Seeing how she acts, I don't have confidence that if she had a fever she would report it right away....
What?? Where are you getting this idea from?
Honestly, of all the shit that is out there, this idea that people would just power through their fever because they are selfish is perhaps the most insane shit.
To the extent people think Kaci Hickox is a bad spokesperson for the cause, I would say that people who say the above are equally poor (or worse) advocates for their side, the quarantine, because such a statement is so ignorant and illogical that anything else that follows is hard to take seriously.
I think she is right. I also think she is losing the PR war and coming across as self-centered (NOT SAYING SHE IS) and perhaps she should have hired an Olivia Pope PR firm as well as a lawyer. Again, team nurse, but she isn't helping the public hysteria, which she would better accomplish by obeying the quarantine while pleading her case and doing online interviews, if she cared about that particular issue, which she isn't required to do, of course. AGAIN she shouldn't HAVE TO, but I personally would love it if she took this opportunity to educate the public without inflaming the crazies.
Yeah, I totally would have released a statement. On it's face, she just looks like she's playing nanny nanny boo boo because she's pissed at Chris Christie.
Seeing how she acts, I don't have confidence that if she had a fever she would report it right away....
What exactly about her behavior suggests that she herself wants to die of Ebola?
This makes absolutely NO sense. From what we have seen of the cases in the US, those people with Ebola who got good medical treatment early were more likely to survive the disease. So far the only person who has died is Duncan and he was pretty advanced in the disease process before he was actually admitted to the hospital.
I think she is right. I also think she is losing the PR war and coming across as self-centered (NOT SAYING SHE IS) and perhaps she should have hired an Olivia Pope PR firm as well as a lawyer. Again, team nurse, but she isn't helping the public hysteria, which she would better accomplish by obeying the quarantine while pleading her case and doing online interviews, if she cared about that particular issue, which she isn't required to do, of course. AGAIN she shouldn't HAVE TO, but I personally would love it if she took this opportunity to educate the public without inflaming the crazies.
I disagree. I think it feeds into the hysteria for her to essentially say "yeah, maybe I should be treated like a leper, even though SCIENCE says theres no chance I'm contagious." She wants the public to know and understand the actual facts. I think the analogy to the anti-vaxxers is apt.
I disagree. I think it feeds into the hysteria for her to essentially say "yeah, maybe I should be treated like a leper, even though SCIENCE says theres no chance I'm contagious." She wants the public to know and understand the actual facts. I think the analogy to the anti-vaxxers is apt.
I don't think that's what incogneato is saying. I read it as her thinking Hickox should release a statement on why she's decided against following the quarantine and why the quarantine as mandated doesn't reflect the reality of her risk or the science behind how Ebola works.
Instead, she's basically said, yeah, that's stupid, not doing it without much else.
I disagree. I think it feeds into the hysteria for her to essentially say "yeah, maybe I should be treated like a leper, even though SCIENCE says theres no chance I'm contagious." She wants the public to know and understand the actual facts. I think the analogy to the anti-vaxxers is apt.
I don't think that's what incogneato is saying. I read it as her thinking Hickox should release a statement on why she's decided against following the quarantine and why the quarantine as mandated doesn't reflect the reality of her risk or the science behind how Ebola works.
Instead, she's basically said, yeah, that's stupid, not doing it without much else.
Listen, I watch CNN all.day.long (daytime TV is really bad. DH teases me about it). I've heard Hickox and her lawyer both say multiple times in various interviews over the last four days exactly what's bolded above. Insofar as that message is not getting out, that's not on her.
This threads just about dead, but do you think someone whose been exposed to the disease not wearing PPE should have different monitoring/quarantine as others?
This threads just about dead, but do you think someone whose been exposed to the disease not wearing PPE should have different monitoring/quarantine as others?
I've been converted. At first I was like oh holy hell NO woman. But the more and more I’ve read, there is no real reason to quarantine her. Now, if she’s saying fuck all the other protocol such as self-temping twice a day, well I’d be pissed again.
Also, how many health care workers are coming from W. Africa into the US each week? Surely there are plenty others that aren’t being quarantined?
I've changed my mind back and forth several times on this.
Yesterday I switched back to pro-quarantine when I learned that not everyone develops a temp before getting sick, that some people get symptoms really, really quickly, and that there are people who don't know how they got the virus.
I'm thinking of the NBC photographer from Providence. He can't explain how he got it because he doesn't believe any fluids touched him. He was self monitoring but said he was fine one moment and sick the next. I think of that doctor who rode a few different subway lines and then got sick...what if he was one of those who started throwing up before they developed a fever? Or what if he got a fever in Brooklyn and took the train home but didn't make it before he was fully sick?
I reserve the right to change my mind again, but I'm not sure we really know enough to say that there's only one way to transmit the disease, always, and that there's always enough of a warning to get a patient into quarantine.
It goes without saying that I think the Maine nurse should have been treated better by New Jersey, and she should have been allowed to serve her quarantine at home. I'm not comfortable with forced quarantine of medical professionals but I'm also not comfortable with declaring them risk free to the public unless they have a temp. it's a dilemma.
I've been converted. At first I was like oh holy hell NO woman. But the more and more I’ve read, there is no real reason to quarantine her. Now, if she’s saying fuck all the other protocol such as self-temping twice a day, well I’d be pissed again.
Also, how many health care workers are coming from W. Africa into the US each week? Surely there are plenty others that aren’t being quarantined?
I've changed my mind back and forth several times on this.
Yesterday I switched back to pro-quarantine when I learned that not everyone develops a temp before getting sick, that some people get symptoms really, really quickly, and that there are people who don't know how they got the virus.
I'm thinking of the NBC photographer from Providence. He can't explain how he got it because he doesn't believe any fluids touched him. He was self monitoring but said he was fine one moment and sick the next. I think of that doctor who rode a few different subway lines and then got sick...what if he was one of those who started throwing up before they developed a fever? Or what if he got a fever in Brooklyn and took the train home but didn't make it before he was fully sick?
I reserve the right to change my mind again, but I'm not sure we really know enough to say that there's only one way to transmit the disease, always, and that there's always enough of a warning to get a patient into quarantine.
It goes without saying that I think the Maine nurse should have been treated better by New Jersey, and she should have been allowed to serve her quarantine at home. I'm not comfortable with forced quarantine of medical professionals but I'm also not comfortable with declaring them risk free to the public unless they have a temp. it's a dilemma.
The fact that a number of people don't show a temperature is a good one, and along with the fact that there's still a lot we don't know, it definitely nudges me a little closer to the quarantine side of things.
That said, I'm still anti-quarentine based on what we know now. Most evidence suggests that it is harder to transmit than your average contagious disease (none of the first patient's family caught it, for example).
Quarentines and increased restrictions on movement will make health care workers less willing to go to West Africa to control the outbreak. Not everyone will get paid to be a prisoner in their home, and many may have a lot of other reasons why such a restriction is impractical. Fewer health care workers there means the outbreak there will get worse, and we are at increased risk of more ebola cases coming here or anywhere, while losing the benefit of the added research on the disease.
Controlling it in West Africa should be our #1 priority. We wouldn't have any ebola here today if the US had made this a priority decades ago. Control it there, and it's controlled here. I don't see how a policy that creates disincentives for people to control it there is going to keep Americans safe from the disease, because so far, ignoring it hasn't really worked.
We know that vomit carries a high viral load. So if the remote chance that you've got someone that contracted it, doesn't show a fever, vomits, and does so in public, those nearby can self-identify and get monitoring. So I'll be honest: I'm willing to take the very, very tiny risk that a couple bus passengers get ebola in exchange for preventing perhaps thousand and thousands more cases worldwide, including many, many more in this country.
If someone wants to explain to me why they believe the quarantine will not impact relief efforts in West Africa, or why diminished relief there will not translate into increased cases here, I'm all ears.
That said, as more information about the disease is learned, I think there's a middle ground between complete quarantine and nothing. I think something reasonable might be daily monitoring, and some reasonable limitations on where they go in public that could be handled on a case by case basis. Certainly their are arguments for, say avoiding public transportation, or why a teacher exposed to ebola should have to stay home, but on the other hand, someone who drives themselves back and forth to an office of four people who do not object to his presence should be able to go to work. Bike rides in rural areas should be fine. Bike rides on congested urban streets where you've got a higher risk of an accident and blood getting on other people is probably not a great idea. People who had exposure to a late stage of the disease and/or without protective gear might get different restrictions than people who were exposed while wearing proper gear, etc.