Will Ebola become a big problem in the United States?

[newtogolf]

I think this kinda makes @Golfingdad's point. ISIS has yet to directly threaten anyone outside of Iraq and Syria. Reporters, diplomats, Soldiers, etc going to the region understand and assume the risk. That's not to say ISIS isn't a problem, just not a direct threat to folks shopping in Kansas City.

That's GD's point. Ebola is a huge threat to hospital workers treating Ebola patients. It remains to be seen whether a general panic is in order.

Got it, we should wait until another 9/11 or major epidemic occurs to take action.

[Slice of Life]

Obama didn't think there was a reason to panic about ISIS in the past but look at where we are today.  I believe in pre-emptive efforts to avoid disasters before they require panic but we can agree to disagree.

Still no reason to panic over ISIS. How many people have they killed in America?

[David in FL]

Still no reason to panic over ISIS. How many people have they killed in America?

As long as Americans are being killed somewhere other than "in America", you're good with it?

[MS256]

That's not to say ISIS isn't a problem, just not a direct threat to folks shopping in Kansas City.

Really?

How quickly we forget. SMH.

Still no reason to panic over ISIS. How many people have they killed in America?

How many people did Al Queda kill in America before 9/11 2001?

They had nowhere near the resources that ISIS has but the same goals.

[k-troop]

Got it, we should wait until another 9/11 or major epidemic occurs to take action.

I think the ISIS comparison is OT, but you brought it up.  I'll comment on it only because I think it exposes your anti-admin bias and colors your view of the Ebola issue.

Essentially, you're advocating that we spend hundreds of billions of dollars; kill 20-30k people; and allow another 3-5k American Soldiers, contractors, and other field support personnel to die.  And for this price we may or may not marginally reduce the chance that a few hundred to a few thousand Americans will be killed somewhere in some completely unrelated location, but only for the duration that we're willing to remain actively in combat in Iraq/Syria.  Further, we'll undertake this strategy with the full knowledge that it has no chance of permanently eliminating the threat.

Your logic sounds reasonable to me.

[Lihu]

I'm not worried a bit. If I was a worrier I would have been an absolute train wreck for most of my life with the dangerous jobs I've had.

I do think if I was a doctor, and came back home after treating Ebola patients, I would care enough about my family and friends to stay fairly secluded for 21 days. I don't mind taking risks myself but I would never put my family at risk if I can avoid it...but that's just me.

My wife and I were talking about this last night, and we concluded that not all doctors are smart.

[k-troop]

Really?

How quickly we forget. SMH.

How many people did Al Queda kill in America before 9/11 2001?

They had nowhere near the resources that ISIS has but the same goals.

The difference is that we now know to take the intelligence seriously and respond to specific threats.  And I haven't forgotten anything.  I've spent a day or two in the Sunni Triangle--have you?  I was there the last time we defeated ISI, were you?

[newtogolf]

I think the ISIS comparison is OT, but you brought it up.  I'll comment on it only because I think it exposes your anti-admin bias and colors your view of the Ebola issue.

Essentially, you're advocating that we spend hundreds of billions of dollars; kill 20-30k people; and allow another 3-5k American Soldiers, contractors, and other field support personnel to die.  And for this price we may or may not marginally reduce the chance that a few hundred to a few thousand Americans will be killed somewhere in some completely unrelated location, but only for the duration that we're willing to remain actively in combat in Iraq/Syria.  Further, we'll undertake this strategy with the full knowledge that it has no chance of permanently eliminating the threat.

Your logic sounds reasonable to me.

I asked for flight restrictions and we basically got it now.  Flights from countries with passengers potentially exposed to Ebola can only fly into certain airports that are properly equipped to handle infected people.  I'd have preferred those flight be restricted completely but I can live with this current scenario which is better than what most of you believed was required.

[David in FL]

I asked for flight restrictions and we basically got it now.  Flights from countries with passengers potentially exposed to Ebola can only fly into certain airports that are properly equipped to handle infected people.  I'd have preferred those flight be restricted completely but I can live with this current scenario which is better than what most of you believed was required.

Interestingly, Great Britain continues to have far greater restrictions than we do.

[dsc123]

I haven't been paying attention to this story lately.  We're still at 2 people infected in the US since this started in March, right?  And one of them has been given a clean bill of health?

[phan52]

Really?

How quickly we forget. SMH.

How many people did Al Queda kill in America before 9/11 2001?

They had nowhere near the resources that ISIS has but the same goals.

Unfortunately, nobody was paying any attention to Al Qaeda then.

And this is the kind of stuff we need to avoid with Ebola, but irresponsible dopes like this can't help themselves. This guy will win an election in a runaway about 11 days from now.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/peter-king-slams-doctors-on-ebola-suggests-ebola-went-airbor

BTW, the second Dallas nurse is also free of Ebola as of today.

[k-troop]

Unfortunately, nobody was paying any attention to Al Qaeda then.

It wasn't that nobody was paying attention.  We knew they were a threat, but didn't believe they'd actually attack the US.  We saw the indicators but refused to believe it was serious.  Very similar to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Suffice it to say, we now take the intel seriously and vigilantly pursue domestic threats.

[MS256]

Looks like somebody needs to start up an ISIS thread because we seem to be moving too far in that direction in this one.

[dsc123]

Looks like somebody needs to start up an ISIS thread because we seem to be moving too far in that direction in this one.

That'd be a hoot.

[Slice of Life]

As long as Americans are being killed somewhere other than "in America", you're good with it?

Yep, that's clearly exactly what I said, was that I'm ok with it.

No need to panic =/= ok with it.

There are thousands of things I'm "not ok" with, that I don't panic about.

[boogielicious]

Gentlemen,

This is the Ebola thread.  All other topics are .  You can start another thread on those.  Sorry to have to moderate.

I spoke to my Doctor about the Ebola panic the media has created.  He is appalled at how it is being overblown by the media.  They need a new crisis all the time.  He mentioned that they forgot about enterovirus already and that has killed a lot of children.  He thinks they are being irresponsible, as usual.

[dsc123]

I spoke to my Doctor about the Ebola panic the media has created.  He is appalled at how it is being overblown by the media.  They need a new crisis all the time.  He mentioned that they forgot about enterovirus already and that has killed a lot of children.  He thinks they are being irresponsible, as usual.

My sister is in charge of infectious disease control at a hospital in CA.  Her opinion is the same as boogie's doctor.  She said she has been getting a ton of calls from people convinced they have ebola, including someone who (falsely) claimed to have flown with the nurse from dallas.

[David in FL]

I spoke to my Doctor about the Ebola panic the media has created.  He is appalled at how it is being overblown by the media.  They need a new crisis all the time.  He mentioned that they forgot about enterovirus already and that has killed a lot of children.  He thinks they are being irresponsible, as usual.

Interesting.  My own doctor and 3 other close physician buddies all say that we're ill-prepared should Ebola get a foothold in the U.S.  Seems as if even the docs can't agree.  Given that, I'll continue to err on the side of caution.

They do however agree that most mainstream media is almost universally irresponsible.

It's also worth mentioning that by comparison, enterovirus has a very low mortality rate, whereas ebola is extremely high.