there

See, to me the job of the president first and foremost is the protection of the citizens of this country, more so than insuring every citizen has a phone or health insurance or a prescription drug plan or a retirement nest egg, etc. Keeping something, even a virus, outside of this county is important. If not possible, at least doing whatever possible to limit its introduction. See I don't care about west Africa or its citizens. They are not my concern. If we assist them, great but our first responsibility should be to the citizens of this country. You try to keep the dz outside our borders and eradicate it over there before it gets here. You don't say well it will make it here anyway, we will screen for it and hope travellers are honest.

[bigsky]

image-961862389.jpg

"Don't fear the Reaper..."

[Doc]

Now this guy is a bit of a loon, he is the one who went thru Hartsfield airport (ATL) in a hazmat suit, but he gets it to some degree. He did predict it would make it here and he was correct.