• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CDC responds to sick paasenger on plane from Liberia

EnigmaO01

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
23,436
Reaction score
17,822
Location
Indiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It says the sick passenger was let go for self monitoring with no apparent test done for Ebola, as it usually takes a couple of days to get the results back -- if previous cases are any indication. And since when is vomiting a symptom of other minor conditions and not Ebola?

Does this remind anyone of sending a patient home in Dallas that ended up coming back with Ebola? Why wouldn't they test for Ebola instead of just going by symtoms?

And in my opinion the fact that the daughter does not have symptoms doesn't mean squat as we know the incubation period is 20 some days.

If i was still in the medical field I would quarantine this individual and his daughter until the test came back negative.










141004153559-newark-plane-twitter-story-body.jpeg

Passenger Paul Chard tweeted a photo of emergency responders on the plane.


The possibility of a new case was knocked down later Saturday by the New Jersey Department of Health.
In a statement, it said that University Hospital "in coordination with federal, state and local public health officials evaluated two individuals who arrived" Saturday afternoon.
"The symptoms of one individual were found to be consistent with another, minor treatable condition unrelated to Ebola," the health department said. "The second individual, who was traveling with the patient, was asymptomatic."
 
Look I'm not panicing but this response has me scratching my head. And if my experience with APHIS, the plant and animal counterpart of the CDC is any indication of competence, we can expect some real dunderhead responses when snap decisions have to be made.
 
At this moment, we have to fear a mass panic more than we have to fear Ebola. One seems to be more contagious than the other.
 
At this moment, we have to fear a mass panic more than we have to fear Ebola. One seems to be more contagious than the other.

What sort of mass panic would be observed? People avoiding leaving their homes? Stocking up at the grocer? Cancelling events and gatherings? Sealing your home up in plastic.?

How far would people go to protect themselves?
 
At this moment, we have to fear a mass panic more than we have to fear Ebola. One seems to be more contagious than the other.

So we ignore testing and quarantine so we don't create a panic? That doesn't make any sense to me.
 
At this moment, we have to fear a mass panic more than we have to fear Ebola. One seems to be more contagious than the other.

People deserve facts and truth. Denying them this right on the grounds you don't want to cause panic is the nanny state way.
 
What sort of mass panic would be observed? People avoiding leaving their homes? Stocking up at the grocer? Cancelling events and gatherings? Sealing your home up in plastic.?

How far would people go to protect themselves?

I'm more concerned about what the federal government's response would be.
 
.
If i was still in the medical field I would quarantine this individual and his daughter until the test came back negative.


Unfortunately, it's a little more complicated than that. We have to go by specific guidelines in order to isolate someone.
 
Unfortunately, it's a little more complicated than that. We have to go by specific guidelines in order to isolate someone.

So quarantine and testing are the not the protocol if someone fits the parameters of the disease such as symptoms and arrival from a country that has major issues wirh the disease?

Seems to me someone made the decision NOT to do the prudent thing.
 
Look I'm not panicing but this response has me scratching my head. And if my experience with APHIS, the plant and animal counterpart of the CDC is any indication of competence, we can expect some real dunderhead responses when snap decisions have to be made.

I think people are too worried about being worried and less worried about stopping the spread of the virus.
 
Wth???? Ebola starts with flu like symptoms. This is ridiculous. What were the symptoms? Diarrhea, vomiting, bleeding out of his orifices? Must be a migraine.
 
It says the sick passenger was let go for self monitoring with no apparent test done for Ebola, as it usually takes a couple of days to get the results back -- if previous cases are any indication. And since when is vomiting a symptom of other minor conditions and not Ebola?

Does this remind anyone of sending a patient home in Dallas that ended up coming back with Ebola? Why wouldn't they test for Ebola instead of just going by symtoms?

And in my opinion the fact that the daughter does not have symptoms doesn't mean squat as we know the incubation period is 20 some days.

If i was still in the medical field I would quarantine this individual and his daughter until the test came back negative.










141004153559-newark-plane-twitter-story-body.jpeg

Passenger Paul Chard tweeted a photo of emergency responders on the plane.


The possibility of a new case was knocked down later Saturday by the New Jersey Department of Health.
In a statement, it said that University Hospital "in coordination with federal, state and local public health officials evaluated two individuals who arrived" Saturday afternoon.
"The symptoms of one individual were found to be consistent with another, minor treatable condition unrelated to Ebola," the health department said. "The second individual, who was traveling with the patient, was asymptomatic."

Vomiting?

Only Ebola causes vomiting?

Ever had too much to drink, eaten some peas that were re-frozen? Had flu?

In suggest you wiki Vomiting.....

it proves only that he had an upset stomach. If the medical team in pace looked at him and let him go, who the hell am I or anyone else to question?
 
Vomiting?

Only Ebola causes vomiting?

Ever had too much to drink, eaten some peas that were re-frozen? Had flu?

In suggest you wiki Vomiting.....

it proves only that he had an upset stomach. If the medical team in pace looked at him and let him go, who the hell am I or anyone else to question?

Did you feel that way about the idiot that sent the Liberian in Texas home with antibiotics only to have him come back in an ambulance with full blown Ebola? If you ignore the fact he may have contaminated someone else what about the fact that he is now in critical condition and may die? Time is of the essense in treating this virus and some idiot screwed up. Probably one of those worthless nurse practitioners.

I say if he's exhibiting potental symptoms of the disease and there is precedence for someone testing positive from Liberia, you could at least test him and hold him until the test comes back negative.

From my my microbiology class when I as studying to be an RN that's basic procedure 101.
 
Last edited:
Look I'm not panicing but this response has me scratching my head. And if my experience with APHIS, the plant and animal counterpart of the CDC is any indication of competence, we can expect some real dunderhead responses when snap decisions have to be made.

Isn't it always better to err on the side of safety and keep them isolated for the publics safety when it could be something like Ebola?
 
At this moment, we have to fear a mass panic more than we have to fear Ebola. One seems to be more contagious than the other.

That's what they said when they discovered AIDS. How did that work out for them?:confused:
 
What sort of mass panic would be observed? People avoiding leaving their homes? Stocking up at the grocer? Cancelling events and gatherings? Sealing your home up in plastic.?

How far would people go to protect themselves?

Until it becomes airborne, most people won't do much at all. If that happens, there will be panic and calls for the government to do something, which could be martial law. Think about what that means.
 
I'm more concerned about what the federal government's response would be.

Martial law comes to mind. Why else has the government recently been arming local police departments with military-type equipment? They've even stated its for riot control. What riots were they expecting?
 
I think people are too worried about being worried and less worried about stopping the spread of the virus.

All people can do at this point is worry about Ebola and also what the governments response will be. If we could stop the spread of the virus, we wouldn't worry.
 
What sort of mass panic would be observed? People avoiding leaving their homes? Stocking up at the grocer? Cancelling events and gatherings? Sealing your home up in plastic.?

How far would people go to protect themselves?

After stocking up...they would stay home...and stop spending their money. The economic consequences would be severe.
 
All people can do at this point is worry about Ebola and also what the governments response will be. If we could stop the spread of the virus, we wouldn't worry.

Given our lawmakers are home until the election we could be contacting them and voicing our opinions about what the government should or should not be doing.
 
Given our lawmakers are home until the election we could be contacting them and voicing our opinions about what the government should or should not be doing.

If those lawmakers think they would be immune from Ebola, I'd like to know their secret! However, this might be one time when they find they cannot exempt themselves from what everyone else might have to live with.

One other thing that bothers me is that people are still dieing in South Africa, but the people that come here for treatment get better. If there is a drug available for treatment, why aren't we sending it to help the people who live in other countries? That would stop the trend that seems inevitable at this point.
 
If those lawmakers think they would be immune from Ebola, I'd like to know their secret! However, this might be one time when they find they cannot exempt themselves from what everyone else might have to live with.

One other thing that bothers me is that people are still dieing in South Africa, but the people that come here for treatment get better. If there is a drug available for treatment, why aren't we sending it to help the people who live in other countries? That would stop the trend that seems inevitable at this point.

Interesting take on the varying attitudes between different points of entry in the US. http://www.steynonline.com/6586/ebola-yes-bagpipes-no
 
Back
Top Bottom