Ebola outbreak - general thread #9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

JudyBolton said:
<modsnip> that is not at ALL what I was saying. I'm sorry if you were legitimately confused by my analogy but rather it seems you are intentionally misconstruing what I was saying. I am well aware that Ebola and Typhoid Fever are not the same thing. I am equally aware that KC has no plans to become a cook.

The point I was making concerned the *attitude* of Mary and of KC and even the disregard and dismissiveness toward those trying to protect the general public. I personally see a very strong resemblance to those two in that regard. I also see a parallel between Mary's lying in order to retain her job and the infected doctor lying to officials about his travels around New York. In each case, a health care official was attempting to get information that would prevent the spread of a disease and in each case - the person lied because of their own selfish reasons. If a nurse will act like this and a doctor will lie like this - what do we think the average person flying into our country might say or do to be able to continue on their merry way?

If you don't see that or disagree with my point that is fine. But please, don't take what I was saying and try to twist it into some ridiculous statement implying that I thought the nurse might change careers to become a cook or that I don't know the difference in the two diseases. Once again, it implies that those who want to protect Americans through quarantine are just ignorant, stupid, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

In comparing Mary and KC's attitudes we are comparing attitudes about regard/disregard for public health. To do that we must look at the context of each person's environment - if you are assuming KC is or may become contagious. KC's attitude is that her activities are not a danger to public health. Her activities are her daily life, is she going to work or not, if so what is her profession. What activities KC engages in would be important to determine risk to others, if she were a risk right now, which she isn't since she as no symptoms.

I think your point is moot because how can KC have an attitude about her danger to public health when there is no danger.
 
nomoresorrow said:
I actually received a couple responses some time ago and, it wouldn't have been too difficult to verify that if you'd done a quick search yourself. By the way, at the time I posted my question, I had done a google search and the only articles I found stated that Spencer had a temp of 103, rather than 100.3 - that's why I asked for a link...

ETA: In case you're not aware... that's what we do here when someone states something as fact w/out a link, we request one.
Click to expand...

The link was the link in the original post and link, it's there already! :therethere:
 
According to this story in the LA Times the legalities between the state of Maine & Kaci are not fully resolved. It states that the current order will be in effect until a full hearing on the issue. The court papers set no specific date for a full hearing, but they noted that such a proceeding must be held "no less than three days & not more than 10 days" from Thursday.








http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-maine-nurse-ebola-quarantine-20141031-story.html
 
Kaci Hickox 'Humbled' by Maine Judge's Ebola Ruling

By Stephanie Gosk and Erin McClam

A judge in Maine ruled Friday that Kaci Hickox, the nurse who treated Ebola patients and defied a state-imposed quarantine, can come and go as she pleases, as long as she is monitored for symptoms and lets health officials know where she’s going.

The same judge had issued a temporary order on Thursday night ordering Hickox to stay at least three feet away from other people and to stay away from crowds and public transportation.

But the judge, Charles C. LaVerdiere of state court, lifted those parts of the order on Friday. He found that authorities in Maine had not proved that restricting Hickox’s movement was necessary to protect the public from infection. He said that his order was pending a further hearing...

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/eb...kox-humbled-maine-judges-ebola-ruling-n238326
 
chipmunk said:
In comparing Mary and KC's attitudes we are comparing attitudes about regard/disregard for public health. To do that we must look at the context of each person's environment - if you are assuming KC is or may become contagious. KC's attitude is that her activities are not a danger to public health. Her activities are her daily life, is she going to work or not, if so what is her profession. What activities KC engages in would be important to determine risk to others, if she were a risk right now, which she isn't since she as no symptoms.

I think your point is moot because how can KC have an attitude about her danger to public health when there is no danger.
Click to expand...

Regardless of if she is a danger to public health or not is moot in regards to her attitude. This woman has had "an attitude" since day one and arrogantly defied anyone and everyone. JMO
 
BetteDavisEyes said:
Kaci Hickox 'Humbled' by Maine Judge's Ebola Ruling

By Stephanie Gosk and Erin McClam

A judge in Maine ruled Friday that Kaci Hickox, the nurse who treated Ebola patients and defied a state-imposed quarantine, can come and go as she pleases, as long as she is monitored for symptoms and lets health officials know where she&#8217;s going.

The same judge had issued a temporary order on Thursday night ordering Hickox to stay at least three feet away from other people and to stay away from crowds and public transportation.

But the judge, Charles C. LaVerdiere of state court, lifted those parts of the order on Friday. He found that authorities in Maine had not proved that restricting Hickox&#8217;s movement was necessary to protect the public from infection. He said that his order was pending a further hearing...

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/eb...kox-humbled-maine-judges-ebola-ruling-n238326
Click to expand...

Wow, the video attached of a "humble" kaci Hickox was a real study in contradiction. Her facial expressions and speech totally did not show "humble" or matched her deep concern in her words. Looked as though she was really trying not to break out laughing as she said that she was humbled. JMO:gaah:
 
chipmunk said:
In comparing Mary and KC's attitudes we are comparing attitudes about regard/disregard for public health. To do that we must look at the context of each person's environment - if you are assuming KC is or may become contagious. KC's attitude is that her activities are not a danger to public health. Her activities are her daily life, is she going to work or not, if so what is her profession. What activities KC engages would be important to determine risk to others, if she were a risk right now, which she isn't since she as no symptoms.

I think your point is moot because how can KC have an attitude about her danger to public health when there is no danger.
Click to expand...

bbm - No danger? 100% guaranteed NO danger? And you base this statement on what exactly? The fact that she returned less than 21 days ago from West Africa where the death from the Ebola virus is anywhere from 50-70% ? Or the fact that her roommate in West Africa has tested positive for Ebola (yes, I know it is past the 21 days with the roommate). Or the fact that she did have an elevated temp. upon arrival? It is now 5 pm EST and she apparently shows no symptoms - but if there is a "sudden onset" of symptoms by 7 pm or 8 pm and she has been all over and been in contact with innocent people - what then? If you expect her to scurry back into her house with the thermometer - to tell the truth - then you have seen a side of her character that I have not. Why not set a good example? Why not think of other people before herself, even if she believes she is of zero threat?

This stubborn, selfish, entitled attitude she has does not play well with the American people. Now that she has made her name, her face, and her disregard for her fellow Americans a matter of water cooler conversation - that genie won't go back into the bottle.
 
The Nina/Bentley reunion will be televised live & online on nbcdfw.com. From what I have previously read it will be at 9AM CDS.
 
JudyBolton said:
No danger? 100% guaranteed NO danger? And you base this statement on what exactly? The fact that she returned less than 21 days ago from West Africa where the death from the Ebola virus is anywhere from 50-70% ?
Click to expand...

Having been in WAfrica does not make her a danger. In order for her to be a danger, she must (a) have the disease, AND (b) be past the point of showing symptoms. (If both of those are true, it doesn't mean she will infect anyone. It just means that it's time to start taking precautions.) Neither of those conditions has been shown to be true of her, and therefore "no danger" is scientifically accurate <modsnip>
 
Another change: this was on the CDC website:

UPDATE: 10/31/14 2:00 p.m. -- The CDC has replaced the document describing the difference between airborne infections and ones that spread via droplet. A key change is that the airborne section stresses that airborne germs "can be inhaled even after the original person is no longer nearby." Droplet germs, by contrast, "travel shorter distances, less than about 6 feet from a source patient." Ebola is the latter type of germ.

How did the judge in Maine come up with his 3 feet rule earlier (that apparently is now no longer in effect?) - if the CDC says 6 feet??? And how long do these "droplet germs" remain contagious once they fall onto hard surfaces let's say in a restaurant, a taxi cab seat, the handle of a grocery cart? ( I googled it - the answer is *several hours*) :gaah:

And yet - people think we're all crazy for not believing the *science* - and asking for a reasonable, cautious treatment of this serious disease.
 
badhorsie said:
I am so frustrated by this woman's behaviour. Absolutely selfish and pigheaded.
Click to expand...

IKR?

Maybe KC came to the states for the express purpose of establishing a legal precedent for Ebola quarantines.

I remain perplexed that Nurse Nina Phem was capable of flying off to DC to give the President a hug after having contracted the deadly Ebola virus and recovered. No way would my happy little body recover as rapidly as hers did.

Three Cheers for Bentley!
 
SteveS said:
Having been in WAfrica does not make her a danger. In order for her to be a danger, she must (a) have the disease, AND (b) be past the point of showing symptoms. (If both of those are true, it doesn't mean she will infect anyone. It just means that it's time to start taking precautions.) Neither of those conditions has been shown to be true of her, and therefore "no danger" is scientifically accurate,<modsnip>.
Click to expand...

So I assume you believe the Pentagon is wrong to quarantine our troops for 21 days upon their return from W. Africa?
 
jjenny said:
Became infected indicates roommate did have Ebola.
That would put her at higher risk level since she was presumably not wearing PPEs at home. Did 21 day pass since roommate was removed from their apartment?
Click to expand...

I think the quote in my post which you responded to answered that question.

Sheila Pinette of the Maine CDC has released information that the roommate of Kaci Hickox, while in West Africa has displayed signs of ebola. Pinette says “The respondents roommate in Africa became infected without knowing how she became infected with Ebola. (Any potential risk to respondent from that incident has passed).”
Click to expand...
 
JudyBolton said:
Another change: this was on the CDC website:

UPDATE: 10/31/14 2:00 p.m. -- The CDC has replaced the document describing the difference between airborne infections and ones that spread via droplet. A key change is that the airborne section stresses that airborne germs "can be inhaled even after the original person is no longer nearby." Droplet germs, by contrast, "travel shorter distances, less than about 6 feet from a source patient." Ebola is the latter type of germ.

How did the judge in Maine come up with his 3 feet rule earlier (that apparently is now no longer in effect?) - if the CDC says 6 feet??? And how long do these "droplet germs" remain contagious once they fall onto hard surfaces let's say in a restaurant, a taxi cab seat, the handle of a grocery cart? ( I googled it - the answer is *several hours*) :gaah:

And yet - people think we're all crazy for not believing the *science* - and asking for a reasonable, cautious treatment of this serious disease.
Click to expand...

Oh LOOK! information being updated and changed yet again by the CDC!!!! How many more updates before we arrive at absolute scientific fact?
CIDRAPs article talked about aerosolization and aerosolized particles can remain suspended in the air 162 minutes for 99% loss of infectivity. With air flow they can travel quite a distance the article states. Aerosolized particles are like those exhaled during reparation. ( Much like the exhaled vapour you see on a cold day outdoors)

www.cidrap.umn.edu/news article titled Commentary: HCW Need Optimal Respiratory Protection dated September 17, 2014.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 144 more.
Total: 2,150 (members: 145, guests: 2,005)

Online statistics

Members online
145
Guests online
2,005
Total visitors
2,150
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,692
Messages
18,160,885
Members
231,821
Latest member
Smfranklin96
Back
Top