<p>Nrdbs, that’s the point. It can’t be done. In Texas, or in Liberia.</p>
<p>No, I am not being facetious. I am asking a question. Since the first thread started there have been calls on this very board for banning flights from known hot zones. Texas is obviously now a hot zone and people who have been exposed are boarding planes and traveling across the country. Why are none of the people calling for a travel ban from West Africa calling for one from Texas? </p>
<p>Texas could also put in border patrol/road barriers on roads leading out of Texas. They can call out the National Guard for assistance. </p>
<p>. </p>
<p>Too badTexas never did secede and become it’s own country that would’ve solved the problem</p>
<p>Same argument does not work in Liberia. They have few roads, bad roads. And then there’s that giant Atlantic Ocean between them and us. All of sub Saharan Africa has issued travel bans for flights from the affected countries. So far, no cases of Ebola have come in to those countries. And those are the countries that have road connections. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll be surprised if that hasn’t already been suggested.</p>
<p>I’ve seen posts made that we should seal off the borders to the African hot spots and just let it take its course. Aside from being impossible to do, that’s pretty cold blooded. </p>
<p>Well, they are already in a room alone until they die, right? At least the contact would be minimized with a hospice like setting. Can you do a 3-5 day painkiller drip that keeps the patient asleep?</p>
<p>Nancy Snyderman self quarantined after her cameraman got sick. Presumably she didn’t exchange any bodily fluids with him. Then when she broke her self-quarantine she was put under mandatory quarantine. But the nurses who daily treated Duncan possibly contacting blood, saliva, diarrhea are not in quarantine? </p>
<p>And if Ebola is not infectious from surfaces, why was the plane cleaned and then taken out of service? Why do that if the patient was not showing any signs of Ebola when she flew from Cleveland to Dallas? Is that just public relations so people will still feel safe flying on Frontier?</p>
<p>But their organs liquefy and they have other bodily output. Do you just leave them in a giant ziplock bag?</p>
<p>I tried to do a Priceline search of one-way tickets from Liberia to Dallas, but could only get a price going the other way. Cheapest for two weeks from now is just under $3,000. Assuming it is the same coming from the other direction, that cost is going to rule out a lot of travelers. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That would make sense. They are not eating or drinking so there can’t be much output, and they are asleep anyway so won’t know the difference.</p>
<p>
Something I had wondered about was whether ventilators/dialysis machines could be assured to have been cleaned.</p>
<p>From the reading I’ve done about transmission and incubation, it seems that it’s almost always X, but every once in a while the outlier Z will occur and keep the disease moving.</p>
<p>A list of the African countries banning travel from Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone.<a href=“Login”>Login;
<p>Bay, no, they’re not alone in a room. There are also healthcare workers in the room.</p>
<p>Hospice is about comfort, so let’s be clear, you are not proposing hospice. You are proposing involuntary euthanasia. </p>
<p>ETA – Seriously?? Let them sleep away their last hours in a Ziplok bag? Why don’t we just kill them outright?</p>
<p>And BTW, there is LOTS of output at the end. It has nothing to do with eating and drinking.</p>
<p>Hospitals can ask for permission to treat this way, just like they do for hospice patients. Isn’t hospice a booming industry? Isn’t that how most people want to go, rather than hooked up to machines that just prolong the misery?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, we know that is not true or else no need to treat the exterior of hazmat suits with multiple levels of decontamination and now a call for UV light, regardless of the level of contact the caretaker has with an infected patient. </p>
<p>The questions are how long the virus lives on a particular surface (all surfaces are different) and how high a concentration exposure is required to cause infection. </p>
<p>One concern is the virus is becoming more virulent and thus a lower concentration may be required to induce infection.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think partially yes. And the other is to make a show of “abundance of caution.” I mean, what does it harm to go ahead and clean it up? </p>
<p>Re: cost of a ticket from Liberia to U. S. </p>
<p>Somehow 150 people per day come into this country from the hot zone despite the high cost of the ticket. Maybe relatives living in this country are sending them money. Who knows? But as the fatality rate goes up and the number of infected people goes up, those who have been exposed and have the means will, like Duncan, try to leave, not caring how many others they are exposing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is not an accurate description of my father’s hospice care. Which I helped provide.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would say so. Also protective in case someone sues them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is an accurate description of my father’s hospice care. And I’m not judging it as right or wrong, either.</p>
<p>The point is perhaps that broad generalizations are in danger of being inaccurate.</p>