• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Nurse Refusing Quarantine

Under the Rose said:
Given that the WHO states the incubation period to be 2-21 days and that the first symptoms of Ebola are similar to several other diseases, by the time someone is symptomatic, others have been exposed. The quarantine or at leat close monitoring must then be extended to all who have been exposed if this disease is to be managed and contained. This outbreak seems to be more easily transmitted than previous ones by reports I have been reading.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/top-eb...orse-than-weve-ever-seen-before-video/5409024

That and I have zero confidence on people turning themselves in for treatment on the 'honor' system.

On the positive side, the infection rate seems to be slowing in Liberia, according to the CBC NEWS of this evening.
Click to expand...

1) You quarantine on *ANY* sign of illness if Ebola exposure is expected.

2) Globalresearch.ca is a conspiracy site, not a credible source of information.
 
Under the Rose said:
That and I have zero confidence on people turning themselves in for treatment on the 'honor' system.

On the positive side, the infection rate seems to be slowing in Liberia, according to the CBC NEWS of this evening.
Click to expand...
I'm curious. Based on the results in the US so far, getting immediate treatment for Ebola can give you a substantially better than 70% mortality rate (right now it stands at 0%, which for those playing at home... are good odds for survival). You'd be insane not to check in immediately!
 
Regardless of how overblown the ebola threat might be or how correct this nurse might be in questioning its necessity, wouldn't those be kind of beside the point?

There are situations where a government should impose a quarantine and, if it chooses to exercise that power, individual people shouldn't be allowed to ignore it because they disagree with the government about the need for the quarantine.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
Regardless of how overblown the ebola threat might be or how correct this nurse might be in questioning its necessity, wouldn't those be kind of beside the point?

There are situations where a government should impose a quarantine and, if it chooses to exercise that power, individual people shouldn't be allowed to ignore it because they disagree with the government about the need for the quarantine.
Click to expand...

I predict it will be challenging for the government to make a strong case this woman needs to be quarantined while simultaneously arguing that these people present no risks and inviting them for photo ops with Obama.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
I think it is ironic that gun lovers (not gun owners, but the people that obsess over gun ownership) seem to have no trouble with Government forcing people to be quarantined even if they test negative for a disease. Yet, when it comes to licensing a gun... they take issue with the Government becoming involved.
Click to expand...

I think you're focusing on the wrong issue here.

Think: voter suppression
 
Tom Sawyer said:
Regardless of how overblown the ebola threat might be or how correct this nurse might be in questioning its necessity, wouldn't those be kind of beside the point?

There are situations where a government should impose a quarantine and, if it chooses to exercise that power, individual people shouldn't be allowed to ignore it because they disagree with the government about the need for the quarantine.
Click to expand...

Rosa Parks should have just moved to the back of the bus.
 
I see a slippery slope here.
If we're going to isolate/quarantine persons who might, possibly come down with a scarey, infectious disease in the next three weeks, why are we not mandating some sort of isolation procedures for those with any active, contagious disease?
Should people with colds, flu or infectious TB be quarantined or required to mask and glove when in public?

In some Asian countries people with colds consider it anti-social not to mask in public spaces. Over here I see communities panicking over the remote possibility someone might have a scarey disease -- yet I see none of these concerned citizens masking or isolating when they, themselves, have some communicable yet more familiar disease.

Scare an American and his vaunted ideals of liberty and justice seem to go right out the window.
 
untermensche said:
Tom Sawyer said:
Regardless of how overblown the ebola threat might be or how correct this nurse might be in questioning its necessity, wouldn't those be kind of beside the point?

There are situations where a government should impose a quarantine and, if it chooses to exercise that power, individual people shouldn't be allowed to ignore it because they disagree with the government about the need for the quarantine.
Click to expand...

Rosa Parks should have just moved to the back of the bus.
Click to expand...

Not a valid comparison to anything I'm talking about. There is, on occasion, a valid medical reason to quarantine people who have certain diseases. When such a situation occurs, the people being quarantined shouldn't have an opt out clause available because they don't see the risk. The fact that there's a theoretical potential for slippery slope abuses doesn't factor into the legitimate medical need for patients to not be able to do that from time to time.
 
We terminate or suspend people's freedoms all the time. When you're being held as a suspect in a case, for example. Whether the situation is jail or quarantine the question is, are these freedoms being suspended for good reason or not?

Ebola isn't some super mysterious new virus. We have successfully used containment measures before, and successfully treated it as well. The valid experts have said that one is only in danger by coming into contact with the infected's bodily fluids while they are showing symptoms. There's no good reason to think this isn't true. The human element has thus far proven reliable in properly judging whether or not they are currently experiencing symptoms and reporting those symptoms to the proper authorities. The human element in this case are well trained medical professionals monitoring their own symptoms. If that wasn't the case I would be more worried.

I see no sufficient reason to hold someone under house arrest (an actual punishment we use for offenses) in this case. If she were my family or friend I would personally visit her and give her a hug.

Fuck irrational fear. I have real life problems to worry about. Also, fuck these politicians for taking political advantage of such a thing. They should be ashamed. Finally, considering how the Republican party is supposed to be the party of tough manly men, they sure whine like little bitches a lot.
 
braces_for_impact said:
Fuck irrational fear. I have real life problems to worry about. Also, fuck these politicians for taking political advantage of such a thing. They should be ashamed. Finally, considering how the Republican party is supposed to be the party of tough manly men, they sure whine like little bitches a lot.
Click to expand...

OK, that was over the line. Just because someone is hiding under their bed and pissing their pants with fear everytime they hear the wind blow doesn't mean that they're somehow suddenly not still tough, manly men.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
braces_for_impact said:
Fuck irrational fear. I have real life problems to worry about. Also, fuck these politicians for taking political advantage of such a thing. They should be ashamed. Finally, considering how the Republican party is supposed to be the party of tough manly men, they sure whine like little bitches a lot.
Click to expand...

OK, that was over the line. Just because someone is hiding under their bed and pissing their pants with fear everytime they hear the wind blow doesn't mean that they're somehow suddenly not still tough, manly men.
Click to expand...

No, of course not. I'm sure they sealed their home with duct tape, as manly men would do.
 
dismal said:
Tom Sawyer said:
Regardless of how overblown the ebola threat might be or how correct this nurse might be in questioning its necessity, wouldn't those be kind of beside the point?

There are situations where a government should impose a quarantine and, if it chooses to exercise that power, individual people shouldn't be allowed to ignore it because they disagree with the government about the need for the quarantine.
Click to expand...

I predict it will be challenging for the government to make a strong case this woman needs to be quarantined while simultaneously arguing that these people present no risks and inviting them for photo ops with Obama.
Click to expand...
No challenge at all. Part of the problem is that much of the control rests with individual states, not under a federal standard. So while the federal government can say they're safe, photo op, the state government can say whatever it wants, and slap them into isolation.
 
Interesting that she had 'a minor fever' upon arrival according to this report.

Officials say she had a minor fever, necessitating a quarantine at a Newark, New Jersey, hospital.

Ms Hickox contested the quarantine regimen, ultimately threatening legal action.
After showing no fever or other symptoms for a 24-hour period, she was discharged and brought to her home state of Maine.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29836550

An interesting article by a returned Canadian doctor who clearly states how easy it is for the health care workers to become infected working in the extreme heat and containment.

And because the suits are impervious, sweat begins collecting inside them fairly quickly. "So you lose a lot of water over the course of the work -- maybe a litre an hour," he said.

It's often when health workers try to readjust their overheating suits that they put themselves at risk of contamination by allowing their hands to get close to their eyes, nose or mouth.
"It's very easy to have a slip-up when you're in the facility, or even more so when you're coming out, because it's very hot," he said.
"There's a natural tendency to want to readjust things, to try to mop sweat away from your brow, and you have to be on guard all the time to not do those natural manoeuvres."
​
Click to expand...
 
joedad said:
Well, Sabine, were I ill and in hospital I would want you to care for me.
Click to expand...
You would not encounter me in a hospital but only in the context of home health care. I would care for you if you were a disabled and home bound person limited in his physical autonomy.

You can even append "political moron - should not vote" on my chart.
Click to expand...
I would never suggest that that you should not vote. My label of "political moron-ism" applied to Christie and his likes. People who are empowered to make decisions affecting others.


And you can take counsel from bilby toward that end. I merely think that 21 days is moderate and prudent, not harsh, and think she is making too much of the issue. She's not going into isolation or being quarantined for months. She's not typhoid Mary. So we merely disagree. Good on us.
Click to expand...
She is, like other health care workers returning from Western Africa, someone who spent 4 to 6 weeks (if not more) not on a vacation but having dedicated their skills, energy and time, attempting to save the lives of Ebola infected human beings. Meaning that upon return, what they are looking forward to is not to be locked up for 21 days based on Christie's mandate that all health care workers returning from all 3 affected regions in Western Africa be placed in quarantine.

If anyone is making an issue and that while dismissing what is medically supported and what is not, it is Christie and his likes.And once more, it conveys the message to the US general public that Ebola is transmittable via other vectors than direct exposure and contact with infectious bodily fluids/secretions. It can only fuel irrational fear among members of the US general public. When people are entrapped in irrational fear, they become vulnerable to political manipulation.
 
Under the Rose said:
Interesting that she had 'a minor fever' upon arrival according to this report.



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29836550

An interesting article by a returned Canadian doctor who clearly states how easy it is for the health care workers to become infected working in the extreme heat and containment.

And because the suits are impervious, sweat begins collecting inside them fairly quickly. "So you lose a lot of water over the course of the work -- maybe a litre an hour," he said.

It's often when health workers try to readjust their overheating suits that they put themselves at risk of contamination by allowing their hands to get close to their eyes, nose or mouth.
"It's very easy to have a slip-up when you're in the facility, or even more so when you're coming out, because it's very hot," he said.
"There's a natural tendency to want to readjust things, to try to mop sweat away from your brow, and you have to be on guard all the time to not do those natural manoeuvres."
​
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No one is denying that health care workers represent the highest risk category regarding exposure and contamination. That in view of their profession. In the first Ebola thread in this Forum we discussed how a procedural failure in the removal of their PPE suffices to cause contamination.However, it still does not justify Christie's mandate applying to all health care workers returning from Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.

Further and as a reference to quarantine, the mandate is not just for 24 hours but 21 days. That was the case for Mr Duncan's relatives(3 individuals). The only reason why she was discharged in such short period of time was because she threatened legal action and one which would have questioned Christie's mandate to place all health care workers returning from Western African under a 21 day quarantine.

An actual accurate medical assessment as to whether an individual with a "minor fever" has been infected would not rely on a 24 hour period of isolation and quarantine.
 
Do they quarantinee the nurses, doctors, cleaning company personel, and anyone else associated with treating the patients in the US?

They're "exposed". That's how several nurses caught it, right?

So, she came back from Africa after treating patients, isn't showing symptoms, and that's somehow different than the nurses and doctors here in Omaha that treat ebola patients. They go home to the family, go out, mill around with us, and their kids, husbands, and wives do too.

Political theater. But in this case the "powerless" person told the "powerful" people where to shove it. We need more people like this in the country, not less.

If she gets a fever, then quarantine.
 
ImGod said:
Do they quarantinee the nurses, doctors, cleaning company personel, and anyone else associated with treating the patients in the US?
Click to expand...
Non.

They're "exposed". That's how several nurses caught it, right?
Click to expand...
Specifically, 2 nurses who were assigned to Mr Duncan (Liberian patient one in the US) at the Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas.

So, she came back from Africa after treating patients, isn't showing symptoms, and that's somehow different than the nurses and doctors here in Omaha that treat ebola patients. They go home to the family, go out, mill around with us, and their kids, husbands, and wives do too.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do. To include members of any medical team in the US who has been assigned to treating any Ebola infected patient in any US medical facility.

Political theater. But in this case the "powerless" person told the "powerful" people where to shove it. We need more people like this in the country, not less.

If she gets a fever, then quarantine.
Click to expand...
Mind you that this saga is not over. While she was transported back to her home state Maine, she was ordered to remain at home for the remaining period of 21 days. Though certainly not as drastic as being placed in complete isolation under a tent as it was the case in N.J, such measure still assumes that as a health care worker returning from Western Africa, she can only be a hazard to the general public. And again, the message such measure conveys is that Ebola is transmittable via other vectors than direct physical contact with infectious bodily fluids/secretions. Mr Boyko in Connecticut was placed under a mandated home quarantine when he had no contact with Ebola infected Liberians. After being discharged and cleared from being Ebola infected, he has been hit with a mandated quarantine order :

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Yale-student-blasts-Connecticut-quarantine-order-5853119.php

Emphasis on this comment :

"Instead of leading by teaching people about the disease and trying to reduce the fear in a way that was productive and based on science, it was a decision to take what felt like the easier path."
Click to expand...

Indeed. But what Mr Boyko did not anticipate is that despite of combined efforts to reduce the fear by a variety of well educated folks, such as Dr Friedman head of the CDC regarding which actual vectors are at play when it comes to the transmittable property of Ebola, there has been a totally dysfunctional response among irrational fear -addicted social media "musers". Meaning their engaging in claims of "they are not telling us the truth". Those folks tend to captivate the attention of uneducated folks who, in turn, join in to propagate via the social media the same claim. Add to that,the fear fueling effect of mandated quarantine orders issued by States authorities (Christie having been the initial model in the State of N.J).
 
I don't think it's political theater. It may contain an element or human ignorance - what doesn't? - but even our military personnel who were there are having to undergo the same treatment. It's only prudent.

What intrigues me is that I would think a person of this nurse's capacity, someone who voluntarily goes there and helps, would understand, perhaps even be amused by what she would perceive as the irrational fear surrounding her. To me it's like knowing you shouldn't pick on someone you know is your lesser and who cannot harm you. What's the big deal? Why doesn't she use some tact and persuasion? Wouldn't she get more mileage by not appearing confrontational? She seems to have taken the same low road as her would be oppressors. She has an opportunity to make a difference and she's squandering it. If she's right she isn't getting through to me and I'm a reasonable person. Does she not recognize that people are concerned because there have been cases where people like herself actually had ebola?

And we're hearing that others willing to do what she did, go and treat patients and deal with the disease, are reconsidering because of having to return to a three week quarantine. If you really think you're making a difference it seems a small price to pay. My humble take.
 
As I hear it, her 'minor fever' was post exertion or something and she was flushed. It was an infrared forehead scan, measuring skin temp. They did not do a confirmatory oral or aural temp. Subsequent temps have been normal and the blood test for the virus negative.

What's the point of locking her in her house? Is stepping onto the porch putting the public in danger? Is going for a bike ride along a rural road?

Aren't there fifty other contagious diseases that pose a greater risk to the public than Ebola? Why aren't people being screened and isolated for them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom