Maine nurse won't observe Ebola quarantine - your take?

[ruger1800]

ht tp://www.spiritscienceandmetaphysics.com/ebo-lie-man-living-in-ghana-confirms-ebola-is-a-hoax/

 

[rambone]

HOW CAN YOU RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF ONE PERSON AT THE EXPENSE OF THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER? Sorry to yell, but I take this very personally because exposure to her (if she's infected) would pretty much kill me outright [bad word] dead. That offends the heck out of me. It's like that whole fist thing, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. Her right to wander the countryside spewing a deadly virus ends at my nose as well. Does she have it? Dunno. Let's make marklar damn sure before she comes up behind me in the checkout line at farkin Kroger. I'm not ready to check out yet.

When you get sick, you tell people your "rights" are being violated? Do you believe it is a "right" to remain disease-free?

Influenza could easily wipe out an immunocomprimised person. It is said to kill tens of thousands of people per year. How much freedom must be eliminated to create the perception of safety you are seeking?

 

[rambone]

Shall we also ask the government to lock up her boyfriend, family, and friends? They all must suffer so that we can feel safe from biology.

 

[dusty88]

When you get sick, you tell people your "rights" are being violated? Do you believe it is a "right" to remain disease-free?

Influenza could easily wipe out an immunocomprimised person. It is said to kill tens of thousands of people per year. How much freedom must be eliminated to create the perception of safety you are seeking?

The clear logic you are looking for isn't in this kind of situation, though it would be nice if it were.

Sometimes the rights of 2 people do collide.

 

[terrehautian]

I think it's unlikely she has Ebola, based on the stats and averages of other Ebola healthcare workers.
The fact she has no symptoms and tests negative today absolutely does NOT indicate that she won't test positive or have symptoms tomorrow. During the incubation period of a disease, there isn't enough virus to show up on tests.


Yeah, I agree the bike ride would be ok. And it's amusing to see all over the media.







Quarantine law is complicated but already spells out criteria; it's different in different states and agencies. Apparently whatever authority they want to use for her, requires a court order either for the individual or to institute the authority for her and others with identical criteria (ie Ebola healthcare worker). Whether or not they use it abusively doesn't really have much to do with her. Quarantine authority already exists.

If she does end up testing positive, they should quarantine all the media stalking her for 21 days and anyone they had contact with.

 

[dusty88]

If she does end up testing positive, they should quarantine all the media stalking her for 21 days and anyone they had contact with.

How about everyone who got the twitter feed? My eyes are bleeding from seeing so much of her 15 min of fame.

 

[ModernGunner]

Does ANYONE like being quarantined? Doubtful.

However, her actions, and whining, demonstrates a complete lack of regard for the safety and benefit of others with which she may come in contact.

People like her is WHY ebola is now IN this country, and has already killed at least one, in this country.

At best, she's dispicable, with no regard for anyone other than herself.

 

[churchmouse]

Does ANYONE like being quarantined? Doubtful.

However, her actions, and whining, demonstrates a complete lack of regard for the safety and benefit of others with which she may come in contact.

People like her is WHY ebola is now IN this country, and has already killed at least one, in this country.

At best, she's dispicable, with no regard for anyone other than herself.

Saw her on the news last night....attention whore at the least.

 

[ghuns]

How much freedom must be eliminated to create the perception of safety you are seeking?

As always, that's the $64,000 question. In today's dollars, its closer to a $600,000 question, but who's countin.

 

[j706]

I would say this nurse is about as self centered and stingy as they come. SO someone would potentially bring a deadly illness home to her family, friends and coworkers...not to mention the rest of people she would be around. Unbelievable!! I would bet none of the INGO crowd would even consider risking the spreading of this thing. When the rubber meets the road she just does not want to be inconvenienced.

 

[Denny347]

I think it's unlikely she has Ebola, based on the stats and averages of other Ebola healthcare workers.
The fact she has no symptoms and tests negative today absolutely does NOT indicate that she won't test positive or have symptoms tomorrow. During the incubation period of a disease, there isn't enough virus to show up on tests.

It's not about not enough virus for tests but that the virus is not in the blood. When contracted, the virus goes to the spleen or liver to multiply (incubation period). Since the virus is there, it is not in the blood, making blood tests impractical to determine infection. Once the virus enters the blood, the patient shows symptoms. This is why it is highly unlikely to spread the virus if you are not showing symptoms. If she is infected, she will LIKELY begin to show symptoms soon. Until then, we are pretty safe.

 

[KittySlayer]

It's not about not enough virus for tests but that the virus is not in the blood. When contracted, the virus goes to the spleen or liver to multiply (incubation period). Since the virus is there, it is not in the blood, making blood tests impractical to determine infection. Once the virus enters the blood, the patient shows symptoms. This is why it is highly unlikely to spread the virus if you are not showing symptoms. If she is infected, she will LIKELY begin to show symptoms soon. Until then, we are pretty safe.

Thus the reason for the quarantine. Everything we hear does not match what the talking heads are telling us. Why did the bowling alley have to be closed if it requires direct body contact with fluids that are only dangerous for a brief time? Why did the airplane have to be taken out of service to be cleaned several flights later?

My wife is a nurse and this morning as the Red Headed Witch flashed across the TV news my wife used the "C" word to describe her. I think I have only heard her use that word a couple of times in all the years we have been married and that was to refer to my ex-wife.

 

[JetGirl]

Until then, we are pretty safe.

On a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being "safe as a baby in his mother's arms", and 1 being "TEOTWAWKI", where does "pretty safe" fall?

 

[findingZzero]

There are 6 states where these stiff quarantine laws are in effect. In 5 of them, the Governors are up for reelection next week.

 

[T.Lex]

On a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being "safe as a baby in his mother's arms", and 1 being "TEOTWAWKI", where does "pretty safe" fall?

She has tested negative multiple times. She has no symptoms. I'm as skeptical of .gov's response/information to ebola as anyone (more than most).

I'd put the safety scale for this one nurse at about a 9. Particularly when it comes to a forced quarantine. If the gov't is so convinced that she's a danger to herself or others, go through the process of having her committed. Let a judge decide. That's the way it should be.

Of course, she's a self-righteous, self-centered narcissist who would do us all a favor by shutting up. But, in the spirit of the 1st amendment, she can be all that as much as she wants.

She, as of the last report of her physical condition, poses as much threat to the safety of the public as any one of us posting in this thread. Maybe less. (I'm not privy to all the medical history of everyone here.) So, keep in mind, .gov can use any of the arguments supporting quarantining her against any of us in the future.

 

[steveh_131]

Influenza could easily wipe out an immunocomprimised person. It is said to kill tens of thousands of people per year. How much freedom must be eliminated to create the perception of safety you are seeking?

I'd really love an answer to this question from one of the folks who think the sky is falling.

 

[JTScribe]

Not sure of the veracity of this link. Take it as you will.

Anti-quarantine nurse Hickox was trained as intelligence officer by the CDC - NaturalNews.com

Similar story from a more mainstream news source:

Released Ebola Nurse Worked For CDC | The Daily Caller

 

[dusty88]

On a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being "safe as a baby in his mother's arms", and 1 being "TEOTWAWKI", where does "pretty safe" fall?

International healthcare workers using MSF protocol during this year's Ebola outbreak number about 700. 3 of them have become infected. That's about 1/2%, although the total number isn't enough to be statistically significant. Still, it gives a perspective. The odds are small that she is infected, but the cost of ignoring the possibility is high.

MSF asks them to take 21 days off of work to reduce their stress, to stay within 4 hrs of a treatment center if needed, and to avoid contact with the healthcare system. They point out that if the returning worker gets the flu, then there is several days of confusion and worry about whether or not they have Ebola and who they contacted in the meantime. Although the healthcare environment certainly includes a lot more high risk people, I think the same can be said about going to densely populated areas.

I think that staying home or going on a private bike ride is fine. When you start mingling with untold numbers of people you create some risk and especially potential for fear and expense. This is highlighted by the NY doc. If he had been staying in an outlying area or staying home and only 6 people had contact with him, it's unlikely the public would be so concerned about the nurse.

When Duncan's family was asked to stay in their apartment, they asked for food. Fair enough. Unlike most of us, they weren't prepared to stay home for a few days. In hindsight, they behaved much better than a NYC doctor and a Maine nurse.

It's not about not enough virus for tests but that the virus is not in the blood. When contracted, the virus goes to the spleen or liver to multiply (incubation period). Since the virus is there, it is not in the blood, making blood tests impractical to determine infection. Once the virus enters the blood, the patient shows symptoms. This is why it is highly unlikely to spread the virus if you are not showing symptoms. If she is infected, she will LIKELY begin to show symptoms soon. Until then, we are pretty safe.

by "not enough virus" I meant not enough virus in the sample to show up on a test. Whether it's multiplying in collagen or hasn't multiplied much yet doesn't matter. Diseases don't wear neon signs. If you use tests that are highly sensitive (ie pick up more positive cases) they often are the same tests that show more false positives.
There is a loose correlation with when symptoms develop, but not exact. Many Ebola patients have symptoms for 3 days before they test positive.


My point is that people keep wanting to know if somebody was tested, and if they are cleared. They can't be considered "negative" until they have gone through the incubation period.


If we care about exposure when symptoms start, though, the monitoring is pretty intense. Once the virus starts to replicate it replicates very rapidly. It's scaled logarithmically from day 0 of onset of symptoms. What you don't want is someone waiting 24-48 hrs to go in for testing/isolation. Look at the data on the cases that turned out to be fatal. (gray bars)

 

[steveh_131]

Would someone provide me a list of germs they think should be jail-able?

It could be similar to the liberal's list of 'scary' guns, but instead of guns you can pick the 'scary' viruses.

 

[dusty88]

I'd really love an answer to this question from one of the folks who think the sky is falling.

I'll bite. I don't think I'm a "sky is falling" but I'm in the camp that thinks this nurse should voluntarily limit her contact to a few people.

The "tens of thousands" number of flu deaths needs to be taken in context. Many of the fatalities are people with other conditions. The number of times that flu actually hastened the death of someone is highly questionable. Flu also spreads so rapidly, even during the incubation period, that quarantine methods are a lot less valuable. In a severe flu outbreak, you would probably have to home-quarantine the entire population to even think you are controlling the spread.

Ebola now has a longer incubation period. That is bad because it gives people time to travel while asymptomatic. With a known exposure, it's good. They can quarantine themselves during the monitoring period and prevent spread.

We can argue aspects of this all day, but the flu comparison isn't apples and apples.