Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Lets say you have 5,000 civilians here who have been exposed. How will you treat them?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
What that article came down to was "Hey, anything can happen guys. 21 days? Try a year, just to be safe!"
He has no evidence that it can be spread before showing symptoms. He is just saying that it could. Has he done any research on this subject? Is there science to back up his claim?
Pretty much what his argument came down to was, "I do not trust these people!"
As for the rest of the article, it just shows how far Christie is out of his depth on this issue. He has no clue what he is doing and it is all driven by politics.
I'm assuming you may have missed this part of the article (buried as it was as the third paragraph) if you're calling his expertise, as a Nobel Prize winning scientist, into question;
"Dr. Beutler, an American medical doctor and researcher, won the Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology in 2011 for his work researching the cellular subsystem of the body’s overall immune system — the part of it that defends the body from infection by other organisms, like Ebola. "
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/31 17:47:57
Oh, I am sorry. I was just supposed to read "Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology" and not question him on a subject?
Where is his proof? Was he specifically working on Ebola and observing how Ebola works in the body? Did he come to any conclusions about it being able to be spread in more ways than we know? Is this man just the highest "ranking" Medical Professional they could find that was for quarantine?
Where is my proof? I need to see facts. Not something a guy said.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
Maine Judge Sides With Science, Rejects State's Attempt to Quarantine Kaci Hickox
Make that Kaci Hickox 2, quarantine-happy governors 0.
A Maine judge on Friday rejected the state’s request to quarantine Hickox in her home, ruling that the Doctors Without Borders nurse does not pose enough of a health risk to justify her forced confinement. Judge Charles LaVerdiere’s order states matter-of-factly that Hickox "currently does not show symptoms of Ebola and is therefore not infectious." That's more or less the argument the public health community and the White House have been making for weeks.
LaVerdiere agreed late Thursday to temporarily restrict Hickox’s movements while he considered the state’s request to quarantine her for the remainder of the virus’ 21-day incubation period. There will still be a full hearing on the matter on Tuesday, although that now appears to be mostly a formality given the force of Friday's decision. "The court is fully aware of the misconceptions, misinformation, bad science, and bad information being spread from shore to shore in our country with respect to Ebola," he wrote. "The court is fully aware that people are acting out of fear and that this fear is not entirely rational."
The order does pose some restrictions on Hickox, most notably that she must coordinate her travel with state public health officials and submit to daily monitoring for symptoms—but those requirements are largely in line with the federal government's recommendations, which she had already agreed to follow. The New York Times reports that that within hours of the decision, "state troopers who had been parked outside the nurse’s house for days had left."
The ruling appears to bring an early end to the first legal battle over just how far the United States should go to contain a deadly virus that has ravaged West Africa but has so far claimed only one life on U.S. soil. It marks a rather stunning defeat for Gov. Paul LePage, who had pushed for Hickox's home confinement since she arrived in Maine earlier this week after being quarantined in a New Jersey hospital against her will last weekend. It's also a small but significant victory for the public health community and the White House, both of which have been vocal critics of states that attempt to forcibly quarantine returning medical workers.
Not only could such bans deter American medical professionals from volunteering to go where they’re desperately needed, such measures are also unlikely to do any good in the first place. Ebola is highly infectious but not highly contagious. It takes only a small amount of contact with the virus to become infected, but the only way for that infection to be transmitted is via the bodily fluids of someone who is sick. That’s why experts say there is no need to quarantine nurses and doctors who have been exposed. Even if they have been infected, they’ll have a chance to self-diagnose and get themselves to a hospital before they become contagious.
Still, Friday's decision won’t end the national debate over how far states can and should go in the name of public health. Recent polling suggest that roughly 4 in 5 Americans are in favor of mandatory quarantines for travelers returning from West Africa. Meanwhile, laws vary by state, so a similar case in a different court could end in a different result. "At the end of the day," Wendy Parmet, the director of Northeastern University’s Program on Health Policy and Law, told me yesterday, "the precedent is going to come when we get an appellate court decision down the road."
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/31 19:26:30
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
It makes no difference if one person or 100,000 people whose civil rights have been curtailed, it is all equally abhorrent.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/31 23:21:31
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Just to be clear, from now on when a Nobel prize winner speaks up for climate change being a thing, everyone has to accept it. Right? That seems to be what is happening here.
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
Dreadwinter wrote: Man, it got quiet in here. Rough day for the crazies.
Out of an abundance of caution, they've all been placed in quarantine.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
motyak wrote: Just to be clear, from now on when a Nobel prize winner speaks up for climate change being a thing, everyone has to accept it. Right? That seems to be what is happening here.
Dreadwinter wrote: Oh, I am sorry. I was just supposed to read "Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology" and not question him on a subject?
Where is his proof? Was he specifically working on Ebola and observing how Ebola works in the body? Did he come to any conclusions about it being able to be spread in more ways than we know? Is this man just the highest "ranking" Medical Professional they could find that was for quarantine?
Where is my proof? I need to see facts. Not something a guy said.
From the same article as before;
“I favor it, because it’s not entirely clear that they can’t transmit the disease,” Beutler said, referring to asymptomatic healthcare workers like Kaci Hickox, a Doctors Without Borders nurse returning from treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone who was quarantined in New Jersey for 65 hours before being transported to her home state of Maine on Monday afternoon.
“It may not be absolutely true that those without symptoms can’t transmit the disease, because we don’t have the numbers to back that up,” said Beutler, “It could be people develop significant viremia [where viruses enter the bloodstream and gain access to the rest of the body], and become able to transmit the disease before they have a fever, even. People may have said that without symptoms you can’t transmit Ebola. I’m not sure about that being 100 percent true. There’s a lot of variation with viruses.”
In fact, in a study published online in late September by the New England Journal of Medicine and backed by the World Health Organization, 3,343 confirmed and 667 probable cases of Ebola were analyzed, and nearly 13 percent of the time, those infected with Ebola exhibited no fever at all.
Which should answer the questions that you posted. Genuine question, and I'm not trying to be surly, but did you read the article that was posted or just reach your own conclusions independently of it? The reason I ask is that the answer to every question you have posed concerning Dr. Beutler seems to have been answered in the article.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: It makes no difference if one person or 100,000 people whose civil rights have been curtailed, it is all equally abhorrent.
Just pointing out your false analogy
So in your opinion when may civil rights be curtailed? Are there any circumstances in which you would approve?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/01 14:01:31
Dr. Butler is right. We don't know that much about this strain of Ebola and it COULD mutate and become deadly. As a trained doctor/scientist I would expect him to hedge his bets and not talk in absolutes.
Of course, everything he says about Ebola COULD also be true about a number of diseases. We really shouldn't be basing Quarantine decisions on what COULD happen. It should be based on what HAS happened.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
Easy E wrote: Dr. Butler is right. We don't know that much about this strain of Ebola and it COULD mutate and become deadly. As a trained doctor/scientist I would expect him to hedge his bets and not talk in absolutes.
Of course, everything he says about Ebola COULD also be true about a number of diseases. We really shouldn't be basing Quarantine decisions on what COULD happen. It should be based on what HAS happened.
Nature weird like that
Though I think Piranhanado movie would happen first
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Dreadwinter wrote: Oh, I am sorry. I was just supposed to read "Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology" and not question him on a subject?
Where is his proof? Was he specifically working on Ebola and observing how Ebola works in the body? Did he come to any conclusions about it being able to be spread in more ways than we know? Is this man just the highest "ranking" Medical Professional they could find that was for quarantine?
Where is my proof? I need to see facts. Not something a guy said.
From the same article as before;
“I favor it, because it’s not entirely clear that they can’t transmit the disease,” Beutler said, referring to asymptomatic healthcare workers like Kaci Hickox, a Doctors Without Borders nurse returning from treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone who was quarantined in New Jersey for 65 hours before being transported to her home state of Maine on Monday afternoon.
“It may not be absolutely true that those without symptoms can’t transmit the disease, because we don’t have the numbers to back that up,” said Beutler, “It could be people develop significant viremia [where viruses enter the bloodstream and gain access to the rest of the body], and become able to transmit the disease before they have a fever, even. People may have said that without symptoms you can’t transmit Ebola. I’m not sure about that being 100 percent true. There’s a lot of variation with viruses.”
In fact, in a study published online in late September by the New England Journal of Medicine and backed by the World Health Organization, 3,343 confirmed and 667 probable cases of Ebola were analyzed, and nearly 13 percent of the time, those infected with Ebola exhibited no fever at all.
Which should answer the questions that you posted. Genuine question, and I'm not trying to be surly, but did you read the article that was posted or just reach your own conclusions independently of it? The reason I ask is that the answer to every question you have posed concerning Dr. Beutler seems to have been answered in the article.
Did you read the article you posted? Because all it says is that it is a possibility and they found some cases where people were infected but did not have a Fever. Were they showing any other symptoms besides a fever? Were those people who were infected with Ebola also able to transmit the disease at the time?
Not so sure you are getting it. What you gave me was an article that gave a few statistics, with no sources, then tried to pass it off as fact. None of what you said can be verified. All of it is vague. Sorry I am calling bullgak on you and you are getting upset, but I need to see some facts. I do not condone locking people up because one guy has a theory. That is not how we work here.
Still waiting on those pesky facts to start popping up.
Off topic....sorry Alpha.....going to excuse ahead of time when I mix up Dreadclaw and Dreadwinter when I post something they post thinking one is the other or something.
*low coffee indicator light flickering*
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Dreadwinter wrote: Did you read the article you posted? Because all it says is that it is a possibility and they found some cases where people were infected but did not have a Fever. Were they showing any other symptoms besides a fever? Were those people who were infected with Ebola also able to transmit the disease at the time?
Again, from the article I have referenced before;
“It may not be absolutely true that those without symptoms can’t transmit the disease, because we don’t have the numbers to back that up,” said Beutler, “It could be people develop significant viremia [where viruses enter the bloodstream and gain access to the rest of the body], and become able to transmit the disease before they have a fever, even. People may have said that without symptoms you can’t transmit Ebola. I’m not sure about that being 100 percent true. There’s a lot of variation with viruses.”
Dreadwinter wrote: Not so sure you are getting it. What you gave me was an article that gave a few statistics, with no sources, then tried to pass it off as fact. None of what you said can be verified. All of it is vague. Sorry I am calling bullgak on you and you are getting upset, but I need to see some facts. I do not condone locking people up because one guy has a theory. That is not how we work here.
Still waiting on those pesky facts to start popping up.
I'm not getting upset. I'm genuinely curious as to the questions you posed when the answers were in the article itself.
And you can stop with the "one guy" has an opinion nonsense. Here are his accomplishments in the medical field;
Beutler has been elected to numerous honorary academic societies. These include the United States National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine. Beutler is also an Associate Member (foreign associate) of the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO), and a member of the Association of American Physicians, and the American Society for Clinical Investigation.
Other notable honors have included:
Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (2011, shared with Jules A. Hoffmann and Ralph M. Steinman)[2]
Shaw Prize (2011, shared with Jules A. Hoffmann and Ruslan M. Medzhitov)
Will Rogers Institute Annual Prize for Research (2009)
Albany Medical Center Prize (2009, shared with Charles A. Dinarello and Ralph M. Steinman)[19]
Balzan Prize for Innate Immunity (2007, shared with Jules A. Hoffmann).
Doctor of Medicine Honoris causa from the Technical University of Munich Germany, (2007).
William B. Coley Award of the Cancer Research Institute, US (2006, shared with Shizuo Akira).
Gran Prix Charles-Leopold Mayer of the Académie des Sciences, France (2006).
Robert Koch Prize of the Robert Koch Foundation, Germany (2004, shared with Jules A. Hoffmann and Shizuo Akira).
Institute for Scientific Information has listed Beutler as an ISI highly cited researcher since the year 2001, marking him as an influential figure in the field of immunology. He has also been listed by Thomson-Reuters as a Citation Laureate.
So the doctor is not just "one guy" with an opinion, he is actually knowledgeable about how the human body deals with viral infections (including when the body can become contagious)
Those facts you want are referenced in the article. And you have your sources; a Nobel prize winning scientist, and the New England Journal of Medicine. If you choose to disregard those in favour of your own opinion, expert or otherwise, that is your choice. Ignoring them, however, does not invalidate them.
If you want his actual notes and sources, and will not be satisfied until they are provided, unfortunately they are not given in the article so it is almost impossible for those to be provided.
I dunno...here's what I imagine news services in the UK imagine when they talk about Ebola:
And then I see all the news in the US and I get the feeling that our newscasters are thinking more like this................
Spoiler:
There's being safe and thorough when dealing with the threat of an infectious disease, and then there's sheer stupidity and panic.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/11/01 18:53:06
"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."
A doctor saying "I have not studied this disease, I have never treated anyone with Ebola, but I think that maybe possible some people might have a viral load big enough to transmit EVD without having a fever. I don't have any evidence of any kind to back up that statement, but viruses are weird so who the feth really knows" is considered facts now?
Dreadclaw, if you think that anything he has said in that article has provided definitive proof of what he is claiming, you are crazy.
“It may not be absolutely true that those without symptoms can’t transmit the disease, because we don’t have the numbers to back that up,” said Beutler, “It could be people develop significant viremia [where viruses enter the bloodstream and gain access to the rest of the body], and become able to transmit the disease before they have a fever, even. People may have said that without symptoms you can’t transmit Ebola. I’m not sure about that being 100 percent true. There’s a lot of variation with viruses.”
All of what is said there is speculation. He provides absolutely no definitive proof on the subject and quite frankly, the idea that he is suggesting to lock people up on an outside theory he has about the virus being transmitted before symptoms show, should be grounds to remove his Nobel Peace Prize. He is creating panic over something he has no proof of. His wording in that paragraph gives away the fact that he has absolutely no clue if it is true or not. Notice that "It may not be absolutely true" or "It could be people develop significant viremia...."
You do not talk like that when you know for a fact that something is true. You also do not go to the Media to get your point across, you call the CDC and report your findings.
d-usa wrote: A doctor saying "I have not studied this disease, I have never treated anyone with Ebola, but I think that maybe possible some people might have a viral load big enough to transmit EVD without having a fever. I don't have any evidence of any kind to back up that statement, but viruses are weird so who the feth really knows" is considered facts now?
That's cute.
It is a fact everyone has an opinion, so by the transitive property all opinions must be facts.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: It makes no difference if one person or 100,000 people whose civil rights have been curtailed, it is all equally abhorrent.
Just pointing out your false analogy
So in your opinion when may civil rights be curtailed? Are there any circumstances in which you would approve?
Are you seriously asking that question or are you just being obtuse for the lulz?
So hold on a second, you think it is perfectly reasonable being held against your will for three days despite having done nothing wrong and then having the state attempt to effectively place you under house arrest, again despite having done nothing wrong? There is no breech of constitutional rights in this instance? Ever heard of the Fourth Amendment or are you just one of those people that doesn't give a gak about constitutional rights unless it's the Second Amendment?
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: It makes no difference if one person or 100,000 people whose civil rights have been curtailed, it is all equally abhorrent.
Just pointing out your false analogy
So in your opinion when may civil rights be curtailed? Are there any circumstances in which you would approve?
Are you seriously asking that question or are you just being obtuse for the lulz?
So hold on a second, you think it is perfectly reasonable being held against your will for three days despite having done nothing wrong and then having the state attempt to effectively place you under house arrest, again despite having done nothing wrong? There is no breech of constitutional rights in this instance? Ever heard of the Fourth Amendment or are you just one of those people that doesn't give a gak about constitutional rights unless it's the Second Amendment?
Fourth Amendment;
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
(a) Promulgation and enforcement by Surgeon General
The Surgeon General, with the approval of the Secretary, is authorized to make and enforce such regulations as in his judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession. For purposes of carrying out and enforcing such regulations, the Surgeon General may provide for such inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, destruction of animals or articles found to be so infected or contaminated as to be sources of dangerous infection to human beings, and other measures, as in his judgment may be necessary.
(b) Apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals
Regulations prescribed under this section shall not provide for the apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals except for the purpose of preventing the introduction, transmission, or spread of such communicable diseases as may be specified from time to time in Executive orders of the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary, in consultation with the Surgeon General, [1] .
(c) Application of regulations to persons entering from foreign countries
Except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, regulations prescribed under this section, insofar as they provide for the apprehension, detention, examination, or conditional release of individuals, shall be applicable only to individuals coming into a State or possession from a foreign country or a possession.
(d) Apprehension and examination of persons reasonably believed to be infected
(1) Regulations prescribed under this section may provide for the apprehension and examination of any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage and
(A) to be moving or about to move from a State to another State; or
(B) to be a probable source of infection to individuals who, while infected with such disease in a qualifying stage, will be moving from a State to another State. Such regulations may provide that if upon examination any such individual is found to be infected, he may be detained for such time and in such manner as may be reasonably necessary. For purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes, in addition to the several States, only the District of Columbia.
(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term “qualifying stage”, with respect to a communicable disease, means that such disease— (A) is in a communicable stage; or
(B) is in a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals.
Looks like the law is compatible with the 4th, and may also apply to those who are not yet contagious
Your analogy is still false. And you avoided my questions; So in your opinion when may civil rights be curtailed? Are there any circumstances in which you would approve?
d-usa wrote: A doctor saying "I have not studied this disease, I have never treated anyone with Ebola, but I think that maybe possible some people might have a viral load big enough to transmit EVD without having a fever. I don't have any evidence of any kind to back up that statement, but viruses are weird so who the feth really knows" is considered facts now?
That's cute.
Someone who's credentials in no way come even close to being comparable to a Nobel prize winning scientist who is a world leading expert in how the body combats viruses, and the stages at which a person may be contagious, downplaying his expertise because it doesn't match what he knows.
Now that's cute.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/01 23:44:21
Does this mean none of us can discuss Obama's policies? I mean, he's a Nobel Prize winner.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
