Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Ebola
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic

How concerned are you about the spread of ebola?
Very - this thing is going to get out of control
21%
 21%  [ 20 ]
Somewhat - might spread, might not, will probably fizzle out
33%
 33%  [ 31 ]
Not at all - completely overblown
44%
 44%  [ 41 ]
Total Votes : 92

Author Message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostFri Oct 17, 2014 1:49 pm 
With respect to EV and TB, we see other health issues related to unacceptably sloppy control of entry into the US, placing citizens at needless risk

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
DIYSteve
seeking hygge



Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 12655 | TRs | Pics
Location: here now
DIYSteve
seeking hygge
PostSun Oct 19, 2014 8:28 am 
Bedivere wrote:
My point was that cartoon is comparing a transmissible virus to diseases that are a result of lifestyle choices and/or addiction.
No. The cartoon is about perceived risk, more specifically about blowing an extremely remote risk out of proportion when far far more likely risks are virtually never discussed. [\pssst] A travel ban would make things more risky. Travel ban would result in people coming from infected nations gaming the system by traveling through other countries, and thus they could not be tracked. With a travel ban, we can track those who come from infected nations. Obvious, but, of course, simple "build the fence" palaver will always appeal to the masses who crave an oversimplistic and/or symbolic solution.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostSun Oct 19, 2014 9:37 am 
It doesn't matter which airport was the last you flew from, your passport says where you're from. The nations around those in Africa have instituted travel bans for those passports. Does this mean they're infected, no. Does it mean a higher risk for infection, yes. Preventing additional infection with quarantines is standard practice, and pretty basic. It's odd that we slapped a ban on Israel over the summer, yet now with something that can kill Americans, it's beyond the pale.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
joker
seeker



Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 7953 | TRs | Pics
Location: state of confusion
joker
seeker
PostSun Oct 19, 2014 10:34 am 
BigSteve wrote:
A travel ban would make things more risky. Travel ban would result in people coming from infected nations gaming the system by traveling through other countries, and thus they could not be tracked. With a travel ban, we can track those who come from infected nations. Obvious, but, of course, simple "build the fence" palaver will always appeal to the masses who crave an oversimplistic and/or symbolic solution.
up.gif And people also gloss over the fact that people will be smart enough to find a way out of the epicenter countries w/o having their passport stamped if a full-on ban is instituted (ever know anyone from the US who has travelled to Cuba - hint, it was not hard for them to do so w/o getting a passport stamped!! and the motivation will be MUCH higher here...). Separate thought - if an ebola vaccine were available, would anti-vaxxers get one? hmmm.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
contour5
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 2962 | TRs | Pics
contour5
Member
PostSun Oct 19, 2014 12:27 pm 
Some kind of travel restrictions or increased monitoring is probably a good idea, but a quarantine that totally isolates the most seriously affected countries will cripple their economies and make eradication far less likely. Eradication should be the end goal; simply isolating ourselves will prove ineffective and far more costly in the long run.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
boot up
Old Not Bold Hiker



Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 4745 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bend Oregon
boot up
Old Not Bold Hiker
PostSun Oct 19, 2014 1:18 pm 
joker wrote:
Separate thought - if an ebola vaccine were available, would anti-vaxxers get one? hmmm.gif
ah, one of my favorite groups for misinformation. And many people that quote them as fact. I especially like the "YE GAWDS, VACCINES HAVE MERCURY, YOU ARE ALL GOING TO DIE FROM THEM". Compare mercury in vaccines to a tuna fish sandwich.... "Everyone who smokes cigarettes contributes a bit of mercury to the air we breathe. Mercury is found especially in seafood like swordfish and tuna; a tuna sandwich contains much more mercury than a typical vaccine dose. " This was from a UR medical center article, randomly grabbed, but there are many other reference. Facts and diseases rarely go hand in hand....

friluftsliv
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostSun Oct 19, 2014 5:45 pm 

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schenk
Off Leash Man



Joined: 16 Apr 2012
Posts: 2372 | TRs | Pics
Location: Traveling, with the bear, to the other side of the Mountain
Schenk
Off Leash Man
PostMon Oct 20, 2014 11:33 am 
Bans on ANYTHING are not 100% effective and it will drive people "underground" to facilitate their travels. People WILL find a way to travel if they want to and it will become impossible to track anyone infected with Ebola and the people they have had contact with if they travel without tickets, documentation or a record of their travels.

Nature exists with a stark indifference to humans' situation.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16088 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostMon Oct 20, 2014 11:41 am 
We should ban all travel out of Texas, Maine had the right idea when they quarantined a teacher who had went there for a conference. wink.gif

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
cascadetraverser
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 1407 | TRs | Pics
cascadetraverser
Member
PostMon Oct 20, 2014 12:09 pm 
No further cases in Texas and Ohio is reassuring despite the flight of the infected nurse. She likely was in the early stages of the illness and her viral load was low (i.e. the concentration of the virus in her body and body fluids). Given the potentially long incubation time, my concern as a health care practicer has been how likely is the spread in the early stages of the illness when the infected person is unaware of the illness. Generally speaking, viral shedding from person to person is much higher when the pt is symptomatic and I suspect this is the case with Ebola. Health care organizations are taking this serious and screening questions at the phone desks of Urgent Cares, ERs and phone triage have been instituted at least where I work. Hopefully a greater international emphasis on global health care and prevention in Africa and the developing world will go forward to try to keep these diseases in check there, first for their well being and also to avoid global spread. Ebola is not new and strategies for future epidemics must go forward as this epidemic will likely wane but future outbreaks are a real possibility....

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostMon Oct 20, 2014 12:57 pm 
Schenk wrote:
Bans on ANYTHING are not 100% effective and it will drive people "underground" to facilitate their travels. People WILL find a way to travel if they want to and it will become impossible to track anyone infected with Ebola and the people they have had contact with if they travel without tickets, documentation or a record of their travels.
I'm not sure how anyone flies internationally without a ticket or a passport, but it's a pretty sure thing that the number is much much smaller than those who need both. And that's the point, not perfection, but limiting the damage.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
contour5
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 2962 | TRs | Pics
contour5
Member
PostMon Oct 20, 2014 2:15 pm 
Quote:
I'm not sure how anyone flies internationally without a ticket or a passport
There's a huge market for fake documentation. And it's fairly easy to travel to Latin America and then cross the southern US border illegally. Happens every day. There's also a huge African immigrant population in Europe and elsewhere. People are constantly moving around between countries. Closing off the US will do little to slow the worldwide spread of Ebola. A quarantine would only work if there was a worldwide travel ban and everybody, everywhere was kept under house arrest. Might help if we all hide under our beds. This type of strategy would obviously have severe economic implications... Given the current model of drug research and development in the US, I'm counting on Cuba, and maybe the Canadians and Europeans to find a solution to this crisis.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
tom roy
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Posts: 429 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bottom of the western side
tom roy
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2014 1:02 am 
Ebola looks good. Any one watch the Black list on TV uncanny timing.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6303 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2014 7:46 am 
contour5 wrote:
Some kind of travel restrictions or increased monitoring is probably a good idea, but a quarantine that totally isolates the most seriously affected countries will cripple their economies and make eradication far less likely. Eradication should be the end goal; simply isolating ourselves will prove ineffective and far more costly in the long run.
up.gif We have the ability to do this. To fail to fully engage in fighting the disease would speak pretty poorly of our moral character. They are a long way away, but they are people like you and me.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
cairn builder
Member
Member


Joined: 19 Aug 2013
Posts: 854 | TRs | Pics
cairn builder
Member
PostTue Oct 21, 2014 8:38 am 
Travel restrictions are dumb, simplistic, and counter productive, I guess that's why they appeal to low-IQ people. We need a lot of things, one of the most important is to stop this at the source. Nobody will go to Africa to help achieve that if they can't come home in a timely manner. Your parents are dying and you want to see them? 3 weeks quarantine first, better hope they make it that long. Desperate people find ways around travel bans. Better to be able to track this all easily than to implement a system we all know is going to fail. Of course none of the people clamoring to stop flights from places with ebola infections want to wall Texas off. The real lesson from Texas is that ebola is hard to spread.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Ebola
  Happy Birthday noahk!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum