11–20 of 54 posts
"At the five US airports that receive most passengers from the three countries where Ebola is circulating, passengers will be singled out on the basis of their travel records; interviewed by means of a questionnaire; and have their temperature taken, to see if they have a fever."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The effective way to fight disease would be health care, and that's the one measure the United States will never take to fight any disease. What are you trying to say? That the US doesn't do health research? That the US doesn't have the best medical care in the world? That we haven't yet invented the magical cure to Ebola and shipped it to West Africa? Or are you trying to politicize a virus discussion into somethin…
In what way does the US have the best medical care in the world? http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthca...
I am getting sick of these submissions merely intended to scrape votes which have no value whatsoever.
Of course it will -- there is no terrorism any more, after all. Real answer: this is nothing more than security theater. The effective way to fight disease would be health care, and that's the one measure the United States will never take to fight any disease.
Aside from that it will likely pick up more false positives than it will actual Ebola cases (e.g. common flu, someone getting too hot after running from the aircraft with a heavy bag to beat the queues, etc), Ebola can go asymptomatic for over a week within which time it will be undetectable.
Keep in mind that several African states are already checking people as they leave. So for this US measure to work someone would have to go from asymptomatic to symptomatic within the time it takes from flying out of an Ebola infected area and arriving at their destination (e.g. 12 hr period).
I already feel bad for all of the people who will be incorrectly quarantined under this scheme just because they have regular flue. They will be caught up in a state overreaction similar to "shoe inspections" and "no liquids above 150mm" nonsense of the past ten years.
I think the Government should go further and embark on enlightenment campaigns. These campaigns would involve listing the symptoms of Ebola, advising people who exhibit such symptoms to visit the nearest hospital, explaining in very clear terms how people can contact Ebola (there is a shocking amount of misinformation about how Ebola is contracted out there) and also listing some of the basic ways people can help prevent the spread of the disease (like washing of hands with sanitizers).
Basically, borrow a leaf from what the Nigerian Government did which brought Ebola to a halt after a Liberian brought Ebola to Lagos, a city whose population is more than the entire population of Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone combined (those are the 3 countries hardest hit by Ebola).
Screening for temperatures is a good first step but since a person might not be symptomatic at the time the temperature is being taken, temperature taking won't be enough. I think the Government should go further and embark on enlightenment campaigns. These campaigns would involve listing the symptoms of Ebola, advising people who exhibit such symptoms to visit the nearest hospital, explaining in very clear terms how…
For anyone thinking of glibly and irrelevantly pointing out the ineffective nature of TSA checkpoints, this is rather a more limited and intelligent program: "At the five US airports that receive most passengers from the three countries where Ebola is circulating, passengers will be singled out on the basis of their travel records; interviewed by means of a questionnaire; and have their temperature taken, to see if t…
[0]http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2008/06/25/why-fever-s...
[1]https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2014/08/theres-really-...
[2]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/03/ebola-airport-scree...
Screening for temperatures is a good first step but since a person might not be symptomatic at the time the temperature is being taken, temperature taking won't be enough. I think the Government should go further and embark on enlightenment campaigns. These campaigns would involve listing the symptoms of Ebola, advising people who exhibit such symptoms to visit the nearest hospital, explaining in very clear terms how…
There's a thin line between sewing panic and providing the public with constructive information. If they released that kind of stuff right now, people would become super paranoid and expect an outbreak any day.
You'd see people going to the hospital with every single flu, cold, or similar that they have.
To me, this is a great illustration of why we need strong, consistent rights and limitations on government action: it's not just a check on government abuse, or abuse by certain minority movements or even malicious abuse by the majority—it's also a check against popular emotional responses like this. It's a way of forcing ourselves to stop, reconsider and perhaps avoid acting poorly in a knee-jerk reaction.
(Also, thinking about it, it's a solid committment strategy: if these rights and restrictions are clear and unambiguous, we can use that when negotiating both with other countries and within our own government.)