Will Ebola become a big problem in the United States?

[newtogolf]

Seems Ebola is going to cause problems in the United States in other forms beyond people becoming infected with the disease.

I just read that one of the major cocoa processing companies has operations are in Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana and may not be able to staff the October harvest as it's dependent on a migrant work force that typically comes from areas where there have been Ebola outbreaks.  The net effect is the cost of chocolate to rise significantly depending on how much of the harvest is impacted.

[Gunther]

We'll know more in a couple weeks but with limited treatment, lack of true understanding by the CDC, continued migration from affected areas, long incubation period, and flu season fast approaching, yes, I believe we have a pretty major issue on our hands. Granted, I'm in Dallas so a little closer to it than most but I am concerned.

[GolfLug]

I think it will not reach to a raging epidemic level. But it will unfold further taking a few hundred before it is contained in the US. This is the case where I am glad we the an over-cautious people as a nation.

I am more concerned about other continents where border control is fractional compared to US. People live in tighter spaces and people come in physical contact a lot more easily.

I have two young kids and I would be lying if I didn't say my heart beats a little faster thinking about worse case scenario. I voted yes. I am a worry wart in general.

[bubble]

were are all going to die !

that's the only certain thing.

[David in FL]

Whatever the final affect, it will be significantly worse if we fail to do our best to restrict people from the predominately affected countries from entering the U.S. Something that the government currently seems unwilling to do.

[phan52]

This isn't West Africa, where healthcare is an afterthought and facilities are lacking. I expect that a few people will contract the disease here and some who contracted it elsewhere will be treated here. But a "problem"? I doubt it. We will throw resources and expertise at it everywhere it appears and it will not reach a difficult stage.

24,000 people, on the average, die of the flu here every year. I don't see why Ebola has so many people in a panic. The media coverage doesn't help. At least, maybe the media coverage will force the issue for a vaccine. Private enterprise may get interested if there appears to be money in it.

Now if you are asking if Ebola in general is a problem worldwide then, yes. Third World countries and backward cultures don't have the resources to fight this, so it becomes our fight as well. It will suck if our military people working on building facilities and a medical infrastructure are exposed and start dying from this over in West Africa.

Whatever the final affect, it will be significantly worse if we fail to do our best to restrict people from the predominately affected countries from entering the U.S.

Something that the government currently seems unwilling to do.

The worst thing they can do is to start restricting travel. At least people who are travelling in the conventional way are being monitored and, if we start restricting flights, how will the people who are needed to fight this get there and/or back?

People in this country have a habit of overreacting to things. The media doesn't help.

[newtogolf]

The worst thing they can do is to start restricting travel. At least people who are travelling in the conventional way are being monitored and, if we start restricting flights, how will the people who are needed to fight this get there and/or back?

People in this country have a habit of overreacting to things. The media doesn't help.

People who have been exposed to Ebola don't belong on commercial flights or in public airports.  Until we learn about the methods of infection and incubation period the key to controlling it is minimizing exposure to large groups of people.

[phan52]

Whatever the final affect, it will be significantly worse if we fail to do our best to restrict people from the predominately affected countries from entering the U.S.

Something that the government currently seems unwilling to do.

The worst thing they can do is to start restricting travel. At least people who are travelling in the conventional way are being monitored and, if we start restricting flights, how will the people who are needed to fight this get there and/or back?

People in this country have a habit of overreacting to things. The media doesn't help.

We'll know more in a couple weeks but with limited treatment, lack of true understanding by the CDC, continued migration from affected areas, long incubation period, and flu season fast approaching, yes, I believe we have a pretty major issue on our hands.

Granted, I'm in Dallas so a little closer to it than most but I am concerned.

The CDC knows what Ebola is. They have known for years as this isn't the first outbreak of the disease. They know the symptoms and they know how it spreads.

[phan52]

Originally Posted by phan52

The worst thing they can do is to start restricting travel. At least people who are travelling in the conventional way are being monitored and, if we start restricting flights, how will the people who are needed to fight this get there and/or back?

People in this country have a habit of overreacting to things. The media doesn't help.

Originally Posted by newtogolf

People who have been exposed to Ebola don't belong on commercial flights or in public airports.  Until we learn about the methods of infection and incubation period the key to controlling it is minimizing exposure to large groups of people.

People who have been exposed to Ebola do not get on commercial flights (unless they lie, like Duncan did). We know how infection occurs, we know the incubation period and we know how to minimize exposure to large groups of people. I'm fairly certain the CDC knows more than people listening to the media and getting panicked about Ebola. One person in this country has contracted it. She contracted it from a patient who was being treated and it is almost certain that she failed her protocol.

[newtogolf]

People who have been exposed to Ebola do not get on commercial flights (unless they lie, like Duncan did). We know how infection occurs, we know the incubation period and we know how to minimize exposure to large groups of people. I'm fairly certain the CDC knows more than people listening to the media and getting panicked about Ebola. One person in this country has contracted it. She contracted it from a patient who was being treated and it is almost certain that she failed her protocol.

Best way to make sure people don't lie is to restrict flights out of areas that are heavily infected with Ebola.  We know the incubation period but we don't know if the person becomes contagious before they exhibit a fever (which is the test they are using).

There are others being quarantined that could have it and awaiting confirmation.  She failed her protocol, but no one knows exactly how.

There's no reason to panic, but there is reason to be extremely cautious which means you minimize exposure in every possible way.

[MS256]

The worst thing they can do is to start restricting travel. At least people who are travelling in the conventional way are being monitored and, if we start restricting flights, how will the people who are needed to fight this get there and/or back?

People in this country have a habit of overreacting to things. The media doesn't help.

The CDC knows what Ebola is. They have known for years as this isn't the first outbreak of the disease. They know the symptoms and they know how it spreads.

When I heard the director of the CDC say that very thing I almost choked on my glass of iced tea. We have plenty of capability to get aid, medical personnel, and other required workers into those areas without commercial flights.

I don't have enough knowledge to decide if or when commercial flights should be stopped but I am pretty good at knowing when somebody is trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

We used to have a saying. You can lie to me all you want. Just don't expect me to actually believe it.

[David in FL]

The worst thing they can do is to start restricting travel. At least people who are travelling in the conventional way are being monitored and, if we start restricting flights, how will the people who are needed to fight this get there and/or back?

People in this country have a habit of overreacting to things. The media doesn't help.

The CDC knows what Ebola is. They have known for years as this isn't the first outbreak of the disease. They know the symptoms and they know how it spreads.

Good grief.  The relative low number of people "needed to fight this" are easily monitored, quarantined and managed as they travel to and fro.  Those that can't be monitored and managed are individuals who are traveling for purely personal reasons, or may even suspect that they've been infected and try to get to the U.S. by whatever means possible in the hope of better treatment and possibility of survival.  And yep......believe it or not, they might even lie in order to do it.

NOT restricting travel, at least at this juncture is completely, and utterly irresponsible, and puts the country at risk.

People who have been exposed to Ebola do not get on commercial flights (unless they lie, like Duncan did). We know how infection occurs, we know the incubation period and we know how to minimize exposure to large groups of people. I'm fairly certain the CDC knows more than people listening to the media and getting panicked about Ebola. One person in this country has contracted it. She contracted it from a patient who was being treated and it is almost certain that she failed her protocol.

People who have been exposed to Ebola don't necessarily know that they've been exposed.  Testing people for symptoms at the time of departure, or upon arrival is useless.  They may be infected and as of yet, asymptomatic.  Is that really so hard to understand?

We know how infection occurs, we know the incubation period and we know how to minimize exposure to large groups of people.

I would have thought that the way to do that is to reduce the likelihood that an exposed/infected person would come into contact with other people, especially people traveling together who will subsequently go their separate ways once they hit the ground, providing for an exponential rate of exposure.

So, if you're willing to allow potentially exposed/infected people to travel freely to the U.S.,  how do you keep them from exposing others?

[phan52]

I can see where this is going. I'll prefer to listen to the CDC, not Fox news.

[MS256]

I can see where this is going. I'll prefer to listen to the CDC, not Fox news.

What in the Hell does Fox news have to do with it? SMH.

[David in FL]

What in the Hell does Fox news have to do with it? SMH.

I think that means that he's unable to think this one through on his own, and feels the need to blame someone for that..... FWIW, I have no idea what is being reported on Fox News about this one. Don't care either. Seems pretty straight forward.....don't let people who are most likely to have come into contact with a very contagious, deadly disease into the Country. I can't even imagine what kind of agenda, someone could have to disagree with that simple concept.

[newtogolf]

I can see where this is going. I'll prefer to listen to the CDC, not Fox news.

What channel is the CDC on?  Do you watch the weather on Fox news or are you afraid they might give you the right forecast?

[phan52]

I think that means that he's unable to think this one through on his own, and feels the need to blame someone for that.....

FWIW, I have no idea what is being reported on Fox News about this one. Don't care either. Seems pretty straight forward.....don't let people who are most likely to have come into contact with a very contagious, deadly disease into the Country.

I can't even imagine what kind of agenda, someone could have to disagree with that simple concept.

Fox News means PANIC!!

ONE person in the US has contracted Ebola. She contracted it from a patient who was in his death throes and was highly contagious and she missed something in her protocol. And BTW, that patient who died lied about it; he had direct contact with an Ebola sufferer who had the full blown disease. He did not infect anybody in his travels and it is becoming clear that he did not infect anybody until he was dying and his body was hemhorraging.

They are monitoring every single flight that comes in that has passengers who were in infected countries. They separate them from everybody else and give them protocol to follow. There is a difference between being in Liberia and actually having contact with somebody who has Ebola. I suggest as well that if it was a family member who was trying to get back to America and had only been traveling in one of those countries that you would go crazy if they quarantined him/her there.

This is not the first outbreak of Ebola and the CDC knows more about this than you do.

[David in FL]

Fox News means PANIC!!

Ok. That pretty much explains your perspective..... But could you explain how you "monitor" someone coming into the Country and determine if they've been infected, when they may very well be asymptomatic.....and, knowing the consequences, will likely be dishonest in answering any questions regarding possible exposure?