RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries?


US airports should have closed airports from Ebola ravaged countries.
  29% (13)
The US should immediately close airports from Ebola ravished countries
  38% (17)
We should never close airports from any country.
  11% (5)
What the hell is going to happen next in this country?
  4% (2)
I could care less, until the US has at least 100 cases of Ebola
  6% (3)
I am not worried, I will never get Ebola.
  4% (2)
I am worried, and I have no idea what I should do.
  4% (2)


Total Votes : 44
(last vote on : 11/4/2014 8:15:41 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message


Greta75 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/13/2014 9:08:36 PM)

They will have simply have to spend resources tracking people closely who returned or came from Ebola outbreak countries.
Perhaps a compulsory medical upon return. And basically education, telling them within the next 3 weeks, they should keep a diary of who they come in contact with and what they have been up to, just incase, they got it.
Troublesome! But it's prevention.

Ebola symptoms are so hard to tell too, it's all normal stuffs like diarrhea, vomiting, fever, seems like all common symptoms of food poisoning if one travelled to less pristine countries.




Marini -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/13/2014 9:17:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

They will have simply have to spend resources tracking people closely who returned or came from Ebola outbreak countries.
Perhaps a compulsory medical upon return. And basically education, telling them within the next 3 weeks, they should keep a diary of who they come in contact with and what they have been up to, just incase, they got it.
Troublesome! But it's prevention.

Ebola symptoms are so hard to tell too, it's all normal stuffs like diarrhea, vomiting, fever, seems like all common symptoms of food poisoning if one travelled to less pristine countries.



At the very least, we can't sit here, and say we don't NEED to take extra measures to attempt to keep/or at least limit this disease from invading the US.

I would rather see measures taken sooner than later.
Mandatory medicals! I can just imagine that.




Greta75 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/13/2014 9:20:20 PM)

Hehe, my country's ebola prevention advice is very funny. That if anybody travel to ebola countries, just carry alcohol disinfectant, as ebola virus dies easily from alcohol contact, so just keep rubbing your hands with disinfectant and washing it as a prevention.

If they die from alcohol, so sad you can't just drink alcohol to heal yourself.




Sanity -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/13/2014 10:06:00 PM)


A lot of hand washing / hand sterilizing couldn't hurt though, realistically




Greta75 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 5:10:00 AM)

I just read that the first ebola patient in the US was cured! So they do have the vaccine! And are giving it to the nurse!

If there is a cure, then everything is fine! No worries now!

Time to produce truckloads of it and ship it to Africa!




PeonForHer -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 5:24:26 AM)

Apparently they have various drugs that *sometimes* work. However, these drugs take months to make.




Greta75 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 5:33:39 AM)

So they say the only reason why the second ebola patient died was because his blood type didn't match with the first ebola patient. It looks like first ebola patient's blood is the cure or something. But as long as something is working, they can re-create it into medication, so it's all good!

Man every Ebola patient is gonna be out for his blood!




ChrchofDrk -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 7:00:08 AM)

Just because you catch ebola doesn't mean you're gonna die. It has a high kill rate (50%). But it's not always deadly. For comparison the kill rate of the flu is estimated to be about 8.5%

After reading all the posts in this thread. I've just one thing to ask. Paranoid much?




BitYakin -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 7:26:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

So they say the only reason why the second ebola patient died was because his blood type didn't match with the first ebola patient. It looks like first ebola patient's blood is the cure or something. But as long as something is working, they can re-create it into medication, so it's all good!

Man every Ebola patient is gonna be out for his blood!


I don't know where you are getting this disinformation

the first ebola patient died last Wed, there is NO VACCINE or CURE, and is fatal aprox 50% of the time

they are transfusing the nurse with blood from a doctor who survived ebola in the HOPES his blood will produce a resistance to ebola in the nurse

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/12/health/ebola/index.html

A nurse who had worn protective gear during her "extensive contact" at a Dallas hospital with an Ebola patient who died tested positive during a preliminary blood test, officials said Sunday.

The nurse is in stable condition, Texas Health Resources chief clinical officer Dan Varga said. Duncan, the first person to be diagnosed with Ebola in the United States, died Wednesday.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/13/ebola-nurse-who/17182599/

By evening, she had received a transfusion of plasma from Kent Brantly, a Texas physician who survived the virus, according to her pastor and the nonprofit medical mission group Samaritan's Purse, Associated Press reported.

Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Monday that Pham was "clinically stable."




Greta75 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 7:43:52 AM)

"the first American to return to the U.S. from Liberia to be treated for Ebola"

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/doctor-gives-blood-ebola-infected-dallas-nurse-050231595.html

I might have got stuffs mix up.

I thought Brantly was the first American Ebola Patient, and Duncan was the second patient.

But Duncan is apparently the first foreigner patient.

Which still makes Brantly the first Ebola case in the US isn't it? Since he healed and his blood was suppose to help Duncan, but wasn't the right blood type?




MariaB -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 7:45:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChrchofDrk

Just because you catch ebola doesn't mean you're gonna die. It has a high kill rate (50%). But it's not always deadly. For comparison the kill rate of the flu is estimated to be about 8.5%

After reading all the posts in this thread. I've just one thing to ask. Paranoid much?


I think we can blame a lot of that on media frenzy.

I read something the other day that was quite funny. Can't find it now but here is what I remember.

Sensible rules when travelling by aircraft.

Rule 1. Don't have sex with random people on planes and don't deep kiss a stranger on a plane that looks like he may have a temperature.

Rule 2. Always ask the person sitting next to you where they are from. If they aren't from Liberia, Guinea, or Sierra Leone, don't forget to ask them if they are a health care worker.

Rule 3. Don't be tempted to drink the sweat of the person sitting next to you; no matter how thirsty you are. Thirst can of course be one of the first symptoms of Ebola. Go and lock yourself in the lavatory NOW.

Rule 4. Don't rub your neighbours sweat into an open wound and don't rub your fingers in his open wound and then lick them.

Rule 5. If someone sneezes don't try and catch the droplets with an open mouth. People see this behaviour as quite rude and annoying.

Apart from that, run to your bunkers, lock yourself in with plenty of supplies and wait for the storm to pass.




Greta75 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 7:48:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChrchofDrk
After reading all the posts in this thread. I've just one thing to ask. Paranoid much?

Of course! Who wants to get Ebola and risk 50%? Not me!




Sanity -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 10:30:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChrchofDrk
After reading all the posts in this thread. I've just one thing to ask. Paranoid much?

Of course! Who wants to get Ebola and risk 50%? Not me!



The Ebola apocalypse is upon us

Come with me if you want to live




mnottertail -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 11:19:04 AM)

It wouldnt be much of a life with you. Most of those in their right mind will chose the Ebola thing.




Sanity -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 12:08:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

It wouldnt be much of a life with you. Most of those in their right mind will chose the Ebola thing.



...yet, you dedicate YOUR life, to living in my shadow




Moderator3 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 12:16:07 PM)

Please return to the topic of the thread. You have many other threads in which to rip others apart.

Thank you




PeonForHer -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 12:17:06 PM)

quote:

I read something the other day that was quite funny. [Etc.]


Damnit. See, that doesn't mesh well with the experience of at least one medic. Touch the armrest that's just been rested on by the sweating hand of an ebola sufferer on the plane then inadvertently rub your eyes - you can get it. Or so it seems.

One fundamental problem we have right now is that the authorities want us to take ebola seriously in order to legitimise their efforts against it - while they also want us to stay calm. To add to the dilemma we have incomplete knowledge about the virus and how it acts.




ResidentSadist -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 12:41:36 PM)

My friend in California saw the news on TV about the Ebola Scare At SoCal Airport last night. She dreamed everyone at work got Ebola. She takes a bus to work and said it made her nervous to be sitting with all those people. She was a little high strung by the time she got to work where she discovered 4 people were out sick . . . she freaked out! I previously wasn't concerned or following any news about Ebola until I empathized with her concerns saying they were valid. I recalled to her the time the flu spread through my company. It hospitalized my VP (10 days) and his wife (7 days), infected all 8 employees and 4 sub contractors, me and my wife, resulting in the unmanned business shutting down from late December all the way through January until February 1st.

With that reminder of my own brush with flu contagion and the fact my slave works in a hospital, I decided to look into the current Ebola outbreak. I feel sorry for medical staff because treating Ebola patients is a deadly job. More than 233 doctors and nurses have caught Ebola and died in Africa this year. In Spain, Maria Teresa Romero Ramos wore a protective “space suit” on the two occasions she came close to an Ebola patient in a Madrid hospital, but she inadvertently touched her cheek with her gloved hand while removing the suit. Now she has Ebola and is clinging to life.

So here I am in a thread where some replies are joking about germaphobes and other replies propose impractical quarantines. I think the OP asks a valid question about closing borders, it's the right response. Liberia and Sierra Leone already have closed borders, but Guinea had only closed its borders to neighboring West Africans. Guinea now has over a thousand cases. Our response is important and in April, if WHO had not downplayed the Ebola concern at the Geneva conference, things might be a lot different right now. They certainaly changed their stance but it was too late. I found a nice summary timeline of what went wrong (ref - Huffington).
~~~~~~~~~~~~
April 1, 2014 - Outbreak Or Epidemic: What's In A Name? - Wary to call the Ebola outbreak "an epidemic," World Health Organization (WHO) spokesman Gregory Hartl plays it down at a news conference in Geneva, saying, "Ebola already causes enough concern, and we need to be very careful about how we characterize something which is up until now an outbreak with sporadic cases."

June 4, 2014 - Doctors Without Borders Warns Ebola Is "Not At All Under Control" - After explaining the unprecedented geographical spread of the disease, Bart Janssens, the director of operations for Doctors Without Borders, tells reporters in Dakar that despite assumptions to the contrary, "the epidemic is not at all under control."

June 20, 2014 - The Consequences Of Not Acting - Janssens tells The Idependent, “There needs to be a real political commitment that this is a very big emergency. Otherwise, it will continue to spread, and for sure it will spread to more countries.”

June 23, 2014 - A Call For Help And Hands - In a joint press release from Doctors Without Borders headquarters in Brussels and New York, the organization says that "bringing the spreading Ebola epidemic under control in West Africa will require a massive deployment of resources by regional governments and aid agencies." It continues by warning that the organization had "reached the limit" of what it could do to fight Ebola on its own.

July 17, 2014 - Budget Cuts Mean World Health Organization (WHO) Can't Handle Ebola - "The situation in West Africa should be a wake-up call to recognize that this weakening of this institution on which we all depend is not in anybody's interest," said Scott Dowell, the director of disease detection and emergency response at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in a Washington, D.C., briefing. "In my view, there's no way that WHO can respond in a way that we need it to."

August 8, 2014 - WHO Changes Tone, Says Ebola Is 'International Health Emergency' - "A coordinated international response is deemed essential to stop and reverse the international spread of Ebola," WHO says. Doctors Without Borders says that the statement is a start, but it needs to translate into action, adding that "lives are being lost because the response is too slow."

August 15, 2014 - Affected Nations And Doctors Without Borders Say Efforts By WHO Are Not Enough - In a press conference, Sierra Leone President Ernest Bai Koroma urges WHO to "increase their responsiveness." Sierra Leone Information Minister Lewis Brown adds in an interview with Reuters, "The reaction quite frankly is not where we would want it to be to give any serious level of comfort."

August 19, 2014 - World Leaders "Fail To Step In" - "Globally, the response of the international community is almost zero. Leaders in the west are talking about their own safety and doing things like closing airlines – and not helping anyone else," Doctors Without Borders Operations Director Brice de la Vigne says in an interview with The Guardian. "The solution is not that complicated but we need to have political will to do so."

August 23, 2014 - Lack Of Fundraising - "One reason for the tepid philanthropic response to the Ebola outbreak is that large aid agencies like the American Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders have decided against creating dedicated donation pages for their Ebola responses, partly due to a lack of interest from people outside Africa," writes Gillian Mohney, reporting for ABC News.

August 27, 2014 - Time Is Of The Esssence - "It is simply unacceptable that, five months after the declaration of this Ebola outbreak, serious discussions are only starting now about international leadership and coordination," Doctors Without Borders Director Of Operations Brice de le Vingne tells USA Today.

September 16, 2014 - CDC Testimony Admits We Could Have Done More - “We must do more, and do it quickly, to strengthen global health security around the world, because we are all connected," says Beth Bell, the director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDC, in testimony before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. "If we do not act to stop Ebola, we could be dealing with it for years to come. If even modest investments had been made to build a public health infrastructure in West Africa previously, the current Ebola epidemic could have been detected earlier, and it could have been identified and contained."

September 30, 2014 - First Case Of Ebola In The United States - The CDC confirms the first diagnosis of Ebola in the United States.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
... and we now have our second case. We are euthanizing the patient's dog and screening people for fevers in our airports. Plains with sick passengers are being met with emergency response crews and being isolated upon landing. The plain that landed at LAX airport yesterday had a passenger that was recently in Africa vomit on the flight. It scared the hell outta' the other 142 passengers.

As others pointed out, closing off certain countries can and would be circumvented by travels that can afford to make two hops to get to the USA. Quarantine is impractical because of the huge numbers. It's the affect countries that need their borders closed. As shown in the timeline, not taking proper action hasn't worked out well has it? I am all for regulation, but where do you put the line for closing off the country?

>0
>1
>10
>100
>1000

If we draw the line at greater than 1, the USA would have closed borders right now. Would you consider Spain an Ebola risk country with only 1 case? Why is it that when CDC and others in the medical community talk about Ebola they mention the lower death counts instead of the full case load?

Current Cases (ref - BBC)

3,929----LIBERIA
2,246----SIERRA LEONE
1,199-----GUINEA
70-----DRC
20-----NIGERIA
2-----USA
1-----SENEGAL
1-----SPAIN

Well, that's how I spent my long lunch hour today and what I have learned about Ebola so far. Now I am a gremaphobe too. If Ebola hits Florida, don't be surprised if I buy some bio hazard suits and start hosing my slave off in the driveway when she comes home from the hospital.

[:)]




Moderator3 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 2:13:10 PM)

Let me remind you all that the Feisty sections may have less moderation, but they still have some moderation. After a moderator request on a thread, we do expect that you all will work with us.

http://www.collarchat.com/m_4713810/tm.htm

A number of posts have been removed for being off topic after a moderator warning.

We should be able to have some discussion within the Feisty section without personal word wars taking over and moving from thread to thread, which can move into harassment. Please remain on topic.




Kaliko -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/14/2014 2:22:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist


As others pointed out, closing off certain countries can and would be circumvented by travels that can afford to make two hops to get to the USA. Quarantine is impractical because of the huge numbers. It's the affect countries that need their borders closed. As shown in the timeline, not taking proper action hasn't worked out well has it? I am all for regulation, but where do you put the line for closing off the country?



But this is what I find so frustrating. Why does it matter how many hops someone takes to get to the USA? If their passport activity shows that they've been in one of the affected countries in the last 21 days, then deny entry. Revoke their passport rights so they're stopped before they ever get on the plane. And if they do make it on, do another passport check of everybody as they get off the plane and quarantine anybody who slipped through the first round. How is this any more difficult than scanning everyone's temperature? And surely it's less expensive than caring for Ebola patients in the U.S.

I feel like everyone (not here - out there) is talking over and around the simple act of checking passports. Not stopping flights. Not denying aid. Only revoking passport entry. And yes, there may be the rare person that gets through without "Liberia" stamped on their passport, but you can't tell me the chances aren't much, much smaller if we at least take some action.




Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125