Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#31

Post by IvyMike »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #22
dublinben wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just as much security theater as TSA checkpoints. IR thermometers are pretty inaccurate[0] and not good at catching Ebola.[1] You can also just pop and Ibuprofen an lie your way through.[2] [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...

>> "You can also just pop and Ibuprofen and lie your way through" Why would anyone do that?

"Ah, it's just the flu and I can't afford to spend any time in quarantine"

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#32

Post by maxerickson »

tindrlabs wrote: post #23

So what's the long term policy / law that will come out of Ebola testing via the TSA? Since these activities never go away they just become unquestionable policy. Long term maybe it's finger print scanning, blood, saliva.

This is CBP and CDC, not TSA.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#33

Post by thathonkey »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #22
dublinben wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just as much security theater as TSA checkpoints. IR thermometers are pretty inaccurate[0] and not good at catching Ebola.[1] You can also just pop and Ibuprofen an lie your way through.[2] [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...

>> "You can also just pop and Ibuprofen and lie your way through" Why would anyone do that?

Because fear (especially of death) makes people do highly irrational things. You could argue that it actually isn't irrational to lie in order to get into a 1st world country with 1st world hospitals. From a very selfish perspective of preservation, that is actually pretty rational.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#34

Post by Istof »

pearjuice wrote: post #13

Am I the only one who wants a Betteridge's-law-filter on HN? Simply ban all submissions which are not "Ask HN" with a question mark at the end. I am getting sick of these submissions merely intended to scrape votes which have no value whatsoever.

That would make sense most of the time. Do you want them to filter words like "maybe" and "perhaps" too? I think there is enough censoring on HN already.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#35

Post by thathonkey »

tikhonj wrote: post #20

So basically, the only reason to do this—acknowledged by researchers after more ambitious programs of this kind—is to reassure the public. It's theater, meant to calm irrational, emotional concerns. Unlike the TSA, people aren't even pretending otherwise! 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 abu…

In the United States, a public hysteria would likely do more damage than the virus itself so this is a good idea even if it is just security theatre. I've heard that phrase uttered several times in this thread already. Do you guys all read the same libertarian blog or something?

It's about to be flu season. They don't want hospitals to be overcrowded with paranoid patients because that means if somebody actually does have the virus they're less likely to get the proper attention. Etc. Not to mention all the people suffering from other problems. Such a strain on our healthcare system must be avoided at all costs.

This is a good thing, even if it is just a jumping off point.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#36

Post by callahad »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #22
dublinben wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just as much security theater as TSA checkpoints. IR thermometers are pretty inaccurate[0] and not good at catching Ebola.[1] You can also just pop and Ibuprofen an lie your way through.[2] [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...

>> "You can also just pop and Ibuprofen and lie your way through" Why would anyone do that?

An infected individual might believe that they have a greater chance of surviving if they're treated in the US. After all, we've brought back our own infected folks, supplied them with experimental therapies, and they've survived. Send that through the grapevine a few times, and it could very easily create the impression that the US has a cure.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#37

Post by maxerickson »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #14
Vivtek wrote: post #2

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.

There is little to no health care that can make a difference to a person already infected with Ebola, AFAIK, IANAD. Quarantine is the best thing you can do to prevent it getting further.

Supportive care makes a difference. It isn't a cure, but preventing dehydration at least means the infected person doesn't die of dehydration.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#39

Post by DanBC »

pearjuice wrote: post #13

Am I the only one who wants a Betteridge's-law-filter on HN? Simply ban all submissions which are not "Ask HN" with a question mark at the end. I am getting sick of these submissions merely intended to scrape votes which have no value whatsoever.

I would fucking love such a filter for the comments.

Re: US Will Screen Air Passengers for Signs of Ebola. Will It Work?

#40

Post by pdabbadabba »

dublinben wrote: post #18
devindotcom wrote: post #11

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…

It's just as much security theater as TSA checkpoints. IR thermometers are pretty inaccurate[0] and not good at catching Ebola.[1] You can also just pop and Ibuprofen an lie your way through.[2] [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...

So this approach might not be foolproof. Does that mean we shouldn't expend the very small amount of effort that this approach would require? Do we have any reason to think that IR thermometers are so inaccurate that they aren't worth using? (For that matter, where does the article say they will use IR thermometers?) And while a person MIGHT be able to slip through after taking a fever reducer, is there a good reason to think that a meaningfully large number of people will do that?

Comments like this strike me as textbook examples of making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Post reply on HN