I was trying to read up on ebola testing, and saw this..

Simple new test finds Ebola in 15 minutes, could be ?game changer? (http://news.yahoo.com/simple-new-test-finds-ebola-in-15-minutes--could-be--gamechanger--200026694.html)

I've got to think, this would solve a lot of the quarantine discussions if implemented here (and it really works). But I'm not clear if it (or the other quick tests mentioned) still require the testee to be symptomatic first.

I was trying to read up on ebola testing, and saw this..

Simple new test finds Ebola in 15 minutes, could be ?game changer? (http://news.yahoo.com/simple-new-test-finds-ebola-in-15-minutes--could-be--gamechanger--200026694.html)

I've got to think, this would solve a lot of the quarantine discussions if implemented here (and it really works). But I'm not clear if it (or the other quick tests mentioned) still require the testee to be symptomatic first.

Unfortunately I think people will read in this article what they want to hear.

I didn't see anything that tells me at what point of the infection that the test is able to detect the virus. Since its a blood test, obviously it can't detect the virus while it incubates in one's tissues. Also, how prevalent does the virus have to be to be detectable once the virus is in the blood stream.

If I read this correctly, you're already symptomatic by the time the test is accurate.

Not sure how it solve's quarantine issues, other than to possibly reduce the overall number of days required before the test can be administered.

Unfortunately I think people will read in this article what they want to hear.

I didn't see anything that tells me at what point of the infection that the test is able to detect the virus. Since its a blood test, obviously it can't detect the virus while it incubates in one's tissues. Also, how prevalent does the virus have to be to be detectable once the virus is in the blood stream.

If I read this correctly, you're already symptomatic by the time the test is accurate.

Not sure how it solve's quarantine issues, other than to possibly reduce the overall number of days required before the test can be administered.

Good points

What made me think it might help, is the mention of deploying this test at Airports.

The other area it would help is it would significantly reduce the risk of exposure for health care workers, so there'd be less concern and cause for quarantine.

What made me think it might help, is the mention of deploying this test at Airports.

The other area it would help is it would significantly reduce the risk of exposure for health care workers, so there'd be less concern and cause for quarantine.

Regarding airports;

1.) The effectiveness would be directly tied to how much time has passed since they LAST had exposure to the virus. If they pass through the airport only a day or so after exposure, then the test is not only irrelevant but may give a false sense of security.
2.) Blood tests (on any level IMO) are invasive. I feel its a dangerous policy to acclimate the population to mass invasive testing simply out of caution - especially when its not fool proof by any stretch of the imagination.

However, I do think it would be a good tool for healthcare workers and emergency responders.

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.


That why I also said "and is not showing any symptoms"

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.
I am used to the name calling and personal attacks and to be honest, have a lot of skepticism that much is done about them. I have had some of the worst, just horrid comments made about me and 99% of the time, it is ignored. Or many 99.5% of the time. I have also complained and that landed me a month's grounding from politics not because I did anything wrong, but because, as it was explained, I was often in the middle of a politics dispute. I thought it was grossly unfair but it is not my forum and I don't make the rules. But I learned to not complain because the slant is left and it easier to remove the target than deal with the bullies. Most women avoid the the politics forum and there is a reason for that. The message I get is that I should also shut up and not bother the name callers.

Yes, credibility does go down for if people are basing decisions on the idea that God will keep people safe instead of following science and medical practices. It’s basic logic. There are thousands of dead Christians in Africa to prove that God will not protect people, even good Christians, while there are zero infections in the US when the correct medical practices have been followed. You are not infectious if you are non symptomatic. It’s that simple. The fear mongering is political and has no basis in medical or scientific facts.

You prove the point. In a situation where the facts and exposure are exactly the same, you pick and choose who you trust depending on what you bring to the table. A lot of people call that science but it has nothing to do with science - it has to do with your judgement of the credibility of the people involved and you argue that religious people are less scientific or logical. If ebola is hard to get (and it is), a belief that god will protect means nothing. Recall, we are talking about an incubation period when people are not expected to be walking around in haz mat suits.

And the same is true of people who are skeptical of people who claim they can self monitor. It has little to do with "science" either. Regardless of whether you believe ebola is hard to catch, if you don't trust people to use good sense, you'd rather them just stay home and not expose people. And that is logical, too. We can't pick and choose, in terms of policy, who is responsible and who isn't. It is generally a one size fits all and it doesn't matter if you have super silly Sally who likes to hug play ground children and escort them to the bathroom, or Sterile Sarah who stays in her apartment and checks her temperature on the hour.

For me, personally, I think home isolation makes sense. I personally don't care if someone goes on a run or rides their bike so long as they avoid public transportation or public areas and part of that is because of the huge cost to the rest of us in terms of tracking if they DO come down sick. But Nurse Twit refused to even do that and I lost all respect for her at that point. She is wanting to make a point and this isn't the point to make. All she tells me is that she is arrogant, elitist, she doesn't care if she upsets people and she really, really, really, really likes to threaten and call attention to herself.

You prove the point. In a situation where the facts and exposure are exactly the same, you pick and choose who you trust depending on what you bring to the table. A lot of people call that science but it has nothing to do with science - it has to do with you judgement of the credibility of the people involved and you argue that religious people are less scientific or logical. If ebola is hard to get (and it is), a belief that god will protect means nothing. Recall, we are talking about an incubation period when people are not expected to be walking around in haz mat suits.

And the same is true of people who are skeptical of people who claim they can self monitor. It has little to do with "science." either. Regardless of whether you believe ebola is hard to catch, if you don't trust people to use good sense, you'd rather them just stay home and not expose people. And that is logical, too. We can't pick and choose, in terms of policy, who is responsible and who isn't. It is generally a one size fits all and it doesn't matter if you have super silly Sally who likes to hug play ground children and escort them to the bathroom, or Sterile Sarah who stays in her apartment and checks her temperature on the hour.

For me, personally, I think home isolation makes sense. I personally don't care if someone goes on a run or rides their bike so long as they avoid public transportation or public areas and part of that is because of the huge cost to the rest of us in terms of tracking if they DO come down sick. But Nurse Twit refused to even do that and I lost all respect for her at that point. She is wanting to make a point and this isn't the point to make. All she tells me is that she is arrogant, elitist, she doesn't care if she upsets people and she really, really, really, really likes to threaten and call attention to herself.

Thank God those arrogant elitists choose to put their lives at risk in those 3rd world countries AND put their reputations at risk when they get back home. Seems to me she's none of the things you forward and instead a free thinker who puts reality above hysteria regardless of the consequences to herself.

You can name call all you want - I personally applaud her.

I am used to the name calling and personal attacks and to be honest, have a lot of skepticism that much is done about them. I have had some of the worst, just horrid comments made about me and 99% of the time, it is ignored. Or many 99.5% of the time. I have also complained and that landed me a month's grounding from politics not because I did anything wrong, but because, as it was explained, I was often in the middle of a politics dispute. I thought it was grossly unfair but it is not my forum and I don't make the rules. But I learned to not complain because the slant is left and it easier to remove the target than deal with the bullies. Most women avoid the the politics forum and there is a reason for that. The message I get is that I should also shut up and not bother the name callers.

Well PQ I've seen many times where you've degraded and belittle other posters and when it's turned around you act like you're the victim in the whole thing. You've made outlandish claims and when questioned about them you act like you're being persecuted or just ignore the questions. How do you expect people to respond to your posts when you act like you're better than everyone else? This thread alone you've called a person a 'Nurse Twit' and criticized her as being self-centered after she volunteered to go treat Ebola victims and showed zero signs of being infected. The same goes for calling a doctor 'Dr. Hipster'. You've also said on this thread they didn't grasp the problem because they didn't see things the same way you did but you complain about personal attacks and name calling, especially after this post of yours "Twit, brat, selfish kid on the nurse. LYING dick for the doc and he convicts himself by cowardly lying about his behavior"

Maybe if you didn't constantly do the same behavior you accuse others of doing to you things might be different. If you're going to play the victim card at least don't victimize others while you do it. jmho

Thank God those arrogant elitists choose to put their lives at risk in those 3rd world countries AND put their reputations at risk when they get back home. Seems to me she's none of the things you forward and instead a free thinker who puts reality above hysteria regardless of the consequences to herself.

You can name call all you want - I personally applaud her.

I am so weary of people trying to claim they are angels. They did very good things but they aren't saints and nothing suggests they are immune from making poor decisions. They are still people just like everyone else. So, please. If they lie or screw up, don't act like noticing that is heresy. You aren't usually this PC and it is a shame to see you go there. Let's just be real. Someone can honestly say the Hipster Doc lied and was self serving and that doesn't take away from his service in Africa. And his service in Africa doesn't allow him to act like a dick without being called out, either.

Here's a way out hypothetical - someone with a heart of gold goes to Africa to treat ebola patients, gets sick, and deliberately infects his cheating spouse when he returns. Not a nice guy. The logic being employed on this thread would excuse criticism because he achieved sainthood in Africa. The attempt at shaming is just a means to try to shut people up without addressing the material issues.

And just as an aside - she obviously thinks she is very clever and you've taken her at her word. But the last thing any of us need to control/avoid an outbreak are "free thinkers" making the decisions. They can contribute to policy, and should. But when they are the ones exposed, their decisions concerning how they live their lives, short term, are not what we should be using in making public health decisions. They are too close to the situation.

More quarantine idiocy (I'm on the sane side, not the "misguided overreaction" side):

Oklahoma Teacher Will Have To Quarantine Herself After Trip To Ebola-Free Rwanda (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/28/ebola-rwanda-oklahoma-teacher_n_6062726.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular)

More quarantine idiocy (I'm on the sane side, not the "misguided overreaction" side):

Oklahoma Teacher Will Have To Quarantine Herself After Trip To Ebola-Free Rwanda (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/28/ebola-rwanda-oklahoma-teacher_n_6062726.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular)now that is dumb.

More quarantine idiocy (I'm on the sane side, not the "misguided overreaction" side):

Oklahoma Teacher Will Have To Quarantine Herself After Trip To Ebola-Free Rwanda (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/28/ebola-rwanda-oklahoma-teacher_n_6062726.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular)

The only good thing to come out of the paranoia over the teacher is she's getting paid.

I was trying to read up on ebola testing, and saw this..

Simple new test finds Ebola in 15 minutes, could be ?game changer? (http://news.yahoo.com/simple-new-test-finds-ebola-in-15-minutes--could-be--gamechanger--200026694.html)

I've got to think, this would solve a lot of the quarantine discussions if implemented here (and it really works). But I'm not clear if it (or the other quick tests mentioned) still require the testee to be symptomatic first.

15 minutes is quite fast, I presume this is antibody mediated much like the rapid strep test.

I do want to state that I am against any one just being quarantined just from going to Africa. If they are absolutely positive they don't have Ebola, than we can let them be. I just assume err on the safe side if you've been treating Ebola patients.

I do want to state that I am against any one just being quarantined just from going to Africa. If they are absolutely positive they don't have Ebola, than we can let them be. I just assume err on the safe side if you've been treating Ebola patients.

How about the same treatment if a family member has the flu? Should you be quarantined for several days?

CDC admits droplets from a sneeze could spread Ebola | New York Post (http://nypost.com/2014/10/29/cdc-admits-droplets-from-a-sneeze-could-spread-ebola/)

Be nice if the CDC acted like it knew what it was doing...

In all of this, I am not sure what they plan to do/are doing with medical staff actively nursing or otherwise caring for ebola patients in the US. I think they are quarantining them in NYC (thought I read that) but am not sure.

ETA - this article http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/nyregion/new-york-state-offers-protections-for-medical-workers-joining-ebola-fight.html?_r=0 says they are being monitored.


Another 114 people — the vast majority being travelers arriving in the city since October 11 from West Africa — are being actively monitored by health workers, but are not being quarantined or having their movements restricted.

The list also includes Bellevue Hospital staff members taking care of Dr. Spencer, the emergency medical workers who transported him to Bellevue and the lab workers who conducted his blood test.

Those being actively monitored are in regular communication with health workers, who check in with them daily rather than relying solely on them to self-monitor.

How about the same treatment if a family member has the flu? Should you be quarantined for several days?Let me ask you something, if you found someone in your family had the flu, what would happen to them? What would you do? My stepmother has the flu right now and she is home just fine.

Now, what would you do if someone in your house had Ebola? I know exactly what would happen. They would go to the hospital and there would be a much higher chance they wouldn't survive it. I've known a lot of people who have had the flu, not very many people who have had Ebola. Just stop comparing the two...

A lot of flu deaths are from older, younger, and people with weak immune systems. The flu is also much more widespread.

For anyone saying Ebola is hard to catch, you should think how many people cough, sneeze, or rub their face and touch other objects. It doesn't live as long as the flu does on dry surfaces, but it is a lot worse if you do catch it. The majority of people working with the nurse that was infected followed safety protocols and stayed a safe distance or wore bio hazard suits.

I am not hyping this and I think the news is waaaay over hyping it. I stand by all of my comments and think the nurse--someone who work with infected patients in Africa--should remain in quarantine during the duration of the incubation period. If that has passed, then she shold be free to walk. If it didn't and she is refusing, force her to and take away her medical license.

I'm in disbelief that people are such in a hysteria that they would ask a teacher who was on a cruise far away from the nurse who confirmed Ebola negative to stay away from class, but the incubation period was already up. There was no risk. From what I know, the incubation period hasn't passed for this teacher and it's called being safe rather than sorry.

I bet everyone here who is siding with the nurse would be the same people bitching at the government for not doing enough if she did have Ebola and spread it to others. It seems no matter what happens, everyone just wants something to bitch about.

There should be a simple policy, if you go and treat others that have Ebola, you're a wonderful person and thank you, but after you're done, wait 21 days and then you're done. Why is that such an over-reactive view to have? It's not like I'm saying if you've been to West Africa, hell, I don't care if you've been Liberia, but if you've been treating people that YOU KNOW are infected, it should be mandatory that you remain in isolation for the incubation period.

Thank you! We don't quarantine people with HIV. Some people here obviously don't know that or are just happy to be manipulated by the media and political machine.HIV is blood to blood transmission, isn't that a little harder to contract than a disease that is spread from any bodily fluid?

http://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/aH1U30_7cKZhuobFqZBIuzELn1k=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2371568/Ebola.0.pngWow, I didn't know that.

While that's true PluPan, that's not the whole picture. The fluid transmission doesn't tell the whole story. Look at mosquito transmission issues for an example. The math and science about a contagion and infectivity of a virus is more complicated than simply how it can be transmitted through bodily fluids.

AND, that science doesn't indicate a need for the hysterical response we are seeing.

That's true. I didn't think about the mosquito issue, but that makes sense.

HIV is blood to blood transmission, isn't that a little harder to contract than a disease that is spread from any bodily fluid?

HIV is present in sufficient quantities for transmission in blood, seamen, ******l secretions and breast milk - with blood being the primary (but certainly not only) mode of transmission.

HIV usually enters the body through a mucous membrane or when directly introduced to the bloodstream through transfusion or hypodermic needle.


*Seriously - we can't say V@ginal on this forum but PQ can call someone a dick?

She's about to say you're being overly emotional and hysterical in 3, 2...
Sid, how about sticking to the subject rather than piling on? Or is that why you come on here - to trash another poster?

Thank you! We don't quarantine people with HIV. Some people here obviously don't know that or are just happy to be manipulated by the media and political machine.

Why would anyone compare the two? Complete strawman. Not only do people have to have intimate contact with an AIDS person, we don't have health care workers coming down with it and dying as we have with ebola. Can we please stick to science?

HIV is present in sufficient quantities for transmission in blood, seamen, ******l secretions and breast milk - with blood being the primary (but certainly not only) mode of transmission.

HIV usually enters the body through a mucous membrane or when directly introduced to the bloodstream through transfusion or hypodermic needle.


*Seriously - we can't say V@ginal on this forum but PQ can call someone a dick?

Nice, Brian. Are you implying I make the rules? If not, please me out if your complaining about what the filter catches. And yes, I really can call the guy a dick because he was acting like one. If the mods want to censor that, they have the power.

Why would anyone compare the two? Complete strawman. Not only do people have to have intimate contact with an AIDS person, we don't have health care workers coming down with it and dying as we have with ebola. Can we please stick to science?

No health care workers have died of Ebola in America.

No health care workers have died of Ebola in America.That's because there has not been very many cases of it here and strict regulations and protocols about treating the infected. My guess is the nurse who contracted it violated protocol.

Speaking of Ebola Deaths in America . . . As far as I'm concerned, one DumbPhuque, texting in traffic, has, like, ten to the tenth powers of negatively effecting me, more, personally, than the entire African Continent. So . . . therefore, from an entirely statistical and selfish standpoint I say: Don't Text About Ebola In Traffic. it sorta evens the odds.

As far as I'm concerned, one dumbphuque, texting in traffic, has, like ten to the tenth powers of negatively effecting me, more, personally, than the entire African Continent. So . . . therefore, from an entirely statistical and selfish standpoint I say: Don't Text About Ebola In Traffic.what's that saying.... created a crawl in the mall or like a crawl in the skin. -confini

what's that saying.... created a crawl in the mall or like a crawl in the skin. -confini

Yup.
(edited to add some bongos, some simple bass and a beret in the background. =)

Yup.
(edited to add some bongos, some simple bass and a beret in the background. =)My views of any matter are subject to change. I refuse to refute the irrefutable; I know how to do it to. I like to look at it, like someone asking a monkey if it wants to live on a planet shaped and made out of a banana.

Why would anyone compare the two? Complete strawman. Not only do people have to have intimate contact with an AIDS person, we don't have health care workers coming down with it and dying as we have with ebola. Can we please stick to science?

"an AIDS person" - Can you be any more ignorant or insensitive?

FYI -- AIDS is not the disease, its a diagnosis/condition/effect of HIV. A person by no means has to be diagnosed with AIDS to be infectious to others. As a matter of fact, most transmissions happen long before a person with HIV is diagnosed with AIDS. Additionally, a person may live their entire life infected with HIV but never be diagnosed with AIDS.

Are you actually claiming that coming into direct contact with a person's blood, sweat, vomit, diarrhea etc. is not 'intimate contact'?

We know how Ebola is transmitted so, yes, it is absolutely not only possible but should be the expectation that healthcare workers are equipped with the tools to insure they do not become infected while treating (I'll use your verbiage) "those Ebola people."

HIV = strawman (I think not)... but, of course PQ cares little about anything that doesn't fit her agenda.

Want some science and facts - hold on to your knitting needles PQ, because here they are......

Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said; "We have to work now so this is not the world’s next AIDS."

Dr. Amesh Adalja, a representative of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has publicly stated that the Ebola Virus and HIV "are similar." ...

"to deny the similarities is to stigmatize Ebola in much the way the U.S. did with AIDS."

Both are mutating viruses, both emerged from Africa, neither has a vaccine, both are fatal if left untreated, both are believed to have originated from host animals and then progressed to using humans as hosts (possibly through contact by hunters to the original host animals). Both have an incubation/latency period where it is extremely difficult to detect them (HIV's is much longer). Neither are airborne. Both are most readily transmitted by intimate contact with an infected person's blood or other bodily fluids. Infection from either can be eliminated through very similar health protocols.

The main difference (superficially speaking) is that Ebola can be spread through additional boldly fluids that while HIV is present in, has not shown to be prevalent enough to cause an infection (urine, sweat, feces, etc.). The other significant difference is that a person with HIV is infectious to others while showing no symptoms for up to 10 years or so. A person infected with Ebola is not infectious to others until symptoms appear (usually within 21 days of infection).


To deny the similarities is the height of ignorance - which explains your stance PQ.

Let me ask you something, if you found someone in your family had the flu, what would happen to them? What would you do? My stepmother has the flu right now and she is home just fine.

Now, what would you do if someone in your house had Ebola? I know exactly what would happen. They would go to the hospital and there would be a much higher chance they wouldn't survive it. I've known a lot of people who have had the flu, not very many people who have had Ebola. Just stop comparing the two...

A lot of flu deaths are from older, younger, and people with weak immune systems. The flu is also much more widespread.

For anyone saying Ebola is hard to catch, you should think how many people cough, sneeze, or rub their face and touch other objects. It doesn't live as long as the flu does on dry surfaces, but it is a lot worse if you do catch it. The majority of people working with the nurse that was infected followed safety protocols and stayed a safe distance or wore bio hazard suits.

I am not hyping this and I think the news is waaaay over hyping it. I stand by all of my comments and think the nurse--someone who work with infected patients in Africa--should remain in quarantine during the duration of the incubation period. If that has passed, then she shold be free to walk. If it didn't and she is refusing, force her to and take away her medical license.

I'm in disbelief that people are such in a hysteria that they would ask a teacher who was on a cruise far away from the nurse who confirmed Ebola negative to stay away from class, but the incubation period was already up. There was no risk. From what I know, the incubation period hasn't passed for this teacher and it's called being safe rather than sorry.

I bet everyone here who is siding with the nurse would be the same people bitching at the government for not doing enough if she did have Ebola and spread it to others. It seems no matter what happens, everyone just wants something to bitch about.

There should be a simple policy, if you go and treat others that have Ebola, you're a wonderful person and thank you, but after you're done, wait 21 days and then you're done. Why is that such an over-reactive view to have? It's not like I'm saying if you've been to West Africa, hell, I don't care if you've been Liberia, but if you've been treating people that YOU KNOW are infected, it should be mandatory that you remain in isolation for the incubation period.

I'll take this 1 thing at a time.

"if you found someone in your family had the flu, what would happen to them? What would you do?" I imaging what would happen to them is they would have flu symptoms and feel crappy. What would I do? I would try and make them comfortable and see if they needed anything.

"The flu is also much more widespread." I agree 100% and many people die from the flu every year but we don't force quarantine them do we?

"I'm in disbelief that people are such in a hysteria" I am too but surprised you are since you advocate putting people in quarantine who show no symptoms.

"I bet everyone here who is siding with the nurse would be the same people bitching at the government for not doing enough if she did have Ebola and spread it to others. " Apples and oranges..... She has no symptoms of having Ebola so your point is moot.

"There should be a simple policy, if you go and treat others that have Ebola, you're a wonderful person and thank you, but after you're done, wait 21 days and then you're done. " What if you were over in Africa treating people with the flu and when you came home you had no symptoms of the flu whatsoever, should you be placed in quarantine just in case? Do we force people who are not sick into quarantine because of hysteria?

Does not a mandatory quarantine for a person who is not sick equal imprisonment against their will? Isn't their something in the Constitution about that?


Plus you didn't answer my original question... Since the flu is much more contagious than Ebola should people with the flu be quarantined? How about people that have been around others with the flu but show no symptoms of having the flu themselves?

Why would anyone compare the two? Complete strawman. Not only do people have to have intimate contact with an AIDS person, we don't have health care workers coming down with it and dying as we have with ebola. Can we please stick to science?

Sticking with science is what some of us have been trying to do but others prefer hysteria.

My views of any matter are subject to change. I refuse to refute the irrefutable; I know how to do it to. I like to look at it, like someone asking a monkey if it wants to live on a planet shaped and made out of a banana.

Yes. But can that monkey use a slide rule to determine the probability of Ebola infection while texting on a two-lane roadway without shoulders? And what does that have to do with the price of bananas in Tokyo?

The fight over Ebola quarantines in the United States is already discouraging doctors, nurses and other health workers from signing up to go to Africa and battle the outbreak where help is needed most.

Would-be volunteers are worried about losing three additional weeks of work when they return to the United States, about still-evolving isolation rules and about being holed up in an unfamiliar place, aid organizations say.

They also worry about mistreatment generated by the public fear of Ebola, the organizations say.

“We have seen a big deterrence,” said Margaret Aguirre, head of global initiatives for International Medical Corps, which has about 20 Americans working in the outbreak countries. “People are worried. They don’t want to sign up.”

“Hopefully smarter minds will come to the front,”

'People Are Worried': Aid Groups See Fallout From Quarantine Debate - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/people-are-worried-aid-groups-see-fallout-quarantine-debate-n237751)

Oh the freaking irony of you claiming we are just piling on and trashing you. I simply come here periodically for ironic relief.
Sid, leave me alone. Mods - could you help? No? Or this thread just a vehicle to amuse people with personal axes to grind against other posters?

That's because there has not been very many cases of it here and strict regulations and protocols about treating the infected. My guess is the nurse who contracted it violated protocol.

No. The AIDS virus is not remotely as contagious as the ebola virus. Name a health care worker who ever came down with AIDS from treating an AIDS patient with standard universal precautions. Or even without them. Name ONE person who came down with aids from casually touching an AIDS victim. Doesn't happen.

No health care workers have died of Ebola in America.

Your point? No health care worker treating an aids patient has been infected as a result (perhaps a needle prick?) anywhere. Doesn't happen because the transmission is completely different.

"an AIDS person" - Can you be any more ignorant or insensitive?

FYI -- AIDS is not the disease, its a diagnosis/condition/effect of HIV. A person by no means has to be diagnosed with AIDS to be infectious to others. As a matter of fact, most transmissions happen long before a person with HIV is diagnosed with AIDS. Additionally, a person may live their entire life infected with HIV but never be diagnosed with AIDS.

Are you actually claiming that coming into direct contact with a person's blood, sweat, vomit, diarrhea etc. is not 'intimate contact'?

We know how Ebola is transmitted so, yes, it is absolutely not only possible but should be the expectation that healthcare workers are equipped with the tools to insure they do not become infected while treating (I'll use your verbiage) "those Ebola people."

HIV = strawman (I think not)... but, of course PQ cares little about anything that doesn't fit her agenda.

Want some science and facts - hold on to your knitting needles PQ, because here they are......

Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said; "We have to work now so this is not the world’s next AIDS."

Dr. Amesh Adalja, a representative of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has publicly stated that the Ebola Virus and HIV "are similar." ...

"to deny the similarities is to stigmatize Ebola in much the way the U.S. did with AIDS."

Both are mutating viruses, both emerged from Africa, neither has a vaccine, both are fatal if left untreated, both are believed to have originated from host animals and then progressed to using humans as hosts (possibly through contact by hunters to the original host animals). Both have an incubation/latency period where it is extremely difficult to detect them (HIV's is much longer). Neither are airborne. Both are most readily transmitted by intimate contact with an infected person's blood or other bodily fluids. Infection from either can be eliminated through very similar health protocols.

The main difference (superficially speaking) is that Ebola can be spread through additional boldly fluids that while HIV is present in, has not shown to be prevalent enough to cause an infection (urine, sweat, feces, etc.). The other significant difference is that a person with HIV is infectious to others while showing no symptoms for up to 10 years or so. A person infected with Ebola is not infectious to others until symptoms appear (usually within 21 days of infection).


To deny the similarities is the height of ignorance - which explains your stance PQ.

My brother is HIV positive although it has not blown into AIDS, thank god. Don't preach to me as I am well aware of the heartbreak and horror. I deliberately chose the phrase AIDS person because I hate to call them AIDS VICTIMS. It is a subtlety you might not grasp but is has to do with treating them as people rather than defining them by the disease. Same with ebola. Your condescending comments aren't appreciated or called for. Who are you to judge the phrase? I am not an AIDS counselor in a previous life but I don't have to be to appreciate the disease or how it devastates families and communities. I love my brother and for you to assume by a phrase that I am being ignorant or dismissive of him or other people affected by the disease is over the top. If there is any insensitivity going on, you just displayed it. If you want to start a stampede that you can get aids from vomit and the like, go for it. Make life harder for AIDS people, jeeze. Yes, you can, I suppose, get the virus that way but the community has spent decades trying to get past that fear. And whole sale quarantines have never been effective anywhere because of the way it spreads. With the millins of aids patients who have been safely cared for in hospitals and living among us, to equate the risk of contamination from ebola with AIDS is asinine.

:doh:

Your point? No health care worker treating an aids patient has been infected as a result (perhaps a needle prick?) anywhere. Doesn't happen because the transmission is completely different.

As of December 2008 = 57 instances of occupational HIV transmission to healthcare workers in the US were reported to the CDC. Another 138 cases fall under 'possible' occupational infections to healthcare providers. There is no 'perhaps a needle prick' - needle sticks ARE a primary mode of infection to healthcare workers - followed by contact with non-intact skin (which can be as simple as chapped, abraded or afflicted with dermatitis).

My brother is HIV positive although it has not blown into AIDS, thank god. Don't preach to me as I am well aware of the heartbreak and horror. I deliberately chose the phrase AIDS person because I hate to call them AIDS VICTIMS. It is a subtlety you might not grasp but is has to do with treating them as people rather than defining them by the disease. Same with ebola. Your condescending comments aren't appreciated or called for. Who are you to judge the phrase? I am not an AIDS counselor in a previous life but I don't have to be to appreciate the disease or how it devastates families and communities. I love my brother and for you to assume by a phrase that I am being ignorant or dismissive of him or other people affected by the disease is over the top. If there is any insensitivity going on, you just displayed it. If you want to start a stampede that you can get aids from vomit and the like, go for it. Make life harder for AIDS people, jeeze. Yes, you can, I suppose, get the virus that way but the community has spent decades trying to get past that fear. And whole sale quarantines have never been effective anywhere because of the way it spreads. With the millins of aids patients who have been safely cared for in hospitals and living among us, to equate the risk of contamination from ebola with AIDS is asinine.

You never stop putting your ignorance or indifference on stage do you?

How about a 'person diagnosed with AIDS' (or is that concept just too hard to grasp?)

I can judge a phrase you put out there publicly just as easily as you can judge the fine medical people who selflessly come to other's aid and place themselves at great risk - only to then be referred to as twits and dicks by you.

The [HIV+/AIDS] community has only spent "decades trying to get past that fear" because of ignorance displayed by people like yourself who promote the fear mongering in the first place. The EXACT same unjustified fear of 'catching AIDS' is what is now going on with the unjustified fear of 'catching Ebola.' Which is only furthered by the ignorance of others who scream "quarantine! quarantine!"

You ma'am are part of the problem.

You never stop putting your ignorance or indifference on stage do you?

How about a 'person diagnosed with AIDS' (or is that concept just too hard to grasp?)

I can judge a phrase you put out there publicly just as easily as you can judge the fine medical people who selflessly come to other's aid and place themselves at great risk - only to then be referred to as twits and dicks by you.

The [HIV+/AIDS] community has only spent "decades trying to get past that fear" because of ignorance displayed by people like yourself who promote the fear mongering in the first place. The EXACT same unjustified fear of 'catching AIDS' is what is now going on with the unjustified fear of 'catching Ebola.' Which is only furthered by the ignorance of others who scream "quarantine! quarantine!"

You ma'am are part of the problem.
Unbelievable. I had no idea you were so PC and willing to put form over substance. My sincere and respectful reasoning for my choice of words doesn't jive with your opinion so I become part of the problem in your eyes. You are actually lecturing the sister of an HIV positive person and calling her part of the problem because she said AIDS people instead of people with AIDS. Wow. And as for quarantine - you haven't even read what I've posted, clearly.

You simply can't bring yourself to admit that nurses gowned head to toe with an inch of skin showing are getting infected by their ebola patients and that isn't happening with AIDS patients. Why do you feel the need to personally attack me?

Unbelievable. I had no idea you were so PC and willing to put form over substance. My sincere and respectful reasoning for my choice of words doesn't jive with your opinion so I become part of the problem in your eyes. You are actually lecturing the sister of an HIV positive person and calling her part of the problem because she said AIDS people instead of people with AIDS. Wow. And as for quarantine - you haven't even read what I've posted, clearly.

You simply can't bring yourself to admit that nurses gowned head to toe with an inch of skin showing are getting infected by their ebola patients and that isn't happening with AIDS patients. Why do you feel the need to personally attack me?

As you state that someone volunteering their time in africa doesn't just give them a pass. I state to you that your brothers medical condition does not give you one either.
I am a Gay man in my 40's who survived the AIDS crisis and went to more Funerals of friends and loved ones that I care to recall. and the term AIDS PERSON is disrespectful. you can dismiss it as "wow didn't know you were so PC" if you wish but PC or not its down right disrespectful to people who are living with HIV and those who perished due to that diagnosis.
Stop playing a victim for once and admit you are WRONG WRONG WRONG on this one.
very tired of your attitude towards others and when called on it your victim mentality its grown old.. That is all I will say to you on this or any subject as the block feature I think will help in this matter a great deal.

Not to repeat myself but I will....

If you're going to play the victim card at least don't victimize others while you do it.


http://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/beating-a-dead-horse.png

*Seriously - we can't say V@ginal on this forum but PQ can call someone a dick?Just try mentioning the county of which Cordell is the seat, or the river that runs through the state from Cheyenne down to Lake Texoma...

Be thankful that we can still talk about Poor Richard's Almanack with such aggressive bowdlerizing automata in service!

Judge in Maine temporarily limits nurse's activities (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/31/maine-nurse-ebola/18232749/)


The judge, who issued the temporary order in response to a state petition, said a hearing on the matter must be held in the next three to 10 days.

The temporary order requires Hickox to:

• submit to monitoring;

• coordinate all travel with public health officials;

• avoid public places;

• maintain a 3-foot buffer from others while engaging in outdoor public activities such as jogging or biking; and

• not leave the Fort Kent community.

Hysteria and not facts at work once again.

"The order does not amount to a strict quarantine requiring her to remain inside her boyfriend's home, where she has been living since Monday, but does order her not to leave the town of Fort Kent."

Isn't this something she's already been doing? I still wonder what the legalities are of a force quarantine on a person who's not showing any signs of an illness.

Hysteria and not facts at work once again.

"The order does not amount to a strict quarantine requiring her to remain inside her boyfriend's home, where she has been living since Monday, but does order her not to leave the town of Fort Kent."

Isn't this something she's already been doing? I still wonder what the legalities are of a force quarantine on a person who's not showing any signs of an illness.


Penny this is how your insults and calls for strict and medically pointless quarantines are hurting. Fewer health care workers that might go and fight Ebola in Africa are going to do so. Who wants to be needlessly quarantined, ostracized, insulted with ugly names like dicks and twits as a reward for risking their lives to save others? This costs lives in Africa by impeeding our ability stop the spread at the source in Africa and therefore actually raises our risk here.

with such aggressive bowdlerizing automata in service!
I'm going to use that phrase some time .

Your point? No health care worker treating an aids patient has been infected as a result (perhaps a needle prick?) anywhere. Doesn't happen because the transmission is completely different.

My point was only that you stated health care workers have died from ebola and I clarified that none has. I simply thought you had wrong information. I wouldn't want anyone accusing you of exaggerating the situation.

Jn
As you state that someone volunteering their time in africa doesn't just give them a pass. I state to you that your brothers medical condition does not give you one either.
I am a Gay man in my 40's who survived the AIDS crisis and went to more Funerals of friends and loved ones that I care to recall. and the term AIDS PERSON is disrespectful. you can dismiss it as "wow didn't know you were so PC" if you wish but PC or not its down right disrespectful to people who are living with HIV and those who perished due to that diagnosis.
Stop playing a victim for once and admit you are WRONG WRONG WRONG on this one.
very tired of your attitude towards others and when called on it your victim mentality its grown old.. That is all I will say to you on this or any subject as the block feature I think will help in this matter a great deal.

No, it isn't disrespectful and the fact that you are gay and survived the aids crisis doesn't give you any right to judge me. My brother in law died of aids related complications just recently and the sorrow my family felt/feels is just as real as for anyone else. I hate that some people are trying to hijack the AIDS crisis to use it - USE IT - to make illogical arguments. If you want to look for disrespect, look there.

For you to presume that my choice of words is disrespectful and lay claim to the right to judge me simply because you are gay is outrageous. My brother and his gay friends have no problem with the term and perhaps that is because they know my heart. You don't but still think you can define me by a PC narrative of your choosing. Get over yourself. You are coming from a position of arrogance as if you have a greater claim to the pain than others. The gay community has been devastated by AIDS but every victim had straight mothers, fathers, siblings and who also mourn. Their losses may not be as numerous but they often lost their dearest soul and seeing their loved one grieve, repeatedly, is a special kind of hell. You are trying to create a wall between the gay community and everyone else in which you are somehow the maker of the rules of what constitutes love or respect. You are attacking a sister who loves her brother and doesn't want to see him stigmatized by people trying to hijack the AIDS crisis as a means to an end. Nice job.

Jn

No, it isn't disrespectful and the fact that you are gay and survived the aids crisis doesn't give you any right to judge me. My brother in law died of aids related complications just recently and the sorrow my family felt/feels is just as real as for anyone else. I hate that some people are trying to hijack the AIDS crisis to use it - USE IT - to make illogical arguments. If you want to look for disrespect, look there.

For you to presume that my choice of words is disrespectful and lay claim to the right to judge me simply because you are gay is outrageous. My brother and his gay friends have no problem with the term and perhaps that is because they know my heart. You don't but still think you can define me by a PC narrative of your choosing. Get over yourself. You are coming from a position of arrogance as if you have a greater claim to the pain than others. The gay community has been devastated by AIDS but every victim had straight mothers, fathers, siblings and who also mourn. Their losses may not be as numerous but they often lost their dearest soul and seeing their loved one grieve, repeatedly, is a special kind of hell. You are trying to create a wall between the gay community and everyone else in which you are somehow the maker of the rules of what constitutes love or respect. You are attacking a sister who loves her brother and doesn't want to see him stigmatized by people trying to hijack the AIDS crisis as a means to an end. Nice job.


No, Penny NEVER attacks anyone.

your ability to flip every scenario to make yourself a victim is really a gift. you use the same tactics you accuse everyone else of doing to make yourself a martyr somehow.. BRAVO.

Perhaps the people close to you excuse your ignorance and dismiss your improper terms because they know you.. I can understand where that may be the case and they just say "bless her heart".
I can't use my position as a gay man but you can use yours as someone who has gay relatives.. I see. .that makes perfect sense ( in your world perhaps). I am not creating any WALL do you think I am don't have Straight family and friends and know parents and siblings of friends who have passed.. HOW DARE YOU. I am not on some island of gay people i am in the real world so I don't need your education of who is affected by HIV i know very well thank you very much.
Please come back and make yourself a victim ONCE again.. we are use to it. its your best trick in the bag.

No, Penny NEVER attacks anyone.

She was defending herself as always.. remember she is the victim always.

I apologize moderaters I attempted to not make this personal.. however to use such offensive terms and then be able to defend them and insult others is over the top for me.. instead of just admitting it was poor choice of words. over and over and over and always turn it around on everyone is just beyond. never taking any responsibility.

To get back to the topic, what the hell was that scrolling across the bottom of all local channels last night? I stopped paying attention, but got the idea that this person had no contact with nobody, no nothing, really, not sure why they were freaking out over him/her. Just f-ing crazy to run that for so long on all the channels...