Ebola - all or nothing?

[unofan]

Give her a TV, a recliner and a Netflix subscription and tell her to shut the hell up. Seriously, we don't need people coming from those hell holes walking around in population centers at this point.

They could easily quarantine her in her own farking home. There's no reason for this extreme level of isolation except to pander to morons who have been watching too much cable news.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

They could easily quarantine her in her own farking home. There's no reason for this extreme level of isolation except to pander to morons who have been watching too much cable news.

Imagine if it was a Dem governor. "OH NOES BLACK HELICOPTERS FEMA CAMPS BENGHAZI!!!11!"

The derp is very strong on this.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Imagine if it was a Dem governor. "OH NOES BLACK HELICOPTERS FEMA CAMPS BENGHAZI!!!11!"

The derp is very strong on this.

Cuomo is pulling the same crap.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

I think we need to enforce mandatory and indefinite quarantines on the Ebola fear mongers. Their diseased minds are proving to be dangerously contagious.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

Cuomo is pulling the same crap.

Then send him to Exile Island too.

 

[walrus]

She was just released

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

She was just released

Only because she's leaving NJ. If she was staying there fatso would have her in the tent for the full 21 days.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

CT governor joins NY and NJ in mandatory 21-day quarantine.

That's two D govs and one R gov if anyone actually thinks party labels matter in this situation.

I applaud them for taking action. Quarantining the gal in the tent may have been a bit much, but I think that is the best solution, that or maybe a hospital room. Keeping them at home is tough because if they do have it, that's quite a huge clean-up issue there. Would you want to live in a house that an ebola case live in? You really can't put someone up in a hotel, no hotel would want that. So what else is there?

I know the nurse was p/o'ed, but she has to look at the big picture and not be quite so selfish. She needed to take one for the team.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

I applaud them for taking action. Quarantining the gal in the tent may have been a bit much, but I think that is the best solution, that or maybe a hospital room. Keeping them at home is tough because if they do have it, that's quite a huge clean-up issue there. Would you want to live in a house that an ebola case live in? You really can't put someone up in a hotel, no hotel would want that. So what else is there?

I know the nurse was p/o'ed, but she has to look at the big picture and not be quite so selfish. She needed to take one for the team.

It's a "no win" situation for the politicians. They do anything other than a complete quarantine and someone in their state tests positive after spending a week wandering around in public, the Governor is fried by the press and the public. They quarantine and the press/blogosphere casts them as fascists.

 

[unofan]

Would you want to live in a house that an ebola case live in?

Sure. The bug couldn't live long enough to make it through a standard 60-day closing anyway, let alone after the thorough bleach cleaning that would be done after someone was diagnosed.

 

[LynahFan]

It's quite fascinating that the crowd who seems to be most vocal against the quarantines are the ones who also push the hardest for health care plans to pay for preventative care as a way of reducing future health care costs. It will be far cheaper to quarantine a few dozen people who might have the disease than to treat dozens who definitely have it. Ounce of prevention and all that...

Also interesting that the "small government" crowd are the ones okay with it. Strange bedfellows, indeed.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

I applaud them for taking action. Quarantining the gal in the tent may have been a bit much, but I think that is the best solution, that or maybe a hospital room. Keeping them at home is tough because if they do have it, that's quite a huge clean-up issue there. Would you want to live in a house that an ebola case live in? You really can't put someone up in a hotel, no hotel would want that. So what else is there?

I know the nurse was p/o'ed, but she has to look at the big picture and not be quite so selfish. She needed to take one for the team.

I have no issues quarantining anyone who has a fever and has come into contact with infected people, that makes sense. But she hasn't had a consistent fever, she hasn't shown any symptoms, and she probably understands the disease better than anyone making these decisions. Adding to that, she wasn't allowed to see her lawyer. That's the part that takes this from absurd to completely unacceptable.

 

[unofan]

It's quite fascinating that the crowd who seems to be most vocal against the quarantines are the ones who also push the hardest for health care plans to pay for preventative care as a way of reducing future health care costs. It will be far cheaper to quarantine a few dozen people who might have the disease than to treat dozens who definitely have it. Ounce of prevention and all that...

Also interesting that the "small government" crowd are the ones okay with it. Strange bedfellows, indeed.

This is as close to seeing a paniced mob in action as I've ever witnessed in my life. Post 9/11 we were all in shock for a week or two before we turned angry. Even being in Boston for the marathon last year, I didn't get the sense of panic from the actual people there, the panic came from those watching from afar and contacting me every thirty seconds.

This is the entire country going "for the love of god, do something!!!!! Ebola!!!!" And that's after all of 2 domestically infected persons, both of whom were direct caregivers handling his bodily fluids.

I can only imagine what sorts of things we'd do if something like the avian flu ever caused a true pandemic.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

It's quite fascinating that the crowd who seems to be most vocal against the quarantines are the ones who also push the hardest for health care plans to pay for preventative care as a way of reducing future health care costs. It will be far cheaper to quarantine a few dozen people who might have the disease than to treat dozens who definitely have it. Ounce of prevention and all that...

Also interesting that the "small government" crowd are the ones okay with it. Strange bedfellows, indeed.

Really?

How about just straight science? How about that?

 

[joecct]

Really?

How about just straight science? How about that?

I'd call it common sense.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

It's quite fascinating that the crowd who seems to be most vocal against the quarantines are the ones who also push the hardest for health care plans to pay for preventative care as a way of reducing future health care costs. It will be far cheaper to quarantine a few dozen people who might have the disease than to treat dozens who definitely have it. Ounce of prevention and all that...

Also interesting that the "small government" crowd are the ones okay with it. Strange bedfellows, indeed.

Really strange bedfellows?

US Rep. Darrell Issa, a frequent critic of the Obama administration and its Ebola response, surprisingly didn’t embrace the New York and New Jersey’s quarantine steps. He said that he understands the governors are doing what they believe is right, but science suggests immediate isolation “is not the answer.”

“The science has told us — if we are to take them at their word — that if somebody does not have an elevated temperature or the other later symptoms, then we can rely on them not being contagious,” Issa, R-Calif., said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “ If that’s true, then immediate isolation of people for 21 days is not the answer.”

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

How about just straight science? How about that?

When's the last time we had "straight" science? So-called "straight" science has been shouted down; nowadays you can find scientists for hire who will support any position with "science" if you pay them enough money.

Any time someone says it is "settled" science then you know that it is politics talking, not a scientist.


I liked the nuance in Issa's quote, it sums up the problem brought about by scientists becoming active in support of a particular political cause to the point that they have compromised their appearance of following the facts wherever they lead:

"the science has told us - if we are to take them at their word" while grammatically ungainly sums up the problem pretty well.

Ebola mutates quickly, and any "straight" scientist would say "based on what we know now" and not be dogmatic about anything beyond that. "the evidence indicates..." etc. At least then you are open to change if the evidence changes.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

When's the last time we had "straight" science? So-called "straight" science has been shouted down; nowadays you can find scientists for hire who will support any position with "science" if you pay them enough money.

Any time someone says it is "settled" science then you know that it is politics talking, not a scientist.


I liked the nuance in Issa's quote, it sums up the problem brought about by scientists becoming active in support of a particular political cause to the point that they have compromised their appearance of following the facts whereever they lead:

"the science has told us - if we are to take them at their word" while grammatically ungainly sums up the problem pretty well.

Ebola mutates quickly, and any "straight" scientist would say "based on what we know now" and not be dogmatic about anything beyond that. "the evidence indicates..." etc. At least then you are open to change if the evidence changes.

All I can say to that is, Wow. It's no wonder the US is pumping the handcart to hell.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

When's the last time we had "straight" science?

Every day, all over the scientific world. The best thing about science is in the long run, and even the not so long run, you can't BS it. The pols can and will, forever, but the scientific method is a beautiful thing -- if you're pulling it out of your arse, you're nailed to the wall the instant you submit to peer review.

Pundits bloviate. Doctors save lives. I'll listen to the doctors, thanks.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Ebola - all or nothing?

When's the last time we had "straight" science? So-called "straight" science has been shouted down; nowadays you can find scientists for hire who will support any position with "science" if you pay them enough money.

Any time someone says it is "settled" science then you know that it is politics talking, not a scientist.


I liked the nuance in Issa's quote, it sums up the problem brought about by scientists becoming active in support of a particular political cause to the point that they have compromised their appearance of following the facts wherever they lead:

"the science has told us - if we are to take them at their word" while grammatically ungainly sums up the problem pretty well.

Ebola mutates quickly, and any "straight" scientist would say "based on what we know now" and not be dogmatic about anything beyond that. "the evidence indicates..." etc. At least then you are open to change if the evidence changes.

Let me get this straight, Issa implicitly questions whether the science should be taken at "their" word, while at the same time, he bases his opinion of the quarantines on "their" word.