Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: White House Not Planning Travel Ban For Ebola Countries [View all]rocktivity
(44,605 posts)25. DING DING DING! TorchTheWitch, you're our grand prize winner!
Last edited Sat Oct 4, 2014, 05:37 PM - Edit history (1)
What difference does it make if a person like Mr. Duncan (is) not exhibiting symptoms but (is) infected...? NONE.Duncan made his escape because he had good reason to believe he was infected. Taking temperatures at the airport solves only part of the problem, as it allows infected but non-symptomatic people to travel. That's like pulling a weed -- if you don't remove the roots as well, you accomplish nothing.
But at the same time, I think a total travel ban is too drastic. Just require anyone wanting to travel from ebola-affected countries to pass a blood test, wait three weeks, and pass a second blood test.
rocktivity
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
That is good. It seems the same precautions should be applied to everyone since you don't
uppityperson
Oct 2014
#1
It might be a really good decision or a really, really bad one. Time will tell for
Purveyor
Oct 2014
#2
I think it is a big mistake. It may not be necessary to quarantine those countries in which ebola
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#35
Ebola has been diagnosed in the USA, so I guess you mean us too since you say those countries inw
uppityperson
Oct 2014
#38
I would quarantine people who possibly could have had contact with someone who has the
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#39
I thought I read it takes 21 days from exposure to the first symptoms of the illness.
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#36
Adults who listen to scientists and science and not the voices on the TV are in charge.
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#4
You are not infectious until you are symptomatic, so......get with the facts, they are your friend.
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#28
In the past, we in the US placed quarantines on children who had diseases like scarlet fever.
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#37
I will have to go with the opinion of the epidemiologists, I prefer science over deeply held beliefs
Fred Sanders
Oct 2014
#43
Epidemiologists probably don't use as many railroad station restrooms as I do.
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#47
Most hospitals in my region are only allowing visitors over 16 to pediatric units
eilen
Oct 2014
#18
Excellent solution! I could never understand how nabbing infected people after they've
Stardust
Oct 2014
#31