Nurse Under Ebola Quarantine Criticizes Her Treatment

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ~Lucidity

So. Because we didn't take steps early enough we should now just take no steps at all? Is that what you're saying here?

I don't see where Antar said that.

I believe I was asking for clarification on that point.

originally posted by: ketsuko


We've gone soft as a society, and sometimes, there are threats that cannot be dealt with by allowing people to just run anywhere and everywhere.

Would you be willing to embrace this woman and let her make an extended visit with your family? Or would you prefer that she be isolated for 21 days first?

How about we put her someplace better than a tent, with some actual food instead of a measly granola bar and some water? How much freaking infrastructure would it require to bring her some takeout Chinese food or something?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Oh.
Since there is nothing that suggests that we "do nothing" in the Antar's post, I guess I misinterpreted your query as a loaded question. My apologies.

a reply to: Phage
I don't play that game. But thanks for your concern.

Common sense has gone out the window. I'm sorry, but if you are going to travel to ebola infested areas of the world, work with ebola patients and insist on returning the states, you *should* be quarantined to protect the rest of your fellow countrymen and women. Nurse Hickox attitude is disgusting and full of entitlement. I fully support these governors actions to try and keep ebola from spreading in their states. As it is, we should be restricting air travel, another common sense method gone by the wayside. It almost seems as if someone wants everyone to get sick. I'm looking at our "president" to prove me wrong. He *should* be protecting American citizens *cough cough*.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: ketsuko


We've gone soft as a society, and sometimes, there are threats that cannot be dealt with by allowing people to just run anywhere and everywhere.

Would you be willing to embrace this woman and let her make an extended visit with your family? Or would you prefer that she be isolated for 21 days first?

How about we put her someplace better than a tent, with some actual food instead of a measly granola bar and some water? How much freaking infrastructure would it require to bring her some takeout Chinese food or something?

Exactly, and I don't have a problem with that. Let's get her into a nice room, with a toilet and shower, tv, food and whatever else she would need. Treat her with compassion and respect, but, she SHOULD be under quarantine, whether she likes it or not. She chose to go over there, and she should be concerned about spreading the disease to other people.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pteridine

I am still puzzled by the world's reactions in letting the vectors wander. It would be sensible to isolate the countries by telling the air carriers that any aircraft leaving a hot zone will have no clearance to land at the world's airports.

Great idea. Isolate the entire region. Prevent access to people and supplies to combat the epidemic where it is. Allow the epidemic to continue.

Maybe this will help you understand why taking such a kneejerk reaction is ill-advised.
www.washingtontimes.com...

The epidemic continues in the region because of low level health care and cultural practices. The disease does not spread easily without those factors. How many people were on the plane with Thomas Duncan? How many got sick? How many people who contacted Duncan in Dallas (apart from the nurses who were heavily exposed) got sick?

The way to fight the epidemic is to combat it in the region in which it is occurring. Shutting down travel to and from that region will not help that effort.

Okay. The next time an elementary school student comes down with chicken pox, measles or pertussis, we'll just refuse to follow orders to keep them at home, away from other children. We'll keep sending them to school to infect other children because golly gee, quarantining them is a "knee jerk reaction". Come ON...... !

a reply to: Tatanka

Nurse Hickox attitude is disgusting and full of entitlement.

Really? Asking to be treated with respect and dignity is disgusting?

Did you even read what she wrote?

We need more health care workers to help fight the epidemic in West Africa. The U.S. must treat returning health care workers with dignity and humanity.

Can you point out where she says anything against being quarantined?

You know, I'm not a hysterical person, I'm calm, cool and collected. I don't appreciate the "president" insinuating that something so rational as quarantining people who have been in contact with ebola patients as hysterical or cruel... that makes absolutely no sense at all.

If ebola is nothing to worry about, why the hazmat? Why clean it up? Why quarantine sick people in hospitals. None of this makes one bit of sense. If ebola comes in my area, we will self quarantine to protect our baby. If that's operating on hysteria, I can't imagine what else would be considered as "hysterical".

a reply to: Tatanka

We'll keep sending them to school to infect other children because golly gee, quarantining them is a "knee jerk reaction". Come ON...... !

You can quarantine a house, even a village. You cannot effectively quarantine a population of millions or an area of millions of square miles.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tatanka

Nurse Hickox attitude is disgusting and full of entitlement.

Really? Asking to be treated with respect and dignity is disgusting?

Did you even read what she wrote?

We need more health care workers to help fight the epidemic in West Africa. The U.S. must treat returning health care workers with dignity and humanity.

Can you point out where she says anything against being quarantined?

And in my post beneath this, I stated that she should be treated with respect and compassion, and given the amenities. I find it unacceptable to place her in a tent with no shower, everything else is good old fashioned common sense.

a reply to: Phage

It wasn't intended to be a loaded question, i was asking for you to clarify your take on the Ebola epidemic and in particular it's apparent level of infectiousness, which you answered, thanks.

I asked because you seemed to think it was a difficult thing to contract Ebola, since you said a commercial jet load of people failed to contract Ebola, even having been in close proximity to an infected individual, in an enclosed aircraft, using the same facilities, touching the same door handles and common surfaces, even breathing in the same recycled cabin air.

Hands on, traditional funerary practices carried out on infected people, would most certainly have contributed to the spread of Ebola and many other viruses and bacteria i'd imagine. I'd say that was a given.

The important consideration once the epidemic has started though, is to prevent it's spread into other countries.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tatanka

We'll keep sending them to school to infect other children because golly gee, quarantining them is a "knee jerk reaction". Come ON...... !

You can quarantine a house, even a village. You cannot effectively quarantine a population of millions or an area of millions of square miles.

There would be no need for quarantine if we were restricting air travel from certain areas, and employing the use of special flights for medical teams to go in and out instead of continuing commercial flights. Putting a clamp down on this may not be 100% effective, but it would certainly decrease the risk. My own doctor has questions about this, he wants to know why all of the sudden, doctors are coming back here sick with this, when doctors have been going over there to Africa for years to work with ebola patients. He told me..... that they would refuse to travel until they were certain they didn't have it, but now they want to run home. Hmm.

a reply to: Phage

Can you point out where she says anything against being quarantined?

well she may not have in her essay, but continues to bump her gums and has in other interviews.

Hickox slammed the new quarantine policy as "completely not understandable" nor based in science. "It is not based on any clear public health evidence," she explained. "It's not the recommendation of public health and medical experts at this point. You know, I think we have to be very careful about letting politicians make medical and public health decisions, and all of the evidence about Ebola shows that if you are not symptomatic, you are not infectious."
Quarantined Nurse Kaci Hickox Calls Her Treatment 'Inhumane', Criticizes Chris Christi

Maybe the health care workers from the US wanting to go to Africa should think twice their careers working with deadly infectious diseases

Stay away from infected countries if they don't want to be "mistreated" better safe than sorry, I am glad is finally some precautions when it comes to people coming from infected ebola areas.

Heck yeah, I don't feel sorry at all.

They can keep their sorry butts in one room in hold 21 days.

a reply to: MysterX

I asked because you seemed to think it was a difficult thing to contract Ebola, since you said a commercial jet load of people failed to contract Ebola, even having been in close proximity to an infected individual, in an enclosed aircraft, using the same facilities, touching the same door handles and common surfaces, even breathing in the same recycled cabin air.

Yes, under those circumstances it is difficult to contract ebola, or else there would have people on that plane who were infected.

Hands on, traditional funerary practices carried out on infected people, would most certainly have contributed to the spread of Ebola and many other viruses and bacteria i'd imagine. I'd say that was a given.

Without those practices, combined with a low level of health care, ebola would not become epidemic. Because it is only through close contact with symptomatic patients that the disease is transmitted.

The important consideration once the epidemic has started though, is to prevent it's spread into other countries.

There are more effective ways of doing that than by shutting down air travel. Those who have no symptoms are not contagious. Screening arrivals (including health care workers) from the region accomplishes the same thing, if someone has symptoms they need to be isolated. Monitoring arrivals does the same thing, if someone develops symptoms they need to be isolated. These methods facilitate aid to the region and accomplish the same thing as preventing or limiting travel. Preventing or limiting travel does not facilitate aid to the region. Such aid is the most effective way of preventing the disease from spreading.

originally posted by: diggindirt
I think the nurse should have enough consideration for her fellow human beings to reach down within herself and find some compassion for people put in a very new and difficult position. Perhaps she can use the next three weeks to reflect on her reaction to a perfectly rational response by agencies of government.
Her rant does nothing to improve the image of health care workers. At this point, the average American who is following this story is left with mouth agape that health care professionals behave in such reckless fashion as to cause undue anxiety to thousands of people.
I'm not saying that she is one who would behave irresponsibly, I'm sure she was planning to "self-quarantine" for the next three weeks. The people dealing with her were in a brand new situation, under brand new orders.

bingo

the end

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

She's right. It makes little sense to quarantine those with no symptoms.

a reply to: Tatanka
Chill out then :]]

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: NoNameNeeded

Mass Quarantine in the US: How Will It Work?

....Think ahead folks. God forbid Ebola comes to America. But if it does, and policy is set by fear, in fear, this is what will happen to YOU. Your children. Your family. Your friends.

The masses are so easily manipulated.

Get them all worked up about a global pandemic and all commonsense goes right out the window. Okay, I meant critical thinking skills, since there is nothing common about commonsense.

This is a far cry from how the first workers were "brought" into the US were treated, and they "were known" to be infected. So they now pump up the fear volume, get everyone on board to being snatched away and quarantined, because they are "suspected" of being "exposed". After all it is for the good of the nation. Lock them away for 21 days, wait. Didn't they just increase the possible time for contagion? What is the next time frame, 6 months, 2 years? Wait. You have been locked up with all those other folks that are "suspect" and the guy that washes your dishes and prepares your food just got sick. I guess you have a place to stay for the next 2 years all over again.

I am all for caution, but for how this looks like it is going to play out, I am willing to take my chances with nature. Do the math. Ebola is awful but it is not as bad as what they have in store for us under the guise of keeping us safe.