6 ms·

Before judging this man for going bowling etc., we should bear in mind that he caught Ebola working for Doctors without Borders in Guinea. I would guess that w

Before judging this man for going bowling etc., we should bear in mind that he caught Ebola working for Doctors without Borders in Guinea. I would guess that without workers like him, the risk to Americans and others outside Africa, would be much higher, since the disease would be spreading much faster within Africa. Hopefully he recovers and we can improve travel policies if necessary.

bjz_ 12y ago
Agreed. He might have been silly for being out in public right after having come back from Africa, but I'm sure he did more good over there in preventing the spread of the disease (which helps us), than he might have done when coming home. Lets hope future doctors learn from this.
- jeffdavis 12y ago
  "I'm sure he did more good over there in preventing the spread of the disease" Why are you sure?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
blisterpeanuts 12y ago
Cold comfort if he has created a public health crisis in the city. He should have self-quarantined upon his return, in my opinion.
rustyconover 12y ago
To borrow an idea from math, "doing good" isn't a commutative, infections and diseases are. Have some respect for others and slow your roll before going out during the 21 day post exposure window. It's a bit like saying, "Hey I've saved lives over here so I have earned the right to be irresponsible over here". Because you know, karma balances out. No, the world doesn't work like that. And you aren't doing any good propagating this idea either because it encourages this privileged way of thinking. As much as this guy isn't being vilified (and say what you want about the government spinning its story of ebola being hard to transmit), lets think clearly and rationally. He knew the risks that he could possibly be infected and decided to endanger others when he could have easily stayed home or gone anywhere to a more isolated environment (upstate NY is calling). It is well known symptoms generally show up by the 10th day. Today is his day 10. It's very interesting that the government has locked down this guys apartment, yet if you need contact with bodily fluids to contract the disease why quarantine the apartment and surroundings? Could it be that droplets are a transmission method as many people are starting to suspect. Sneezing and coughing may spread these droplets to the floors and walls? And if that is the case, what about other objects that come in contact with saliva and other fluids like utensils, door handles, glasses...
- blergh123 12y ago
  I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example.
  - rustyconover 12y ago
    If you asked 10 average people what they think "airborne" means in this context, I doubt they'd say there is a difference between wet and dry transmission. I'd say for the purposes of argument, if a guy coughs violently on you because he's sick there is risk you could get Ebola. If a guy vomits in the subway car, apparently there is a risk of Ebola transmission. I've been on the subway cars and in taxi cabs it happens more than you think. Do you think they bleach all of those things adequately? No way, the financial incentives don't align to properly do it. The government is using semantics and spin to their advantage by saying it isn't airborne via dried viral transmission. The WHO agrees[1] that it also isn't airborne, but also admits surfaces can transmit the virus. Most officials omit this detailed explanation since they have no adequate explanation of how to decontaminate the urban environment en masse if an outbreak does occur. In the end we all have to assess our own risk profiles. Will I stand or sit next to somebody coughing? I doubt it. Or will I take mass transit if I can easily walk to where I need to be by leaving a bit earlier? Nope. [1] - http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en...
  - hackuser 12y ago
    > I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example. I would suggest to everyone: Don't comment on questions like this one (how Ebola spreads) unless you know for certain what you are saying and can back it up. We have complete saturation of rumors and bad information; adding to it won't improve the situation. I don't mean to criticize the commenter above; they just happened to have the top-most comment of this kind. EDIT: What a strong signal of over-reaction when a post that says you should know what you are talking about, on HN, is modded down. (I don't care how it's modded, it's just depressing to see this response here.) EDIT: The same applies to my other post, which asks serious, legitimate questions in a non-offensive way. How sad.

bjz_ 12y ago

Agreed. He might have been silly for being out in public right after having come back from Africa, but I'm sure he did more good over there in preventing the spread of the disease (which helps us), than he might have done when coming home. Lets hope future doctors learn from this.

jeffdavis 12y ago
"I'm sure he did more good over there in preventing the spread of the disease" Why are you sure?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

blisterpeanuts 12y ago

Cold comfort if he has created a public health crisis in the city. He should have self-quarantined upon his return, in my opinion.

rustyconover 12y ago

To borrow an idea from math, "doing good" isn't a commutative, infections and diseases are. Have some respect for others and slow your roll before going out during the 21 day post exposure window. It's a bit like saying, "Hey I've saved lives over here so I have earned the right to be irresponsible over here". Because you know, karma balances out. No, the world doesn't work like that. And you aren't doing any good propagating this idea either because it encourages this privileged way of thinking. As much as this guy isn't being vilified (and say what you want about the government spinning its story of ebola being hard to transmit), lets think clearly and rationally. He knew the risks that he could possibly be infected and decided to endanger others when he could have easily stayed home or gone anywhere to a more isolated environment (upstate NY is calling). It is well known symptoms generally show up by the 10th day. Today is his day 10. It's very interesting that the government has locked down this guys apartment, yet if you need contact with bodily fluids to contract the disease why quarantine the apartment and surroundings? Could it be that droplets are a transmission method as many people are starting to suspect. Sneezing and coughing may spread these droplets to the floors and walls? And if that is the case, what about other objects that come in contact with saliva and other fluids like utensils, door handles, glasses...

blergh123 12y ago
I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example.
- rustyconover 12y ago
  If you asked 10 average people what they think "airborne" means in this context, I doubt they'd say there is a difference between wet and dry transmission. I'd say for the purposes of argument, if a guy coughs violently on you because he's sick there is risk you could get Ebola. If a guy vomits in the subway car, apparently there is a risk of Ebola transmission. I've been on the subway cars and in taxi cabs it happens more than you think. Do you think they bleach all of those things adequately? No way, the financial incentives don't align to properly do it. The government is using semantics and spin to their advantage by saying it isn't airborne via dried viral transmission. The WHO agrees[1] that it also isn't airborne, but also admits surfaces can transmit the virus. Most officials omit this detailed explanation since they have no adequate explanation of how to decontaminate the urban environment en masse if an outbreak does occur. In the end we all have to assess our own risk profiles. Will I stand or sit next to somebody coughing? I doubt it. Or will I take mass transit if I can easily walk to where I need to be by leaving a bit earlier? Nope. [1] - http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en/ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/06-october-2014/en...
- hackuser 12y ago
  > I thought it was well known that ebola can be spread through any bodily fluids and that this includes droplets from coughing and sneezing. What they don't yet know is whether ebola is 'airborne' - i.e. dried droplets that can float in air as is the case with measles for example. I would suggest to everyone: Don't comment on questions like this one (how Ebola spreads) unless you know for certain what you are saying and can back it up. We have complete saturation of rumors and bad information; adding to it won't improve the situation. I don't mean to criticize the commenter above; they just happened to have the top-most comment of this kind. EDIT: What a strong signal of over-reaction when a post that says you should know what you are talking about, on HN, is modded down. (I don't care how it's modded, it's just depressing to see this response here.) EDIT: The same applies to my other post, which asks serious, legitimate questions in a non-offensive way. How sad.