[MP-Ryan]

So, in case anyone missed it this morning, one of the nurses who treated the infected man in Dallas (who just died) has been tentatively diagnosed as being infected herself.  Cue crazy rhetoric.

Actually, what I'm most interested in discussing is this poll question: should countries with advanced medical care impose travel bans from countries with active Ebola outbreaks for persons who are not citizens of the destination country? (Framed this way because you have a legal right to enter a country of which you are a citizen).

Having studied genetics and virology and being at least somewhat familiar with the transmission of Ebola, my view is actually yes - not because there is a significant risk of spread within countries with advanced medical care, but because the best way to contain any infection is to isolate its transmission, which any travel restrictions help toward.  Moreover, ebola has a potentially lengthy incubation period during which infected persons may be asymptomatic; the movement of a thus-infected person into a low-income area in a developed nation (particularly one in which medical care is not free) could cause localized outbreaks.  My caveat is thus, however:  any country imposing such a travel restriction should be immediately committing significant resources into the countries suffering active outbreaks to aid in combating transmission.

What do the denizens of HLP GD think?

[Fury]

Let it spread far and wide. It's high time we had another Black Death upon us to reduce number of population on this green Earth.

[Scotty]

I voted no, with a few caveats, one of which is closely related to your final point.

1) If citizens who are potentially infected are still allowed to travel into the country, the point is entirely moot and such a measure is meaningfully divisive and exclusive in the face of no real gain.

2) Related to your last, all available efforts should be dedicated toward treating the outbreak.  In such a fashion, and related to 1), rather than deny entry wholesale to non-citizen visitors from another country, it would be a more effective way to prevent the spread of the disease to identify and isolate said visitors.  While this does impose a hardship, it's also significantly less likely to result in an infected person doing exactly what you said and vanishing into a low-income area.

[Mr. Vega]

Travel ban on all except aid workers - and you may want to impose a requirement for not allowing them to return until X amount of days have passed since working in a high risk area. You're prob going to need to let through some very careful journalists through as well.

I agree with Scotty, it's going to spread if you give it enough time to multiply in Africa - the solution is to throw your resources into containing it there.

[IronBeer]

I said "yes", because it's closest to what I think a wise course of action is, but I'm not particularly keen on a flat travel ban.

What I think would be a better move would be a mandatory quarantine period for all travelers from stricken countries. (huh guess something like that's already been said. Well, carry on then)

[Dragon]

Travel ban and quarantines (for citizens, in case you really can't deny entry). It's a sad, but necessary course of action, not to mention the only way such outbreaks are ever contained. There's no treatment for Ebola - you either survive or you don't, the best the doctors can do is to make sure you don't die from anything other than Ebola while fighting the disease. They're working on a vaccine (I heard it mentioned on the news that it's expected sometime in 2015), but until that's ready, the only thing that can be done is sending humanitarian aid and our advanced medical equipment to places where the situation is the worst.

[MP-Ryan]

There's no treatment for Ebola - you either survive or you don't, the best the doctors can do is to make sure you don't die from anything other than Ebola while fighting the disease.

Not true, actually.  Canada and the US both have an experimental antiviral that has shown some promise.  It was used in the treatment of the two American aid workers who contracted Ebola and were then transported back to the US for treatment.  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/how-a-cold-call-led-to-a-canadian-experimental-ebola-treatment/article20842691/

ZMapp and TKM-Ebola are the two treatments that have come out of Canada.  ZMapp and an experimental vaccine that's about to be sent to the WHO were both developed by the Public Health Agency of Canada's National Microbiological Laboratory in Winnipeg.

[Dragon]

Not true, actually.  Canada and the US both have an experimental antiviral that has shown some promise.  It was used in the treatment of the two American aid workers who contracted Ebola and were then transported back to the US for treatment.  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/how-a-cold-call-led-to-a-canadian-experimental-ebola-treatment/article20842691/

ZMapp and TKM-Ebola are the two treatments that have come out of Canada.  ZMapp and an experimental vaccine that's about to be sent to the WHO were both developed by the Public Health Agency of Canada's National Microbiological Laboratory in Winnipeg.

Those are still experimental, as are other upcoming treatments. "Shown some promise"=/="We can cure Ebola". Of course, anything with a chance of working needs to be given top priority, but as far as I'm concerned, there's still no definite treatment. There will be one eventually, maybe pretty soon, but until it can be widely deployed, the disease needs to be contained at all costs. At the moment, it's how I said, or else we'd be well on our way out of this mess already.

Once we have a proven, widely deployable treatment, then the strategy would change completely. It should then become a priority to apply it to as many Ebola victims as possible, with quarantines being preferable to travel bans and complete isolation. Indeed, in that case, it should be made possible for Western hospitals to admit victims from Africa if they are capable of it. But we're not quite ready for that yet, every possible way to treat Ebola is still in experimental phase.

[Phantom Hoover]

There's no treatment for Ebola - you either survive or you don't, the best the doctors can do is to make sure you don't die from anything other than Ebola while fighting the disease.

You were utterly wrong about this and you think you can just prevaricate around it and keep talking and nobody will notice. We do. Everybody does. Just stop. Please.

[karajorma]

Does this mean banning travel from America too then?

[Bobboau]

no, wouldn't work. would be little more than theater. super easy to get around, even unintentionally. nothing will be done until there is a semi major outbreak in a western nation..

[Rhys]

Should I be investing in gas mask filters yet? Anxiety levels are going through the roof right now because of this, haha. I really hope those experimental vaccines show promise.

[The E]

Should I be investing in gas mask filters yet? Anxiety levels are going through the roof right now because of this, haha. I really hope those experimental vaccines show promise.

Unless you are planning on spending time in the same room as someone suffering from Ebola, no, you should not.

[Phantom Hoover]

Even if you are, a gas mask is total overkill.

[666maslo666]

There's no treatment for Ebola - you either survive or you don't, the best the doctors can do is to make sure you don't die from anything other than Ebola while fighting the disease.

You were utterly wrong about this and you think you can just prevaricate around it and keep talking and nobody will notice. We do. Everybody does. Just stop. Please.

What is the treatment for Ebola then?

[Phantom Hoover]

MP-Ryan gave a decent account of that.

[MP-Ryan]

Even if you are, a gas mask is total overkill.

A simpler solution is simply not to touch the saliva, mucus, feces, blood, or various other bodily fluids of an infected person and then touch yourself.  Even then, a common N95 particulate mask will stop Ebola particulate from penetrating it.  Of course, I reserve the right to point and laugh at anyone walking around the streets of North America or Europe wearing a mask because of a localized Ebola outbreak in Africa.

Despite the fact that it is a particularly nasty virus with a high mortality rate - which has more to due with the places that usually experience outbreaks, not the virus itself; ebola is survivable if caught early and treated with fluids even without the experimental treatments - Ebola is ironically preventable by measures no more sophisticated than those needed to avoid a common cold.  Actually, the common cold (Rhinovirus) is more infectious than Ebola because it is capable of airborne transmission while Ebola is not.

Ebola poses a greater risk to the health care professionals in countries with advanced medical care than the general populace (another reason why I support travel restrictions; it's one thing for medical staff to sign up to treat Ebola in its source countries; it's quite another to expect them to treat travelers who fraudulently travel into their countries, potentially exposing some members of the general public and hospitals themselves to an infection source in the process).

[karajorma]

Should I be investing in gas mask filters yet? Anxiety levels are going through the roof right now because of this, haha. I really hope those experimental vaccines show promise.

Unless you are planning on spending time in the same room as someone suffering from Ebola, no, you should not.

I'm assuming he means investing in a company that makes them, rather than buying one for himself.

[Dragon]

Perhaps. Ebola is very much not air-transmittable, but it sure is good at causing panic. While it's certainly every bit as serious as people depict it, getting infected does actually require some effort, especially in advanced countries, where water comes from the tap and not from the village well (indeed, I imagine well water contaminated with saliva is a contributor to the outbreak in Africa). Normal sanitary practices recommended when dealing with any sick person (washing hands after any contact, avoiding physical contact in general, etc.) should suffice for most people.

[S-99]

It's weird living in DFW. That virus is in dallas. And i'm in fort worth. I'm not really worrying since so far, containment of possible infecteds is working as far as we can see and know in this uncertainty for what mr. duncan caused. I think he definitely knew he had it. I believe he just wanted to see his wife and others before he died. His wife could have definitely caught it. She slept in the same bed with him and his extreme fever soaking the sheets.

This virus is a hell of a thing to survive.