Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
One Nation, Under Lockdown…
Lockdowns, bans, “zero tolerance” and the like have become everyday events for citizens of these United States. When it comes to risk, the heavy hand of government, by default, swings into action with maximal coercion. This has become the rule; ordinary. Yesterday, we learned from the CDC that a citizen exposed to Ebola in the US — the latest nurse infected — “should not have flown” according to Dr. Tom Friedan of CDC. Although she displayed no symptoms at the time, the CDC has asked all passengers to contact them. This is because, although the risk of infection from those without symptoms is low, it is not zero, especially in an enclosed space with limited air exchange and close contact. It is well known that for most viral diseases, viral particles are shed by infected asymptomatic individuals — albeit in small amounts compared to those with symptoms. Transmission is unlikely, but not at all impossible. None of this applies, in the eyes of the Obama Administration, to passengers departing from affected areas of Africa en route to the US.
I cannot help but note the glaring differences in leftist policy regarding prevention of this highly lethal disease when compared to other favorite causes. Consider progressive attitude toward guns, for example. They consider their possession to be a health care issue. Their answer is first and foremost to ban them outright.
Odd, isn’t it, that we could fairly easily ban entry of Ebola into the United States and avoid all the death, hardship, confusion and chaos that will inevitably follow the arrival of numerous infected individuals who will come here to receive better (and free – because the enormous costs will be absorbed by taxpayers) care? Banning entry is not an option, we are told. It would somehow make the spread in Africa worse since it would supposedly prevent sending aid. The wizards making policy have apparently never heard of one-way or charter flights.
So, rather than a ban, zero tolerance, or lockdowns enforced against those who wish to come here from high-risk areas, better to inflict such measures on citizens who are so well-trained and compliant as to be inured to them. Why let this crisis go to waste, even if it could be prevented by the usual, simple, public health measure: isolation at the source.
Those sworn to protect this nation clearly have some other agenda.
Published in General
It does seem odd that this government is more eager to regulate the activities of those to whom the Constitution does apply (US citizens within the borders of the country) than it is to restrict the activities of those to whom the Constitution does not apply (non-citizens outside of America’s borders).
+1
I dunno. Given this government, it makes perfect sense to me. Not that it is a good thing, though. Just that it is as predictable as carrion attracting a buzzard.
Seawriter
Civ,
Boy are you right. Ebola and ISIS are the two cute cuddly killers who just need a hug. Gosh, of course, we should “engage” with them. I’m just sure it will all be just fine.
Those darn bitter clingers. You know the ones that won’t let go of their guns or bibles. They are the real threat. Sure most of them are good citizens who help their communities and pay their taxes. Underneath they are full of hate and are just waiting to make rich white left wingers feel really bad about themselves.
Why sure of course it’s all about Isalmaphobia and now it’s about Ebolaphobia. Wow, if not for the internet showing all the dead bodies nobody would care anyway. Darn internet, it’s not like the good old days when Dan Rather could manufacture the news and it would stick.
Boy being a cheap left wing ideologue just isn’t what it used to be.
Regards,
Jim
Well, bugger. 2.0 isn’t letting me put a link behind my correction. Here it is in all it’s nasty raw-html glory (which you may have to cut and paste to use): http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/10/15/ebola-patient-traveled-day-before-diagnosis/
Anyway, fixed it for you.
Source, pertaining to Ebola?
Thanks Kelly. It really makes little difference, as the lines of transmissibility are not as hard and fast as the retail information suggests. The CDC knows about viral shed prior to frank symptoms. That is why they said she should not have traveled on public conveyance. As well, if those exposed should not engage in air travel domestically, that principle applies a fortiori to those who would most want to come here from areas in Africa for treatment – knowing they were exposed. Multiply Dallas (whose extent we do not yet know) by 50 or 100 or more and life will never be the same in this country.
Hey, since we’re international, what are the odds that you’ll be CoC’d for using the word “bugger?” (grin)
@Mike H. I don’t have a reference as to ebola, specifically. The fact of shedding prior to symptoms has long been known to be true of viral diseases, generally. I would not like to rely on the notion that ebola is an exception to the general rule. In any case, the CDC clearly takes this to be the case, as they say that those known to be exposed – not only those who are symptomatic – should not travel by plane. At the retail information level, they want to limit the fear factor by making the statement: “no transmission prior to symptoms.” While transmission is far less likely since fewer viral particles are shed before frank symptoms are evident, it is not the certainty the statement implies.
Over what sort of time period? Per year?
“Multiplying Dallas by 50” would mean 100 people with the virus and 50 dead.
That’s still way less than the flu.
The main point I was hoping to make is that the government uses brute force on its own citizens in the form of zero tolerance, bans, lockdowns etc. and does not do so here – by excluding visitors from affected areas for a time – where the stakes are much higher than many other risks, most of which are trivial by comparison.
We also do not yet know the extent of Dallas’ spread, nor of likely subsequent infections elsewhere. Mortality from flu, while not insignificant, is not 70%.
Cue the liberal sound bite! “If it saves just ONE child…”
YES!! I almost wrote that six times.
The thing to remember about science is that last week’s hallowed verity is next week’s debunked theory.
CIDRAP (scientists) are advising the CDC (bureaucrats) and the WHO (skeevy UN bureaucrats) that there is evidence that Ebola can be transmitted via aerosol contact.
Mis – mostly what seems evident is that the total aspect of ebola today is NOT known. And with a mortality of 70%, you wouldn’t need anywhere near the number of people infected that you get with the flu. I would expect as a numbers guy you would inherently grasp that.
No @#$!.
It flew through the air from Liberia to Dallas.
Yes, think about nuclear power risks — zero tolerance for their pet projects.
How about the risk that SSM might have some bad consequences — say like polygamy coming more into vogue. Risk is denied.
How about the risk that Roe v. Wade would “evolve” into a murder weapon used against 2nd, 3rd trimester infants and even allow partial birth abortions and then killing infants that are still “born alive.” People who worried about such things in 1973 were laughed at.
We will all rue the day that we let the left have control of this country.
The administration will not support any bans until it gets to apply them to Americans in general.
When they finally do announce sweeping restrictions, they will quote conservatives and ridicule our protests that applied earlier they would have been effective, but that “now” it amounts only to government overreach with little practical effect.
And everybody from the GOP to Fox News will chuckle.
… in Liberia, where people poop in communal outhouses, don’t wash their hands, live with large families in one-room shacks, and have primitive medical facilities.
I doubt the mortality rate in the United States will be much under 50%, and keeping it that low requires extraordinary measures. The factors promoting its spread in Liberia are largely absent in the United States, which means fewer people will be getting it (at least until it overwhelms the medical facilities in the United States). But if you do get it, it is deadly.
I am far from panicked over Ebola. Ebola is less contagious than influenza, but more contagious than AIDS. But contagion is a public health concern. I am concerned about the fumbling of the issue by public health officials. They are missing obvious steps, apparently for superstitious reasons (political correctness is superstition – we must be approaching peak PC – please tell me we are).
I am ready to suggest my sons not date any health care professionals — at least until 2015. And I am almost glad my sister-in-law, who graduated with a nursing degree in the spring has not yet found a job.
Seawriter
It wasn’t that long ago by my aged standards when the AIDS epidemic occurred. It was noted that in the past, epidemics would be treated by quarantine, people would be limited to where they could go, as an effort was made to contain and then destroy the illness.
However AIDS was a popular disease and those people could not be quarantined. They were above normal medical considerations, with ‘above’ meaning not subject to.
The fact that concealed carry laws means that women and children are statistically safer than they are in states which deny concealed carry is irrelevant to people who live by their emotions. For such it is better to suffer at the hands of criminals than to fight back; or allow others who want to defend themselves to fight back.
Now Barry, the defender of something, has decided that he has a war he can support, the overwhelming of Ebola. He has dispatched the US Army to help bring about an end to this terrible disease. Perhaps M16s now shoot medicine at those who are suffering from Ebola? If so, that is good news. Yet quarantine is not an acceptable method of treating them. If they can catch the plane, they are home, at least for treatment at taxpayer expense. Isn’t Barry good?
Courtesy of “Information Is Beautiful”, here’s a chart showing the relative contagiousness and deadliness of a variety of different diseases, for comparison’s sake. The image is pretty low rez, so here’s the link to the original source.
The comparison of Ebola and Tuberculosis is the most interesting, IMHO.
I gotta call BS on that chart. Unless I am really misreading it, HIV is more contagious than influenza. And Ebola is as contagious as seasonal influenza. And it is harder to catch a cold (rhinovirus) than it is to get whooping cough.
(Of course it could be the infectiousness scale on the chart is limited by the number of people spreading the disease. There are so many people with influenza that two people with influenza can only spread it to five others because the rest who get it catch it from someone else, while measles is so rare one person will give it to 15 others.)
Seawriter
Here’s a link to the spreadsheet from which the data is taken.
Yeah. There is something dodgy about their interpretation of the data.
One example. On the graph norovirus is shown as less contagious than HIV. However from the spreadsheet:
Norovirus – 2 – surfaces – 12 – 28
HIV – 3.5 – sexual contact – 7 – 15
It looks like the graph is just the average base reproduction rate. From which they conclude we are nearly twice as likely to get a disease transmitted by sexual contact with a lifespan of from 7-15 days than we are to get a disease transmitted by surface contact with a lifespan of 12-28 days.
Anyone wanna take that bet?
Seawriter
Well, yeah, it is of course about statistical averages. One of the variables is the definition of “we”. Clearly your chances of catching an STD are (for all intents and purposes) zero if you are celibate. But then, your chances of catching Ebola are (for all intents and purposes) zero if you’re never in close contact with people from West Africa.
Or in close contact with people who have been in close contact with people from West Africa.
In Texas (Dallas, specifically) we have a lot more of people in that category than we had two months ago. And the problem is being compounded by public health officials encouraging those on the front lines (health care workers) to let their guard down and not providing adequate information on how to contain the situation.
Ebola is controllable. In the United States it should be very controllable, but not when the CDC’s reaction seems to be to put Bobby McFerrin singing Don’t Worry, Be Happy on continuous play. Once Ebola jumps the turnstiles provided by hospitals and the public health system it is going to be a first-class headache to re-contain. And the CDC seems unconcerned about turnstile-jumping.
Seawriter
Well, yeah, clearly your odds of catching Ebola are higher if you work at Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas, Texas.
It seems perfectly reasonable to me for the government to reassure the population of the United States that the odds of contracting Ebola are incredibly low, and is a totally different issue than questions and criticism about the actions the CDC actually has taken to interdict and mitigate the disease.
Saying that the average American shouldn’t be worried about getting Ebola does not mean that the CDC shouldn’t worry about stopping Ebola.
These are not mutually exclusive questions.
By the way, can you please provide the source for this “70% mortality” statistic?
At the Oct 14 press briefing, the World Health Organization said that the current death toll in West Africa is (approximately) 4,500 out of 9,000 infected.
(Note: The total population of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone is about 20 million. FYI.)
Just heard a blurb on Fox News while in the cafeteria at work – apparently we are still letting in 150 people a day from the affected countries because to do otherwise might negatively impact their economies… How many of these visitors are meeting with investment bankers or other legitimate commercial interests rather than doing their business on Skype right now? How many are obvious visa jumpers/future illegal aliens like Mr. Duncan? How many are going to Disney World and hanging out at the Disney Main Street Parade?