It's not hysteria, Mr. Hyperbole.

It's observation.

The President says Ebola won't come here.

The CDC tells us every hospital in the US is ready.

Wrong and wrong.

Observation is part of science, yes?

So, we hypothesize the Ebola risk is a problem that the government may not be able to handle. We observe the government promising, then failing. We see the CDC guidelines being changed. We see the government appointing a "czar" who is a political hack and conclude the government isn't serious. We see the government permitting travel with minimal restrictions from Ebola "hot zones" and think that seems unwise. The government says there is no risk. A doctor who is carrying the virus goes out to eat, goes bowling, and generally paints the town red under "self-watch."

Oops.

I'm not panicked. I don't think Americans are panicked. We are somewhat surprised that our government is more concerned about Ebola as a political liability than a deadly virus. Even SNL mocked the President's handling of this.

You conclude we are wrong to think the government doesn't know what it's doing.

One of us is denying science. That would be you. The rest of us are practicing it.

Get a grip.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:First, consider it is doctors and nurses who are getting this. If they know how it is communicated and are so expert in it, why are they getting sick?

Because they make mistakes, or someone else does. It's not actually that easy to be both hermetically sealed and at the same time providing medical care to an ebola patient.

So, they are making mistakes, even though their lives are potentially at risk, yet we trust that people without that training will do the right thing, etc.?

For the 300th time, I do not live in fear of Ebola. However, I do think common sense would mandate a more stringent set of restrictions than the CDC has devised.

Why do you need to respond to something I didn't say? 300 times?

I'm sorry, but I trust "common sense" a good deal less than I do epidemiologists.

A doctor gets back from West Africa, goes to a bar, goes bowling, etc. If this virus mutates, we're in a world of hurt.

A virus mutates every time it infects a new host. But it would take a great deal of change for it to be transmissible before symptoms present (because it's the symptoms of fluid discharge that are the means of transmission). He went to hospital as soon as he saw his temperature was high.

Here's bipartisanship disagreement with Obama. http://time.com/3537755/ebola-new-york-new-jersey/

Looks Like Cuomo backed off (at least somewhat) from his and Christie's initial hard-line quarantine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/27/nyreg ... -news&_r=0

fate

So, we hypothesize the Ebola risk is a problem that the government may not be able to handle

.
So far 1 person has died. 2 became infected from him and are 100% cured.
Things aren't actually out of control are they?
It isn't even as bad as the Lassa fever out break that no one in the media seems to remember.

Fate

We observe the government promising, then failing. We see the CDC guidelines being changed

.
This is a reference to the two nurses who became infected? Because Texas Health failed to train them adequately or provide 100% coverage suits? How is it the CDC's fault if Texas and the Dallas hospital failed? Moreover, if the guidelines were initially not dumbed down enough, is it a failure to revise them ? Wouldn't a failure be NOT adapting and revising when it became apparent that hospitals required spoon feeding?

Fate

We see the government appointing a "czar" who is a political hack and conclude the government isn't serious.

The nature of your political system is to put political hacks in charge of things they have no understanding of, nor training for... I give you the Congressional House Committee on Science.
And Chris Christie.

Fate

We see the government permitting travel with minimal restrictions from Ebola "hot zones" and think that seems unwise. The government says there is no risk

.
Because they listen to the advice from infectious disease specialists and epidemiologists from around the world.
How many people have been infected in the US Fate? And they were both health care workers dealing with Duncan at his most infectious.
So how have the experts been wrong in this?

Fate

A doctor who is carrying the virus goes out to eat, goes bowling, and generally paints the town red under "self-watch.

"
The reality is that there's more chance someone at the bowling alley will catch the flu or a common cold that develops into pneumonia and dies than catches ebola when the doctor in question is asymptomatic.
But no one is hysterical about the flu are they? (I got my shot at the pharmacy Thursday last...)

fate

. We are somewhat surprised that our government is more concerned about Ebola as a political liability than a deadly virus.

That's because it is more of a political liability than a genuine risk.
When the general populace is so ill served by irresponsible hysterical media, and political hacks who sense an opportunity to attack the opposition gubmint, then the political liability is real.
Even if the health threat isn't.

A few things on the science. 21 day quarantine may not be enough.http://currents.plos.org/outbreaks/arti ... ola-virus/

According to this article, 30,000 people were quarantined in Greater Toronto area during SARS epidemic.http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2003/ ... -0311.html
African countries have used quarantine by closing borders and restricting flights to keep Ebola out. I have not seen any criticism of this (they are in fact praised for this and it appears to be somewhat effective). Apparently, western countries are supposed to not quarantine because they are better equipped to handle Ebola, but it seems that if it is ok for African countries to do it (and they should) then it is ok for western countries, as well. Here is an article on large-scale quarantines.http://www.apctoolkits.com/documents/is ... antine.pdf

I would be curious to know Ricky's basis for the claim that infectious disease specialists from all over the world say a travel ban would be bad. American doctors do not seem to agree and they are better educated than the average person and presumably know more about Ebola. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 14441.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010 ... se_366.xml

The poll above seems to indicate a level of hysteria, that Fate doesn't acknowledge.

freeman

30,000 people were quarantined in Greater Toronto area during SARS

SARS spreads through droplet transfer from coughing or sneezing. The actual number of ordered "quarantines" (actually orders to isolate), were only 22 people were actually ordered to isolate themselves by the Board of health. The rest were "voluntary". Seniors residences were a lot of them. Its fairly standard for Seniors Residences in Toronto to restrict visiting to essential whenever they have a flu outbreak.

freeman

Here is an article on large-scale quarantine

From your article: "for clarity in this article, this action is termed large scale quarantine to differentiate it from incidents of exposure by only a few persons".
Isn't the exposure in the US, only a few persons?
And from the article you linked on SARS.

Quarantine achieves 2 goals. First, it stops the chain of transmission because it is less possible to infect others if one is not in social circulation. Second, it allows the individuals under surveillance to be identified and directed toward appropriate care if they become symptomatic. This is more important in diseases where there is presymptomatic shedding of virus. Isolation, on the other hand, is keeping those who have symptoms from circulation in general populations.

Its not important to keep people quarantined who do not have the ability to spread the disease...
For instance not one of Michael Duncans familiy got Ebola even though they were in close proximity to him when he was symptomatic.
This is not an easy disease to catch in a modern city, with sanitation.

As for your last link. This is SERMO.
https://www.sermo.com/

Face book for doctors.
Do you really think a poll that could be made up largely of dermatologists should have the kind of weight that the expressed written opinions of leading specialists in the infectious disease field offer?

36,000 people will die of the flu this year in the US. Should there be a quarantine to avoid this?

I don 't care what kind of doctor they are--these are very well- informed and educated people . Becoming a doctor in the US is exceptionally difficult. They can read up on the science just as much as any infectious disease expert. For one thing, the data is not that extensive.
You keep quoting things like deaths from the flu like they are meaningful . Old people die from a lot of things, and flu can be one of them. We get older, our immune systems get weaker, and we get susceptible to all sorts of things. But reality is we are going to die and the biggest concern is children or young adults having their life cut short. Ebola is scary because it can kill people in the prime of their life. This is a major fact that you are not assimilating. Not all deaths are the same--a person dying when they are 18 is a lot more tragic than a person dying at 90. If you look at those flu figures probably 35,000 and change are for people over 65.
Your claims about SARS are vague and unsubstantiated. It seems to me that Canadian authorities were willing to quarantine people who were not directly exposed to SARS (30,000), but if you have something to support what appears to be recollection I will certainly take a look at it.

freeman3

Your claims about SARS are vague and unsubstantiated

I used your source.

It seems to me that Canadian authorities were willing to quarantine people who were not directly exposed to SARS (30,000), but if you have something to support what appears to be recollection

The article you quoted shows that only 22 people were "quarantiened" by the health board.
The other 29,978 were "voluntary".
Don't you read the stuff you quote for support?

freeman3

I don 't care what kind of doctor they are--these are very well- informed and educated people

I'm sure the dermotolgists are well informed about acne and boils... Just not ebola.
At least not as much as infectious disease specialists.... Or do you disagree with this second point? That somehow their knowledge IS equivalent? That somehow their opinion is equal?
I suspect that when you need advice on your heart you;ll go to a cardiologist and not an orthopedic surgeon, however.

freeman3

Becoming a doctor in the US is exceptionally difficult. They can read up on the science just as much as any infectious disease expert

They can read up. But do they?
How do you know anyone who answered the "online poll" on Sermo.com had read anything? Maybe, like most peoplee, they are informed by what they've read online or seen on Fox News?
You know nothing about who answered the poll, including, if they were even doctors.

freeman3

You keep quoting things like deaths from the flu like they are meaningful

.

36,000 deaths from flu, is indeed meaningful.
I can't believe you diminish the deaths of 36,000 people with "Well, they were old".

The amazing thing about this, is that flu vaccinations are taken by 46% of the population.
If there was a rationale response to the threat that flu presents, and a reasonable knowledge of the importance of achieving herd immunity, the rate would be over 90%.And 36,000 people wouldn't die. even the old ones..

Now, if there were a widely available ebola vaccine, I'll bet the uptake would be enormous, even thought the actual risk is vanishingly small.
Rationality does not exist.

Oh come on. You tried to claim that the quarantines were mostly for senior homes. Are you claiming that was from article, too?
You throw out infectious disease expert as if they had some specialized knowledge that is beyond the the knowledge of anyone else. What is so complex about the transmission of Ebola? The knowledge is not complex or specialized, it's the level of certainty that is the issue , particularly with a disease that is that recent. You trot that these unnamed experts to support your position. The one "expert" you cited put forth completely unscientific claims. Being scientific isn't accepting at face value some infectious disease expert's opinion that has no factual support; it's looking at the scientific data.

What I can't believe is your smug attitude that the worst infectious disease in a century is nothing to worry about. Your ego at being so smart about Ebola, that it carries little risk, is more important than anything else. Every single one of your posts has been to minimize the risk. You have not sought any alternative source; you simply look for something to support your position, without once considering that our knowledge of Ebola is not that extensive or that we have not had that kind of infectious out break in the recent past. I am not still not that worried about Ebola but uncertainties about the virus and its extreme lethality warrant treating it with more caution than you are doing

freeman3 wrote:I don 't care what kind of doctor they are--these are very well- informed and educated people . Becoming a doctor in the US is exceptionally difficult.

Compared to becoming a doctor anywhere else?

Architecture is hard to qualify in, as is veterinary science, and PhD astrophysics. I'd still ignore their gossip sites when looking for expertise.

Yes, medical doctors are well educated, but they tend to specialise, and in order to be good they have to concentrate on their specialty rather than looking elsewhere. And general practitioners specialise in their own way - on primary care rather than acute care.

a person dying when they are 18 is a lot more tragic than a person dying at 90.

Possibly. Any death is a tragedy, though.

4 years college, 4 years medical school, 1 year internship, 3 years residency to become a dermatologist , the specialty that Ricky made fun of. http://work.chron.com/educational-requi ... -8497.html.
It takes 14 years to be a cardiologist.
Yeah I expect that is a bit more than most other countries.
As for gossip, well , they are doctors. And they are responding to a poll. It's not expertise being asked for but opinions from doctors on Ebola. But I admit it is not very scientific , but it provides some glimpse of doctors' state of mind in the US.
An infectious disease doctor is a specialist in the diagnosis and treatment of infectious disease. I don 't think that is the right expert here. An epidemiologist who works in a public health department would be the more appropriate expert on controlling outbreaks. The CDC actually has a fair summary of the science behind transmission on their web site (for health professionals though, not the one for the general public)

Really it is only possible that a death at age 18 is worse than dying at age 90? Ok...I think we have to disagree on that one. I mean, should we quarantine people with the flu every year because a portion of the public is particularly susceptible? We do what is reasonable and try to get which is the right flu vaccine. Should we do something more?

What I can't believe is your smug attitude that the worst infectious disease in a century is nothing to worry about. Your ego at being so smart about Ebola, that it carries little risk, is more important than anything else. Every single one of your posts has been to minimize the risk. You have not sought any alternative source; you simply look for something to support your position, without once considering that our knowledge of Ebola is not that extensive or that we have not had that kind of infectious out break in the recent past. I am not still not that worried about Ebola but uncertainties about the virus and its extreme lethality warrant treating it with more caution than you are doing

So how do you make ebola to be the worst infectious disease in a century ? I can only assume you're basing that solely on the mortality rate because by any other measure it's really not a big deal. Even in Liberia and Sierra Leone the number of people who die every year from malaria completely swamps the relatively small number of ebola deaths.

Liberian president talks of lost generation--has that happened with malaria ?

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL ... 9?irpc=932

But,yeah, the mortality rate is the main thing.