No maybe at all. I'd say definitely yes. I'm sorry, but that's what's needed here if we're going to contain Ebola effectively. Both in West Africa AND here. Please - think about it. Those valiant souls who treat Ebola patients are the first to become infected themselves - either as family members caring for their sick loved ones at home, OR health care professionals doing so in a hospital setting. THAT, seems to me, is the FRONT LINE. And it has to be handled very strategically. Because the greater public health and public confidence is CRITICALLY important in this equation. You keep the chance of a worse epidemic - panic - from breaking out. You contain the possible spread of the virus so it can't get out and other innocents can't be exposed. You maintain the public calm and stable equilibrium. THAT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT!!!
Hey, just think about it for a moment. Our country is CRAWLING with know-nothings. It's an infestation WORSE than Ebola or any other virus imaginable. The least little bit of ANY kind of less-than-wonderful news is bound to be misinterpreted by this bunch, enflamed by Pox Noise with its camel caravan of crazies pushing the hysteria and bad information. For every Shepard Smith on there (and they only have the one), there are LEGIONS of bill o'reillys and laura ingrahams and elizabeth hasselbecks and steve doocys just hellbent on amping up the panic for ratings. Seems to me the only response is going literally overboard, taking drastic action, with maybe an excess of caution and rigid protocols designed to CONFINE AND CONTAIN. Seems to me that's the ONLY way through this.
And instead of travel restrictions, seems to me the answer is quarantines. SOME inconvenience - compared to - well, you tell me what we can compare that to. SOME inconvenience for three weeks or so - seems to me that is a small price to pay for containing and confining the spread of Ebola - until we finally have it conquered. Travel restrictions are the simplistic answer but it disregards that tricky aspect of human nature - the urge to sneak. It'll make people try to sneak. It'll motivate people to lie and cheat and try to cut corners and bend the rules to get in, and then it's dramatically harder - even downright impossible - to track people, to know who comes into this country from the Ebola-stricken areas of West Africa. Wouldn't it be better to know? To KNOW! To be able to track everyone and know who they are and have records and contact info for everyone who comes in here?
QUARANTINES are the way to go, seems to me. And they're TEMPORARY forcryingoutloud!!!! I'd rather be quarantined and give up a mere three weeks of my life - rather than facing a possible death sentence that the exposure to Ebola guarantees without the proper care and treatment.
= new reply since forum marked as read
