THAT i can agree with.

But instead, your first response was to complain about me and ignore the reason (identical to this point) that I feel the way I do. Priorities.

Oh, I must have missed the posts where she attacked you personally with that language, rather than talking about a 3rd party states away....

I didn't call her any names. I said that people acting a certain way were twits and dicks, exactly like she did. You may have inferred that she is part of that group, but that's a leap that you made, not me.

But instead, your first response was to complain about me and ignore the reason (identical to this point) that I feel the way I do. Priorities.

his point was direct without all the names and theatrics and frankly wasn't your point. the very statement he makes about " Overreaction and stricter quarantines guidelines" is exactly what you support by your statements about the nurse who feels Overreacting and stricter quarantines are unwarranted and unfair.

There are Fear Mongers . . . There are Fur Mongers . . . (and then,) There are . . . FarFurFear Mongers.
(hey! what 'bout us farfearfur mongers . . . ?)

Penny Q: would it be unkind, inappropriate, or otherwise insuggestive, to think that it is more practical to be concerned (over things we can't control) than it might be about oncoming traffic in the cellphone texting mode in traffic than ebola?

Sorry . . . probably not.

his point was direct without all the names and theatrics and frankly wasn't your point. the very statement he makes about " Overreaction and stricter quarantines guidelines" is exactly what you support by your statements about the nurse who feels Overreacting and stricter quarantines are unwarranted and unfair.
So, you are going to interpret my comments in addition to scolding me for my opinions? Seriously? Where do you get off? How about right now?

Btw, "stricter" quarantines aren't on the menu. The doctor defied voluntary isolation and the nurse refuses to even agree to voluntary isolation, at all - much less a quarantine of any sort. If you think what she is doing is at all reasonable, feel free. She is demanding the right to come and go as she pleases during the incubation period, no matter the problems it creates. You might think that is perfectly reasonable. I think it is the actions of a selfish, uncaring twit.

You are so right I am so Wrong. can you find some way to argue that as well? I am sure you can.
I believe I stated more than once you have a right to your opinion but some just don't agree with your opinion so if you call that scolding so be it. Good day :pat_head:

So, you are going to interpret my comments in addition to scolding me for my opinions? Seriously? Where do you get off? How about right now?

Btw, "stricter" quarantines aren't on the menu. The doctor defied voluntary isolation and the nurse refuses to even agree to voluntary isolation, at all - much less a quarantine of any sort. If you think what she is doing is at all reasonable, feel free. She is demanding the right to come and go as she pleases during the incubation period, no matter the problems it creates. You might think that is perfectly reasonable. I think it is the actions of a selfish, uncaring twit.

Don't we all interpret comments made by others? If your opinions included name calling maybe you needed scolding.

How does a person defy something that's voluntary? How do you refuse to do something that's voluntary? Is there any law that demands she submit to a quarantine?

There are Fear Mongers . . . There are Fur Mongers . . . (and then,) There are . . . FarFurFear Mongers.
(hey! what 'bout us farfearfur mongers . . . ?)

Penny Q: would it be unkind, inappropriate, or otherwise insuggestive, to think that it is more practical to be concerned (over things we can't control) than it might be about oncoming traffic in the cellphone texting mode in traffic than ebola?

Sorry . . . probably not.
Not sure why anyone thinks I belive I have any control, practical,or otherwise, over ebola. If there is any doubt - I don't think anything going on in Maine or NYC related to ebola is subject to my control. And last I checked, control or not never was a prerequisite for calling things as I see it. For anyone. Feel free to exercise your judgment in what interests you but be kind enough to allow me the same. Or is this one of those subjects I'm to remain quiet about if I can't toe the PC line?

I didn't call her any names. I said that people acting a certain way were twits and dicks, exactly like she did. You may have inferred that she is part of that group, but that's a leap that you made, not me.

*cough*

"Do you ever have an original insult or thought?" and "There's a lot of people being twits and dicks about Ebola and you are lining right up with them."

Can't imagine someone taking that as not a direct attack on the person you're posting to.

*cough*

"Do you ever have an original insult or thought?" and "There's a lot of people being twits and dicks about Ebola and you are lining right up with them."

Can't imagine someone taking that as not a direct attack on the person you're posting to.
It was darn close but I think he pulled his punches because, in his heart, he actually agrees with me but won't say it due to ideology. This I believe.

It was darn close but I think he pulled his punches because, in his heart, he actually agrees with me but won't say it due to ideology. This I believe.

Just in case you missed this.... How does a person defy something that's voluntary? How do you refuse to do something that's voluntary? Is there any law that demands she submit to a quarantine?

So, you are going to interpret my comments in addition to scolding me for my opinions? Seriously? Where do you get off? How about right now?

Btw, "stricter" quarantines aren't on the menu. The doctor defied voluntary isolation and the nurse refuses to even agree to voluntary isolation, at all - much less a quarantine of any sort. If you think what she is doing is at all reasonable, feel free. She is demanding the right to come and go as she pleases during the incubation period, no matter the problems it creates. You might think that is perfectly reasonable. I think it is the actions of a selfish, uncaring twit.

I object to the use of the word "scolding" in the context, above.
It implies "patronage" in terms of the user of the word. =)
good post, though.

so . . . where's that Tribute to Ebola Quilt?
(sorry . . . wrong again . . . =)

Please don't take that in anything other than a positive time investment manner.
Thank you, in advance.

(we can't fight [ebola] we can only fight the fear of [ebola] . . . and saber-toothed tigers and whatknot)

I object to the use of the word "scolding" in the context, above.
It implies "patronage" in terms of the user of the word. =)
good post, though.

so . . . where's that Tribute to Ebola Quilt?
(sorry . . . wrong again . . . =)

Please don't take that in anything other than a positive time investment manner.
Thank you, in advance.

(we can't fight [ebola] we can only fight the fear of [ebola] . . . and saber-toothed tigers and whatknot)

Working on a Christmas purse and Grandkid Christmas stockings. The ebola quilt will have to wait. Perhaps it can serve as my shroud. ;)

so . . . where's that Tribute to Ebola Quilt?
(sorry . . . wrong again . . . =)



they have began organizing but with the death toll in the US due to Ebola being what it is.. they are thinking Quilt might be too abmitious and perhaps a Napkin was a better representation.

Considering she's responding to "Do you ever have an original insult or thought?" and "There's a lot of people being twits and dicks about Ebola and you are lining right up with them." I think her response is pretty calm. Those type of personal attacks and insults aren't supposed to be tolerated here, and certainly shouldn't be in any sort of polite discourse or society. It makes OKCTalk look pretty bad. This isn't even the politics forum, which at least people can expect those type of attacks here. I certainly hope the mods step in here.
agreed

Maine, nurse at odds over Ebola quarantine | Oklahoma City - OKC - KOCO.com (http://www.koco.com/health/lawyer-nurse-wont-obey-ebola-quarantine/29401700?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=koco%2Beyewitness%2Bnews%2B5)

personally, if she won't abide by the quarantine, she needs to be forced to and have her medical license taken away. It's called being safe which prevents outbreaks.

Maine, nurse at odds over Ebola quarantine | Oklahoma City - OKC - KOCO.com (http://www.koco.com/health/lawyer-nurse-wont-obey-ebola-quarantine/29401700?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=koco%2Beyewitness%2Bnews%2B5)

personally, if she won't abide by the quarantine, she needs to be forced to and have her medical license taken away. It's called being safe which prevents outbreaks.

That 'logic' ignores the FACT the quarantine was supposed to be 'voluntary' and exactly how does it prevent outbreaks considering there have now been numerous examples in the US of infected individuals being in public spaces and not once transmitting the disease?

She doesn't need to be forced to do anything. Especially when these medical quarantines are being ordered by non-medical politicians trying to look tough for their sheep (I mean incumbents).

I'd let her come stay in my house without an ounce of worry.

People forget this exact same hysteria was going around with HIV in the 80's. You'd think we would have learned something.

We have the technology, IMO the quarantine should be nothing more than a mobile device that requires body temperature check and transmission of the results every 8-12 hours.

That 'logic' ignores the FACT the quarantine was supposed to be 'voluntary' and exactly how does it prevent outbreaks considering there have now been numerous examples in the US of infected individuals being in public spaces and not once transmitting the disease?

She doesn't need to be forced to do anything. Especially when these medical quarantines are being ordered by non-medical politicians trying to look tough for their sheep (I mean incumbents).

I'd let her come stay in my house without an ounce of worry.

People forget this exact same hysteria was going around with HIV in the 80's. You'd think we would have learned something.

We have the technology, IMO the quarantine should be nothing more than a mobile device that requires body temperature check and transmission of the results every 8-12 hours.

I'm not sure the direct analogy to HIV applies with Ebola. We didn't have concentrated outbreaks of HIV that killed 50-70% of those infected within, what, a month? We didn't have health care workers getting HIV merely for treating other HIV-positive (or full-blown AIDS) patients.

I try as best I can to hit the proper, realistic middle of any extremes in most cases, but I have to admit that for this particular disease, I do tend to lean more toward the cautious side. Given that we know Dr. Spencer was less than forthcoming regarding his travels upon arriving home, we have at hand indications that the best-intentioned people may elide certain relevant facts about their potential contacts, and even then in not in a malevolent way, but one borne of an innocent state of mind.

This is tough for everyone involved. And, absolutely, it appears we're demonstrating the difficulty of transmitting Ebola. That said, I think we may have to think of something at least moderately more stringent than a "voluntary quarantine." Wish I were smart enough to know exactly what that might mean.

LOL Gotta love selective ignoring.

That 'logic' ignores the FACT the quarantine was supposed to be 'voluntary' and exactly how does it prevent outbreaks considering there have now been numerous examples in the US of infected individuals being in public spaces and not once transmitting the disease?

She doesn't need to be forced to do anything. Especially when these medical quarantines are being ordered by non-medical politicians trying to look tough for their sheep (I mean incumbents).

I'd let her come stay in my house without an ounce of worry.

People forget this exact same hysteria was going around with HIV in the 80's. You'd think we would have learned something.

We have the technology, IMO the quarantine should be nothing more than a mobile device that requires body temperature check and transmission of the results every 8-12 hours.

On top of which she's not infectious because she has no symptoms and even more she has actually been tested for Ebola and the test was negative. As in, she doesn't have it. period.

The idea she needs to be in quarantine at this point is nonsense.

Gotta love the hypocrisy of some of the politicians now. Many of those who whispered "death panels" in interviews and railed against the government standing between the Dr and the patient when we were arguing about the ACA, are now all too eager to ignore the Drs and medical professional and have the government intervene to stamp all over the civil rights of individuals. Seems the government really shouldn't be able to unilaterally detain a citizen when there is no basis for it. This nurse is not contagious or infectious at this time. If and when she presents an elevated temperature (the first sign of the virus), she should be quarantined. The court case will be interesting, it seems a well intended law should be the least restrictive penalty imposed on the smallest affected class of people. Quarantining a person that is not infectious goes too far.

Maine, nurse at odds over Ebola quarantine | Oklahoma City - OKC - KOCO.com (http://www.koco.com/health/lawyer-nurse-wont-obey-ebola-quarantine/29401700?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=koco%2Beyewitness%2Bnews%2B5)

personally, if she won't abide by the quarantine, she needs to be forced to and have her medical license taken away. It's called being safe which prevents outbreaks.

75 medical professionals were in contact with the Dallas patient and many others in contact with the two nurses. they self monitored. why is this individual being treated any differently. and how do you FORCE someone into a VOLUNTARY quarantine and then you want to remove their license? come on

Correct... the quarantine is only good enough for members of our military, who have had no direct contact with patients, and not for those in the medical profession who have had direct contact.

No wonder people are confused. On one hand you have the white house urging states to quit trying to have mandatory 21 day quarantines while at the same time the administration is implementing mandatory 21 day quarantines.

Correct... the quarantine is only good enough for members of our military, who have had no direct contact with patients, and not for those in the medical profession who have had direct contact.

No wonder people are confused. On one hand you have the white house urging states to quit trying to have mandatory 21 day quarantines while at the same time the administration is implementing mandatory 21 day quarantines.

Members of the military are following orders, the nurse isn't in the military, big difference.

Maine, nurse at odds over Ebola quarantine | Oklahoma City - OKC - KOCO.com (http://www.koco.com/health/lawyer-nurse-wont-obey-ebola-quarantine/29401700?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=koco%2Beyewitness%2Bnews%2B5)

personally, if she won't abide by the quarantine, she needs to be forced to and have her medical license taken away. It's called being safe which prevents outbreaks.

Should we lock up people with the flu too? That kills way more that Ebola has. How about AIDS patients? How about we be extra sure and force people who know somebody that had the flu be quarantined?

Members of the military are following orders, the nurse isn't in the military, big difference.

Ok, but how is the average person in the country supposed to react to someone who had direct contact not going into quarantine when the white house is putting military folks into quarantine? There's a real mixed message coming out of the leadership (or lack of leadership) of the executive branch.

I would like the average person in the country to listen to the doctors and scientists and not the politicians and the fear mongers who spread false information. What would you suggest the executive branch do? Ignore the medical professionals and listen to the fear mo0ngers?

If they (the administration) are listening to the medical professionals and not the fear mongers, then why did they yesterday implement mandatory quarantine for any troops who were in West Africa? That's my question, and that's the mixed message I'm talking about.

Should the average person not take the lead from the President now?

If they (the administration) are listening to the medical professionals and not the fear mongers, then why did they yesterday implement mandatory quarantine for any troops who were in West Africa? That's my question, and that's the mixed message I'm talking about.

Should the average person not take the lead from the President now?

Again can you not see the difference between the military orders and a private citizen?

But if it's just fear mongering, why the need for the military orders? Are you saying the military is making orders based on fear mongering and not advice from medical professionals?

Ok, but how is the average person in the country supposed to react to someone who had direct contact not going into quarantine when the white house is putting military folks into quarantine? There's a real mixed message coming out of the leadership (or lack of leadership) of the executive branch.

The military quarantine is stupid too. Test them on the way back and so long as the test is negative and they have no symptoms they are free to go.

But if it's just fear mongering, why the need for the military orders? Are you saying the military is making orders based on fear mongering and not advice from medical professionals?

The US military NEVER does anything that's stupid. Just ask anyone that has ever been in the military.

I'm not sure the direct analogy to HIV applies with Ebola. We didn't have concentrated outbreaks of HIV that killed 50-70% of those infected within, what, a month? We didn't have health care workers getting HIV merely for treating other HIV-positive (or full-blown AIDS) patients.

I try as best I can to hit the proper, realistic middle of any extremes in most cases, but I have to admit that for this particular disease, I do tend to lean more toward the cautious side. Given that we know Dr. Spencer was less than forthcoming regarding his travels upon arriving home, we have at hand indications that the best-intentioned people may elide certain relevant facts about their potential contacts, and even then in not in a malevolent way, but one borne of an innocent state of mind.

This is tough for everyone involved. And, absolutely, it appears we're demonstrating the difficulty of transmitting Ebola. That said, I think we may have to think of something at least moderately more stringent than a "voluntary quarantine." Wish I were smart enough to know exactly what that might mean.

I'm fully aware of the differences between transmission of Ebola vs. HIV - I was recognized as Oklahoma's youngest certified HIV/AIDS counselor, tester and educator in the 80's (when I was still in my teens). I was clear that I was comparing the hysteria. Those contracting the disease are in INTIMATE/DIRECT contact with those that contract it. There has been zero evidence that casual contact will result in a transmission. Unlike other deadly viruses that people in the US walk around with everyday and yet there is zero hysteria to quarantine them.

Personally, I'm glad these people have ventured into public spaces because it only furthers the reality that the general public has nothing to fear.

I don't get the lets all jump on board the quarantine bandwagon when there has been no casual transmission yet people are totally unfazed by the fact thousands die of virus that we willingly show up to work with. Boggles the mind.

But if it's just fear mongering, why the need for the military orders? Are you saying the military is making orders based on fear mongering and not advice from medical professionals?

The military orders are from politicians, not from sound medical and scientific reasoning. Again, the way things are done in the military is different than what is done in civilian life. In military life if you are ordered to do something you do it.

The military quarantine is stupid too. Test them on the way back and so long as the test is negative and they have no symptoms they are free to go.

That's sort of my point. This whole "military orders vs civilian" thing has nothing to do with the discussion. I don't think there's logic or reason for quarantine in either case, but the average citizen, hearing about the quarantine being ordered for the military would not be unreasonable to fear someone not in the military refusing quarantine. It's about the message.

The military orders are from politicians, not from sound medical and scientific reasoning. Again, the way things are done in the military is different than what is done in civilian life. In military life if you are ordered to do something you do it.

Ah, so we agree. The white house is making decisions based on fear mongering and politics, not on sound medical and scientific reasoning, and is sending a mixed message. That was my point.

I would like the average person in the country to listen to the doctors and scientists and not the politicians and the fear mongers who spread false information. What would you suggest the executive branch do? Ignore the medical professionals and listen to the fear mo0ngers?

Bingo.

Its so blantantly obvious Chris Christie put the doctor in quarantine to score political points as he is clearly still having delusions of being President. Ultimately, I imagine someone with more sense than him got his ear and told him the legal difficulties in keeping someone in forced quarantine over a disease they technically don't have.

This whole thing has become so detached from any sort of science or rational thinking, it makes me sad. Its like some Twighlight Zone episode or any other Cold-War era black and white social commentary about the dangers of groupthink and mass paranoia. It really bodes very poorly for this country should we have an actual outbreak of something.

I am very interested to hear the legal arguments the state of Maine will try and use here. I am the furthest thing from some crazed civil libertarian type, but should they argue successfully we would be setting a dangerous precedent. Why stop at quarantining someone over Ebola? Flu is a much deadlier disease in the US, should we start locking people in their homes if they catch the sniffles? Maybe mandatory annual STD/AIDS checks once a year for anyone sexually active?

That's sort of my point. This whole "military orders vs civilian" thing has nothing to do with the discussion. I don't think there's logic or reason for quarantine in either case, but the average citizen, hearing about the quarantine being ordered for the military would not be unreasonable to fear someone not in the military refusing quarantine. It's about the message.

If the whole military/civilian thing has nothing to do with the discussion why do you keep bring it up? There are many things the military is ordered to do that would be unreasonable for a civilian to do.

Ok, but how is the average person in the country supposed to react to someone who had direct contact not going into quarantine when the white house is putting military folks into quarantine? There's a real mixed message coming out of the leadership (or lack of leadership) of the executive branch.

I don't get the comparison at all..... The military is virtually a world unto itself. I've never compared how they do things in their world to how I do things. They have their own judicial system, healthcare, legal aid, the list goes on and on....

If the whole military/civilian thing has nothing to do with the discussion why do you keep bring it up? There are many things the military is ordered to do that would be unreasonable for a civilian to do.

Because policy is coming from the white house. They feel that anyone who even stepped foot into West Africa should be quarantined (if they are in the military) and yet folks who have direct contact with patients shouldn't be. That's a mixed message.

Bingo.

Its so blantantly obvious Chris Christie put the doctor in quarantine to score political points as he is clearly still having delusions of being President. Ultimately, I imagine someone with more sense than him got his ear and told him the legal difficulties in keeping someone in forced quarantine over a disease they technically don't have.

This whole thing has become so detached from any sort of science or rational thinking, it makes me sad. Its like some Twighlight Zone episode or any other Cold-War era black and white social commentary about the dangers of groupthink and mass paranoia. It really bodes very poorly for this country should we have an actual outbreak of something.

I am very interested to hear the legal arguments the state of Maine will try and use here. I am the furthest thing from some crazed civil libertarian type, but should they argue successfully we would be setting a dangerous precedent. Why stop at quarantining someone over Ebola? Flu is a much deadlier disease in the US, should we start locking people in their homes if they catch the sniffles? Maybe mandatory annual STD/AIDS checks once a year for anyone sexually active?

Even the civil libertarian types are being ignorant on this....

Is the Ebola virus 'incredibly contagious' and 'easy to catch,' like Rand Paul says? | PolitiFact (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/oct/27/rand-paul/ebola-virus-incredibly-contagious-and-easy-catch-r/)

I don't get the comparison at all..... The military is virtually a world unto itself. I've never compared how they do things in their world to how I do things. They have their judicial system, healthcare, legal aid, the list goes on and on....

Because the policy came from the top, and is new.

Ok, but how is the average person in the country supposed to react to someone who had direct contact not going into quarantine when the white house is putting military folks into quarantine? There's a real mixed message coming out of the leadership (or lack of leadership) of the executive branch.

I don't get the comparison at all..... The military is virtually a world unto itself. I've never compared how they do things in their world to how I do things. They have their judicial system, healthcare, legal aid, the list goes on and on....

I agree its a mixed message but thats nothing new. Military and civilians should not be mandatory quarantined. its crazy hype that even people on this forum clearly have subscribed to. Relax a bit as it was said it more likely that you would marry a Kardashian than get Ebola so stop the madness. don't ask that medical professionals be stripped of thier license after they have voluntarily helped others with a deadly disease. Yes you would expect a medical professional to be more forth coming with their information after contracting the disease but then again they are human and I am sure had a LOT of their plate when they began running a fever and showing symptoms.

Because policy is coming from the white house. They feel that anyone who even stepped foot into West Africa should be quarantined (if they are in the military) and yet folks who have direct contact with patients shouldn't be. That's a mixed message.

Politicians are running around screaming the White House isn't taking the Ebola crisis serious so what did you expect the WH to do?

Google and research can be your friend

White House: 'Not unusual' for Ebola quarantine rules to differ for military, general population - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/28/white-house-not-unusual-ebola-quarantine-rules-dif/)

I just think they shouldn't have announced or implemented the quarantine policy.

It's sort of like if they government put out a press release announcing that there is absolutely no meteor about to hit the earth, nothing to worry about, but we are moving all military members into underground bunkers to protect them from the meteor that's absolutely not about to hit the earth. It feeds to panic.

The military quarantine is stupid too. Test them on the way back and so long as the test is negative and they have no symptoms they are free to go.

Not quite that simple. The virus first resides in tissue, not blood. Only after a period of time is the virus present in blood and initially a single drop may only have a single occurrence of the virus. So, blood tests would not conclusively eliminate an individual as infected until a time where the virus had multiplied to the point where it shows up in a standard blood test. At that point you unilaterally begin to show symptoms and become infections to others who come into contact with your bodily fluids.

Politicians are running around screaming the White House isn't taking the Ebola crisis serious so what did you expect the WH to do?

Lead, and not just play politics. I guess I have higher standards for my leaders than some folks.

good luck finding that leader that doesn't play politics.

Lead, and not just play politics. I guess I have higher standards for my leaders than some folks.

Then tell that to the ones who are spreading fear and not the facts like a few Republican Governors and Senators.

Then tell that to the ones who are spreading fear and not the facts like a few Republican Governors and Senators.

By implementing the same policies as the white house?

And the difference, I'm willing to, and have, said they are wrong, and making poor leadership choices and responding to fear mongering. Of course, I'm willing to criticize folks regardless of political party, which is rare around here.

By implementing the same policies as the white house?

The WH implemented policies to force civilians into quarantine?

The WH implemented policies to force civilians into quarantine?

Oh, now that's just playing word games. The WH implemented policies to force folks into quarantine who go into West Africa, regardless of risk of contagion. The fact that they implemented it for the military is secondary. It's reasonable for Governors to follow their lead (or for citizens to expect that). You lead from the top down, not the bottom up, except for you, who expects the President to lead based on what Governors and Senators say and do, and what past Presidents did. Like I said, lower expectations.

It was flat out wrong of Chuck Hagel to implement this policy, and it's not going to help with getting states to not do the same. And it's not just Republican states, for folks like you who keep trying to make this a Left V Right fight. California enacted a quarantine yesterday. I didn't realize they were a red state run by a Republican governor (oh, they're not). It's a right vs wrong fight.

Oh, now that's just playing word games. The WH implemented policies to force folks into quarantine who go into West Africa, regardless of risk of contagion. The fact that they implemented it for the military is secondary. It's reasonable for Governors to follow their lead (or for citizens to expect that). You lead from the top down, not the bottom up, except for you, who expects the President to lead based on what Governors and Senators say and do, and what past Presidents did. Like I said, lower expectations.

Kind of interesting how you can veil insults to posters stating they have lower standards but defend others who you feel are being targeted.. Double standards I suppose.

Kind of interesting how you can veil insults to posters stating they have lower standards but defend others who you feel are being targeted.. Double standards I suppose.

Saying someone has lower expectations in their leaders is an insult? And comparable with saying someone has no original thoughts, is an idiot or a twit and a dick? Really? You're stretching here.

double post.

Looks like some cooler heads are starting to emerge here.

LePage backs off quarantine for Kaci Hickox in favor of mandatory blood testing (http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/30/kaci-hickox-and-boyfriend-leave-home-on-bikes/)

Looks like some cooler heads are starting to emerge here.

LePage backs off quarantine for Kaci Hickox in favor of mandatory blood testing (http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/30/kaci-hickox-and-boyfriend-leave-home-on-bikes/)

That's good news, although even the blood test seems like a waste of time based on what Brian said.

Oh, now that's just playing word games. The WH implemented policies to force folks into quarantine who go into West Africa, regardless of risk of contagion. The fact that they implemented it for the military is secondary. It's reasonable for Governors to follow their lead (or for citizens to expect that). You lead from the top down, not the bottom up, except for you, who expects the President to lead based on what Governors and Senators say and do, and what past Presidents did. Like I said, lower expectations.

It was flat out wrong of Chuck Hagel to implement this policy, and it's not going to help with getting states to not do the same. And it's not just Republican states, for folks like you who keep trying to make this a Left V Right fight. California enacted a quarantine yesterday. I didn't realize they were a red state run by a Republican governor (oh, they're not). It's a right vs wrong fight.

How is it word games when you said "By implementing the same policies as the white house?" I asked a very simple question.... The WH implemented policies to force civilians into quarantine? Instead of answering that you went on a different direction we already covered. What are you not understanding the military and civilian are two different things? Did the Governors order military personnel into quarantine or are they trying to order civilians into quarantine?

That's good news, although even the blood test seems like a waste of time based on what Brian said.

I'm certain they will use a higher than standard level of testing because of the high profile nature of this case. I'm guessing they will utilize testing that would detect a single presence of the virus.

I haven't read a conclusive timeline on when the virus can be readily found in a blood test, just that 21-days is sufficient time to know if a person was infected and detectable symptoms and detectable virus levels seem to coincide.