http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29782389

So if she did have it then it would have been a great idea for her to be in quarantine.

Her or some greedy lawyers need to wake up and smell the coffee…

I would think they wont be letting these aid workers back in country soon enough. Our Aussie immigration minister has temporarily blocked refugees from West Africa arriving and non permanent and temporary visa holders cancelled. Permanent visa holders have to be quarantined for 21 days before being allowed back in Australia.
This moaning biatch needs a serious case of swine flu to pass on to her lawyer and the Mayor.

Harsh though it sounds, given tbe infection rate among health workers, some sort of “quarantine” for 21 days doesn’t seem unreasonable.

I would hate to come back from helping these poor people in West Africa and inadvertently pass it on to my own kids.

It’s only infectious when you have symptoms; she didn’t have symptoms so she wasn’t a risk to anyone.

Instead, by subjecting health workers to this treatment, you deprive the affected countries of the very people who might be able to contain Ebola, probably helping to kill a few extra sufferers in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. Oh, and increasing the risk that it becomes endemic.

Total nonsense. In fact I think the doctor who was “self monitoring” himself in NY should be asked some very serious questions about the wisdom of going running in central park, riding the subway and going bowling.

https://twitter.com/CubedLink/status/525496358971916288 😉

Her or some greedy lawyers need to wake up and smell the coffee…

What the hell are you talking about? This is an example of a state government banging up innocent people for no good reason just so they can look like they’re doing something. Of course it should be challenged and the right place is in court.

All this measure will do is ensure people travel through third country airports before flying to the US.

This is an example of a state government banging up innocent people for no good reason

The people concerned had just returned from working at a hospital in an infected area. Reason enough IMO for a quarantine.

The people concerned had just returned from working at a hospital in an infected area. Reason enough IMO for a quarantine.

…which is why you don’t let ill-informed people make off the cuff decisions about whether to incarcerate people.

“you don’t let”

The Government (State or Federal) has made a very rational decision to insist on quarantine in this case. See my post above, this NY doctor was self monitoring himself whilst wandering around one of the most densley populated cities in the world, madness. I am more than well informed enough to believe of in compulsory quarantine in high risk cases for this virus. Our (and they US’s) ability to handle anything other than a very small number of cases is very limited. The vinous is not infectious until symptoms are shown at which point it becomes highly infectious, that is too much of a knife edge.

I strongly suspect you will find when our troops are stood down they will remain in a controlled environment for 21 days before returning to UK or being granted leave.

I’m not supporting incarceration, hence the quotation marks when I suggested “quarantine”. Lets call it “monitoring” instead. But given that you can show no symptoms for 2-3 weeks, I’d be happy to be kept in isolation or whatever until I am tested and definitely clear of the disease.

Along with my human rights not to be incarcerated comes my human responsibility to not spread a contagious disease.

Maybe I’ve just spent too long close to Eyam?

Along with my human rights not to be incarcerated comes my human responsibility to not spread a contagious disease.

…and the right place to check whether those two things have been properly balanced is in court.

They gave us Ebola!
They gave uz Ebola!
Dey gave uz Ebola!
Dey gerv uz Ebola!
Dey gerv urz Ebola!
Deygerv urz Erbola!
Deygerv urzerbola
Dygerv erbla!
Dygerv erbla!
DYGERV ERBLA!

.which is why you don’t let ill-informed people make off the cuff decisions about whether to incarcerate people.

or whether not to

and given i imagine the people that made the decision will be far better informed than your good self I’m going to go out on a limb and say you may be talking a load of crap.

Put it this way, if the Doc whos now being treated had been in quarentine then the 4 people who had been in contact with him wouldn’t be…do they get to sue for a breach of human rights as well?

My guess is that konabunny is actually a human rights lawyer, with tbe most amazing garage of bike porn funded by my taxes legal aid 😉

Put it this way, if the Doc whos now being treated had been in quarentine then the 4 people who had been in contact with him wouldn’t be…do they get to sue for a breach of human rights as well?

@tp, agreed this is my point. One or more of the 5 of them could die. I am not saying there should be blanket ban on travel or quarantine for all, but health workers who have been treating victims doesn’t seem unreasonable to me.

The Government (State or Federal) has made a very rational decision to insist on quarantine in this case.

Only if you equate ‘rational’ with ‘knee-jerk’, ‘political’ and ‘lacking in medical or scientific reason’.

Some people in the US are frothing at the mouth over the ‘threat of Ebola’. They are ignorant of the facts and mostly stupid and / or political. This quarantine and the way it has been handled have been off the scale of knee-jerk.

and given i imagine the people that made the decision will be far better informed electable than your good self I’m going to go out on a limb and say you may be talking a load of crap.

i imagine the people that made the decision will be far better informed than your good self

you probably won’t appreciate the irony of you claiming that the decision was evidence-based when your claim is based on belief and supposition.

I don’t think it’s a reasonable supposition considering the decision maker in question is Chris Christie, a man who doesn’t think his views on creationism are relevant to public discourse (they are when you control public schools), whose conduct is currently the subject of seven different investigations, whose advisors orchestrated an absurd traffic jam to aggravate a political rival, and who said that the nurse in question was “obviously ill” when she was in fact asymptomatic (and therefore not infectious). whether that was a deliberate lie or simply ignorance of the facts is up to you to decide.

.which is why you don’t let ill-informed people make off the cuff decisions about whether to incarcerate people.
…or whether not to

I think you’ve misunderstood how it works: people have a right to be free unless you have a compelling reason to detain them – not the other way around!

Just so we all know – the quarantine has been lifted:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/27/nurse-ebola-quarantine-released-newark

Science and reason believed to have been used in decision. SHOCKING.

So her own countries initial response is haphazard and on the backfoot to a deadly virus that could kill US citizens/spread at home.

Her response is to sue.

Sue means $$ guys. Whichever way you spin it. She isnt a black person denied equal rights etc. Just quaranteed for 3 weeks.

Nice

It’s not just the money involved. Any legal action will set case law defining what limits there should be on state power in situations such as this.

Hora she is going to “challenge her confinement in a federal court” I know the phrase uses polysylables but which ever way you spin it it is a bit more important and subtle than $$.
Loving the idea that because a few states ruled by the tea pot end of the political spectrum have rushed through quarantine it must be rational and well thought out so a fully qualified medic who has tested clear and shows no symptoms should be deprived of her freedom for the best part of a month at public expense just so a scientifically illiterate politician can appear to be doing something. The ability of the citizen to use the court to question state actions is an essential guarantee of freedom . Strange that our own Tory party plan to get rid of it so it will be impossible to stop them acting unlawfully.

Sue means $$ guys. Whichever way you spin it.

or, you know, an injunction from a federal court to prevent the state continuing to detain people for no good reason. or a declaration that the policy is unlawful or unconstitutional. or an order requiring the quarantine restrictions to be lifted (which is, in fact, what the plan was: http://m.wsj.com/articles/nurse-detained-in-new-jersey-for-ebola-calls-conditions-really-inhumane-1414352575?mobile=y). but yeah apart from that “sue means $$”.

I would just like to point out that the person who you are trying to paint as a money-grubbing toerag is a nurse who’s spent a month in Sierra Leone volunteering with Medecins sans Friontieres fighting Ebola. I think that fact speaks for itself.

@Kona the key here is your phrase “no good reason” – different opinions on that. I think the real reason the nurse is upset is that people do this volunteering with their vacation time and if they have to do 21 days quarantine that’s unpaid leave / they won’t get permission. As I said when the British Army task force we’ve sent is done I think you’ll find they’ll do a 3 week R&R somewhere where they will be monitored. They will not just jump on a plane and head back to Blighty.

There are different opinions about whether quarantine detention is appropriate. No-one is denying that (in fact, it’s been covered quite extensively above). The important point is that some of them are informed by science and medical fact (like those of UNMEER, MSF and the CDC) and some of them are Chicken Licken nonsense based on toss (like yours and that of noted epidemiologist Chris Christie).

I think the real reason the nurse is upset is that people do this volunteering with their vacation time

You are a remarkably cynical person. Like our friend above, you are also basing your opinion on bugger all fact and evidence.

I might be rising to the bait here, but…

You only catch Ebola from sick people.

You can only pass on Ebola if you are sick.

The doctor was self monitoring, not sick, so why not go for a run and ride the subway?

If you have been in contact with sick people, you need to be aware and act sensibly if symptoms develop.

You will not catch Ebola from a healthy person sat next to you.

jambalaya:-
“I think the real reason the nurse is upset is that people do this volunteering with their vacation time and if they have to do 21 days quarantine that’s unpaid leave / they won’t get permission”

Article:-
“Under the latest guidelines, returning health workers who have displayed no symptoms can return to their homes for the quarantine period, where they will be monitored twice daily. Compensation will be offered for loss of earnings.”

Amazing how facts get in the way of what people think.

As I said when the British Army task force we’ve sent is done I think you’ll find they’ll do a 3 week R&R somewhere where they will be monitored. They will not just jump on a plane and head back to Blighty.

So what? Comparing the actions of those on a military deployment to a civilian rightly complaining about unwarranted and politically motivated detention is apples and oranges.

[/url]sexy ebola nurses suit for the fetishist in all of us by mike mcdermid, on Flickr[/img]

on a second reading my post of 15 mins ago may be wrong.

quarantine it must be rational and well thought out so a fully qualified medic who has tested clear and shows no symptoms should be deprived of her freedom for the best part of a month at public expense

Things like RT-PCR can only give a positive result a couple of days before the person goes contagious.

I’m on the fence about the issue to be fair, on the one hand I agree with what MSF et al are saying, on the other hand I don’t think it’s doing the medical communities image any good when self monitoring doctors go running in the park and end up testing positive for ebola.

She went on a bike ride today, have to credit her for that. Boyfriend on a fat bike too 8)

Sky News

Must be quite a quandry for Americans. Shooting her is the obvious solution. But that could be bad.