[cologal]

Originally Posted by gomoho

Cologal - unfortunately Dr. Spencer used poor judgement and was about and about in NYC after his return from treating Ebola patients. He now is in the hospital fighting for his life. As a direct result the governor's felt this was the only way to control the possibility of potentially spreading this disease. I agree the CDC says you are not infectious until you present with symptoms; however, the CDC has been caught with their pants down too many times trying to deal with this and quite honestly people don't have much faith in anything they say at this point.

Dr. Spencer followed the guidelines for returning medical personnel, that is why he was taking his temperature twice a day. If we look at what has happened over the past few weeks....

Duncan arrives, get sick, is turned away from the hospital, gets sicker returns to the hospital and later dies. 2 hospital workers who had direct contact with his body fluids are infected with the virus. Some 100 people in Ohio are quarantined due to Amber Vinson. Duncan's family are quarantined and a laboratory tech is quarantined on a cruise ship. None of the quarantined parties are infected with the virus.

These virus is difficult to catch a point which seems to be lost on many of the posters here and the general public. Hopefully no one in NYC will get sick as Dr. Spencer was asymptotic when he was out in public. Perhaps if no one gets sick we will all begin to calm down.

[cologal]

Originally Posted by gomoho

This new policy allows you to have visitors during your quarantine period. Sounds more like house arrest than a quarantine. I don't have any answers just thinking out loud each time they make a move. This certainly is too serious an issue to be making it up as we go along.

Problem is the nurse who is quarantine is in New Jersey not New York....

[graciegirl]

Would anyone opposed to this woman being in quarantine, allow her to babysit in the next few days for their grandchild?

[TexaninVA]

Originally Posted by twinklesweep

Though this is a different subject, rest assured that there are those who would disagree with you (and me) that the internment camps were morally repugnant and simply outrageous.

And for those who are not familiar with the history, during World War II we were fighting three primary enemies: Germany, Italy, and Japan. Americans of Japanese descent were rounded up, taken from their homes, businesses, jobs, lives, and put into internment camps for the duration of the war. Rest assured that Americans of German and Italian descent were NOT treated this way!

Racism was alive and well during those times, and in my opinion it is still true today. In recent years I have heard more overt racist remarks here in TV than I had in several decades preceding. But as I said, this is a whole other subject....

I'm always amused when someone engages in historical revisionism and applies contemporary standards to an earlier era. I don't think it really accomplishes much except to allow some to preen with supposed moral superiority or greater levels of enlightenment etc ... I'm guessing you also opposed the use of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki ... but that's another thread.

Anyway, the person who signed the executive order for internment was FDR. In the context of the times, uncertainty and fear, it was considered a prudent precaution. Unfortunate and regrettable I agree, but that's looking back with the luxury of hindsight, thus I don't criticize him for doing it. Any President at the time probably would have made the same decision.

[cologal]

A 5 year old who returned from Africa now has a fever but is NOT in isolation but the returning healthcare worker is.. Are ya kidding me!


Report: 5 Year Old Hospitalized In NYC With Possible Ebola Symptoms

[cologal]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

I'm always amused when someone engages in historical revisionism and applies contemporary standards to an earlier era. I don't think it really accomplishes much except to allow some to preen with supposed moral superiority or greater levels of enlightenment etc ... I'm guessing you also opposed the use of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki ... but that's another thread.

Anyway, the person who signed the executive order for internment was FDR. In the context of the times, uncertainty and fear, it was considered a prudent precaution. Unfortunate and regrettable I agree, but that's looking back with the luxury of hindsight, thus I don't criticize him for doing it. Any President at the time probably would have made the same decision.

Doesn't matter who signed it.....The policy was wrong.

If your question of the use of the atomic bomb is directed to me....nope I agree we needed to use it, my father-in-law worked at the Hanford Project.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Would anyone opposed to this woman being in quarantine, allow her to babysit in the next few days for their grandchild?

Bumping my own post.

I just heard this quarantined nurse interviewed on CNN. She was nearly in tears over her plight.

I don't think she promotes her cause. I wonder WHY she went to help Ebola patients. She seems angry to be inconvenienced, not like the calm, common sense, dedicated, people I know who are nurses.

When asked if she thought that there was NO risk, she said "Of course there is a risk, but it is very low."

I am for the teams treating Ebola patients here in the U.S. to be separated from the populace.

I hope this is soon a non issue and I appear foolish. This is a disease with no cure, no prevention and a huge mortality rate.

[billethkid]

what I need from some who are against the qurantine is an understanding of what they think should be done under the following circumstances:

A person is either from the hot zone or has been exposed to infected patients.
The person shows no signs of ebola and is allowed to fly out.
The person arrives in TV and still does not show any symtoms.
It is published that people so exposed may possibly show symptoms within 21 days of exposure, which means those who showed no symptoms yesterday still have the potential to become infected today.
Should these people be allowed to visit the squares?
Attend a function at Savannah Center?
Have dinner across the table with you at Arnold Palmers?
Ride on the bus sitting next to you?
Attend a wine tasting at GarVinos in line ahead of you?

Remembering these folks can still become symptomatic and infected at anytime along the way during the above.

Is that OK?

[Sophie11]

5 year old boy in NYC.

AOL.com Article - Boy observed in NYC hospital for Ebola; states firm on quarantines

[graciegirl]

Huge bi-partisan support for Ebola quarantine.

High support for Ebola quarantine


AND, in case you wondered as I did what yougov.com is. Here is that answer. It is based in UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouGov

[cologal]

Nurse in New Jersey to be released today to her home in Maine!!!!

[cologal]

Originally Posted by billethkid

what I need from some who are against the qurantine is an understanding of what they think should be done under the following circumstances:

A person is either from the hot zone or has been exposed to infected patients.
The person shows no signs of ebola and is allowed to fly out.
The person arrives in TV and still does not show any symtoms.
It is published that people so exposed may possibly show symptoms within 21 days of exposure, which means those who showed no symptoms yesterday still have the potential to become infected today.
Should these people be allowed to visit the squares?
Attend a function at Savannah Center?
Have dinner across the table with you at Arnold Palmers?
Ride on the bus sitting next to you?
Attend a wine tasting at GarVinos in line ahead of you?

Remembering these folks can still become symptomatic and infected at anytime along the way during the above.

Is that OK?

From the hot zone is different than being exposed to Ebola patients.

If the person has a fever how ever low they should be watched and tested for Ebola.

[JB in TV]

A phrase used often during the recent Ebola outbreak is "an abundance of caution"... I believe that this is the case with these states originally requiring the quarantine after the doc showed signs of Ebola in NYC. Better to act quickly and try to stop anyone who possible could spread the disease to the large population of people in the NYC area then to risk a large amount of people getting sick. Now it seems that she will be allowed out of quartantine. Good news, I suppose. I sincerely hope that she doesn't become infected with this terrible disease.

With that said, I believe that the conditions this nurse we have been discussing had to endure were less than satisfactory, at least as reported. None of us were there to actually see her situation. And, as some others have said, she doesn't really seem to be the type of person ususally associated with the caring medical folks who volunteer their valuable time and skills to help others who are suffering. I'm sure she was glad to be back from W Africa, and was looking forward to being "home" as any of us would have been, but the thought that she might have been a threat to millions should have been obvious to her. Threatening to sue the state who quaranteed her to try to protect millions of others? REALLY???

[billethkid]

Originally Posted by cologal

From the hot zone is different than being exposed to Ebola patients.

If the person has a fever how ever low they should be watched and tested for Ebola.

So if my hypothetical visitor to TV was ONLY exposed to ebola patients it would be OK for them to participate among us here in TV as I lined out in my post?

[cologal]

Originally Posted by billethkid

So if my hypothetical visitor to TV was ONLY exposed to ebola patients it would be OK for them to participate among us here in TV as I lined out in my post?

Here you go...the guidelines


Interim Guidance for Monitoring and Movement of Persons with Ebola Virus Disease Exposure | Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever | CDC