bmags Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 2nd nurse released, ebola free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 So what’s the total number of people that have actually contracted it in this country (not brought it in from another country). Like 5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Oct 28, 2014 -> 11:37 AM) So what’s the total number of people that have actually contracted it in this country (not brought it in from another country). Like 5? 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 28, 2014 -> 10:39 AM) 2. Definitely time to panic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 I'm guessing widespread panic until november 4th, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Some infectious disease experts wrote this piece yesterday on something we actually should be starting to panic about. If the spread of ebola in west africa isn't contained soon, there is potential that it could start jumping to other urban areas in the developing world where there aren't health systems capable of coping with it, creating a situation where it takes a place as a disease that the world just has to deal with. In that case, it would probably be regularly coming to the U.S. and Europe, but not from a limited group of countries, instead coming from everywhere, pretty much all the time. It would become a highly fatal disease at pandemic level that just wouldn't go away or burn out until there was a widely distributed and effective vaccine. In that case, "quarantining everyone from West Africa" wouldn't be a useful technique at all, and it just might need a couple people to travel from West Africa to an area like India to make it really happen. The way around that is to stop it in west africa and prevent its spread to other places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Oct 28, 2014 -> 10:47 AM) Definitely time to panic. Yes. Someone said more people have been married to Kim Kardasian. But there does need to be something done to keep it contained. Edited October 28, 2014 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Oct 28, 2014 -> 10:47 AM) Definitely time to panic. i think a wall should be constructed around the state of Texas until we know it is all clear. And even when it is all clear, we keep the wall up. Gotta make sure Tex stays in there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Quarantined nurse in the northeast has been stuck in a tent with no heating and nothing but a box to piss and s*** in. She has no symptoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 http://news.yahoo.com/u-isolates-troops-au...-041640921.html Australia closes its borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 Dumb overreaction more likely to make matters worse than better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 09:25 AM) Dumb overreaction more likely to make matters worse than better. Or smart on their part, since they now don't have to deal ($$) with the problem, knowing the US will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 10:05 AM) Or smart on their part, since they now don't have to deal ($$) with the problem, knowing the US will. But they can't close their borders entirely (and neither can the US of course). If ebola spreads into a pandemic, Australia closing its borders to travelers from West Africa has zero impact on it ultimately spreading to Australia. Dealing with and controlling the outbreak in West Africa is the only way to really take control of the ebola issue. I cannot see how Australia passing the buck to someone else is smart... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 11:25 AM) But they can't close their borders entirely (and neither can the US of course). If ebola spreads into a pandemic, Australia closing its borders to travelers from West Africa has zero impact on it ultimately spreading to Australia. Dealing with and controlling the outbreak in West Africa is the only way to really take control of the ebola issue. I cannot see how Australia passing the buck to someone else is smart... Well that's ridiculous. Closing the borders means closing airports and ports. They obviously have a natural border since it's a gigantic island. Unless someone is getting on a boat and landing in some remote part of the country, they're not getting in. And if it reaches pandemic levels, I hope to god all countries use some common sense and start closing borders. Haven't you all played Plague, Inc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 11:07 AM) Well that's ridiculous. Closing the borders means closing airports and ports. They obviously have a natural border since it's a gigantic island. Unless someone is getting on a boat and landing in some remote part of the country, they're not getting in. And if it reaches pandemic levels, I hope to god all countries use some common sense and start closing borders. Haven't you all played Plague, Inc.? It's not ridiculous though. The virus necessarily isn't contained to West Africa so long as people can freely travel from West Africa to anywhere. Think of it this way - there have obviously been a few documented cases of ebola here in the US - we know the virus takes some time to show effects/spread. If the US doesn't have a travel ban, then you haven't eradicated the risk that someone infected with ebola will reach Australia right? If the disease reaches pandemic levels, it's not only coming from West Africa - it's coming from India and China and the UK, etc. If the disease reaches that level, the recourse is to shut down travel from everywhere which would obviously have devastating economic effects. Shutting down travel from West Africa is a short-term Band-Aid that is effective if the virus dies out in West Africa. It doesn't address the long-term effects of the Ebola outbreak if it doesn't die out in West Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 As experts keep saying, if you don't let people come Africa, they'll go somewhere else first. And they'll lie if you promise to treat them inhumanely when they arrive. You want to be able to find them on the way in rather than incentivize them to sneak in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 01:44 PM) As experts keep saying, if you don't let people come Africa, they'll go somewhere else first. And they'll lie if you promise to treat them inhumanely when they arrive. You want to be able to find them on the way in rather than incentivize them to sneak in. Australia also has had a long running "illegal immigration" type controversy over refugees arriving in that country IIRC so this probably somehow fits in with their domestic issues in a similar way to the "Isis will bring ebola to the US from Mexico!" stuff does in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 12:21 PM) It's not ridiculous though. The virus necessarily isn't contained to West Africa so long as people can freely travel from West Africa to anywhere. Think of it this way - there have obviously been a few documented cases of ebola here in the US - we know the virus takes some time to show effects/spread. If the US doesn't have a travel ban, then you haven't eradicated the risk that someone infected with ebola will reach Australia right? If the disease reaches pandemic levels, it's not only coming from West Africa - it's coming from India and China and the UK, etc. If the disease reaches that level, the recourse is to shut down travel from everywhere which would obviously have devastating economic effects. Shutting down travel from West Africa is a short-term Band-Aid that is effective if the virus dies out in West Africa. It doesn't address the long-term effects of the Ebola outbreak if it doesn't die out in West Africa. You're going to know people who have been to West Africa though. They can look at passports. If someone goes from West Africa to China to Australia, they can still ban those people. It's not 100% effective obviously, but it's going to do SOMETHING. It's not a completely worthless move. But yes, if it reaches pandemic level it'll require total border shutdown if it's not contained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 12:44 PM) As experts keep saying, if you don't let people come Africa, they'll go somewhere else first. And they'll lie if you promise to treat them inhumanely when they arrive. You want to be able to find them on the way in rather than incentivize them to sneak in. How many people are going to have the resources/means to sneak into a country? Very, very few. Edited October 29, 2014 by Jenksismybitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 06:08 PM) How many people are going to have the resources/means to sneak into a country? Very, very few. Across a border in West Africa? I bet you already have more resources than you need. I think it probably requires feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted October 29, 2014 Share Posted October 29, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 29, 2014 -> 04:06 PM) You're going to know people who have been to West Africa though. They can look at passports. If someone goes from West Africa to China to Australia, they can still ban those people. It's not 100% effective obviously, but it's going to do SOMETHING. It's not a completely worthless move. But yes, if it reaches pandemic level it'll require total border shutdown if it's not contained. Right, but you can't control the inflow of people who have been in contact with the guy from West Africa who was in India for two weeks, etc. Because of that, closing the borders to West Africans does not eliminate the risk. EDIT: It also doesn't change the initial point that the smart move for Australia, and the international community as a whole, is to dedicate resources to stopping Ebola in West Africa. Period. Edited October 29, 2014 by illinilaw08 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Making it harder to track people coming from Ebola areas and with aa risk of exposure is dumb. That's what Australia's policy does, ergo it is dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I had a doctor's appointment yesterday and as I was checking in, I was asked if I had recently been to West Africa or been in close contact with anybody who had recently been to West Africa. I told them no, and nobody from Dallas or New York either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 For all those who were irrationally scared about it magically turning into a different virus, the USA is now ebola-free. Every single person exposed to the infected people have hit or are about to hit their 21 day clearance levels, including people who lived with the first patient while he was symptomatic, are ebola-free. The only people infected by any of the symptomatic people were two health care workers directly exposed to him with inadequate safety precautions. The only person to die of ebola in this country was the case where an uninsured person came into a hospital and was mysteriously sent home with the "antibiotics and tylenol" treatment for 2 days which I'm sure is totally unrelated to that being a way to get rid of a person who comes to the hospital with flu-like symptoms and no insurance. Every other person who has been treated in this country has survived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 While Balta's uninsured comment was not directed at this, it does highlight why everyone benefits when people have insurance and receive treatment. People who can not afford treatment continue on and infect others, increasing the cost for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts