Mass Quarantine in the US: How Will It Work?

Thanks for the link in the other thread, I'll post here too then, as my opinion remains the same.




Maybe she should be happy she's not ending up like many Africans do every day. Maybe she should be happy SHE CAN STILL COME BACK FOR TREATMENT unlike them who either get help in time or can start bleeding from their ears WHILE THEY WAIT TO DIE

I know one thing. i might not be over there helping, but if I were I sure as hell wouldnt WHINE LIKE A BITCH FOR HAVING TO SIT STILL FOR 7 hours after what I had just witnessed in AFRICA. Compassion my ass, everyone needs to know SHE has been there and is not being treated like a hero, PERIOD.


How humble of her, to think for a minute of all the suffering and agony she had witnessed mere DAYS BEFORE. Oh no, a tent...


The more articles I find, the more I am convinced that besides making a point, this woman is much more interested in getting her 15 minutes of fame

a reply to: kaylaluv

I see your point, however the U.S. hasn't forced these health-care workers to travel to W. Africa . Arguing about who pays for the quarantine is a waste of time.

Just to be clear...

This thread is about how mass quarantine will work in the US - not about whether or not Americans returning from West Africa should be quarantined. Nurse Hickox' treatment gives us a preview.

I think the topic here is either mass quarantine or this nurse in NJ (on which there is already a topic. But anyway...

a reply to: Wildbob77

My comments from the other two thread about these subjects:

Risk assumed on her part. We are getting HER version. Of course she doesn't like it or being the first.

And to the people saying, why is she in quarantine...she is not showing any symptoms. Duh...this is exactly what quarantine is FOR. To make sure they DON'T show any symptoms for 21 days.

Maybe the WHO/CDC/DWB and big mouth opponents of this who apparently have no CLUE as to what a quarantine is for criticizing this bold move by the states should find a tropical island and fly all the do-gooder volunteers coming back there for the quarantine period and greet them with leis and umbrella drinks.

And those opposing this for their various agendas are right on top of her story, using her complaints as an excuse to NOT do this? No. That should not be allowed to happen. IMPROVE the situation...don't stop the quarantines. Now that she has time on her hands maybe this very motivated, first-hand experiencer can make this better for those to come.
___________________________________________________

As to the question, balance includes risk analysis and acceptance or non-acceptance of such risk, with mitigation plans if risk is assumed.

Sacrificing a few rights (if rights are really even what it is at this point) for the short term (say until the crisis is over or under control) may be something people are willing to do, particularly if it is done transparently and with explanation, and particularly where there is in fact choice (to travel or not to travel) involved. The people aiding those in other places, if they so choose, should also know that might come with risks or additional time.

Short term sacrifice for overall benefit is a concept we seem to have forgotten about. Plus I kind of like my right to be protected from this potential scurge. I think the governors are making the right choice. Might be too late or not enough but it's a start.

"Mass quarantine is proved not to work" is something I don't know that much about. If mass means throwing everyone in a room together and hoping for the best, well I guess that wouldn't be a great idea. But if it's done

And it in fact may even give us some more insight into communicability and timings and symptoms and the timing of symptoms, which, as you are well aware, we have sort of a handle on but is still very much a guessing game given that the baseline of all victims is not complete.

Some assumptions here...as stated before...even if masses were exposed, it would still be in stages and there would be initial options. Even given that...

1. They would not throw everyone into one room...the infected and simply potentially infected alike, There would be separation by symptoms/stage. Exposing potentially infected to infected would be idiocy.

2. If people who are potentially infected are not trustworthy to maintain at-home isolation and then removal if/when infected, here might be enough patrolling capability to help enforce this. But it has to be organized.

3. If it got so bad that people were being thrown immediately into places like FEMA camps due to there being no other options, people probably wouldn't be caring as much about rights and freedoms, or given resistance to such, would take matters into their own hands, a la Walking Dead style.

It's a lot of what ifs and very situational. And much of it depends on how we set up and how capable we are of handling it, how we communicate it in an understandable way, and how much people are willing to trust and cooperate.

There would be fear for sure, and probably violence. But if there is a clear, concise plan with rules that are easy to understand and carry out, we could lessen the impact.

a reply to: soficrow

Just stay ahead of the curve.

Be prepared to "self-quarantine".

Have an excellent water filter, store-able food, first aid kit, gloves, masks etc. etc.

Your other option is to depend on the government...

a reply to: kaylaluv

What did one think that mandatory quarantine would be like? Roses and lollipops? No, it is harsh, and cruel. Think solitary confinement, very little to no human contact. It is not pleasant, but it is the lack of one thing, human contact.

The reality is when dealing with a level 4 contagion, it requires an effort and will seem harsh. But the one thing that all of these medical personal tends to think. They think that just cause they hold a degree, that they know best, and the old saying is proven true: Doctors make the worst patients.

We have to start getting serious about this, for 2 reasons, the first is to prevent it from getting worse, and the other is stop the suffering. It also means harsh protocols, isolation and mandatory quarantine for all of those coming back from those countries hit hardest by this disease, isolating those countries, and then giving them more resources than they are asking for, including people and personal to handle the influx of patients, where those going there also realize they can not come back or return until it is done and then for 21 days after.

a reply to: soficrow

I think we're about to see how it works. With governor Cuomo and Christie declaring mandatory quarantine for returning health workers and anyone else traveling from the affected countries ahead of a planned full scale pandemic excercise, one would have to consider the timing.

Chicago Illinois at O'hare airport recently followed suit. The question remains when will the other airports in affective regions declare mandatory quarantine.

This would, upon enactment of all five airports
declaring mandatory quarantine, in effect mobilize or activate five out of the ten FEMA regions in the east.

The council of governors may also play a role as well.

originally posted by: soficrow


Just to be clear...

This thread is about how mass quarantine will work in the US - not about whether or not Americans returning from West Africa should be quarantined. Nurse Hickox' treatment gives us a preview.

I've been wondering myself how that could work. The economy would almost have to be frozen with a months worth of bills, rents, mortgages, etc just let go.
In Canada, we're encouraged to have a months with of food in the pantry in case of disasters, but in the US, that seems to be looked at as "hoarders", "preppers" and such, and the media presents such people as nuts, likely causing some to not be able to quarantine without preparation.

I hope if we have such an outbreak here, that they could set in such a mass quarantine.
Some of course have to keep working to keep infrastructure going, there'll be some logistics to figure out...

I am a little confused. Maybe one of you can clear this up for? So we are to quarantine Dr and nurses and American citizens that travel to these areas and return. What about the other 1500 of African citizens from one of the three countries that are arriving daily? Is there plans to quarantine them too for 21 days? This should be done for everyone that is flying into our country from the Ebola infected areas, Not just the American citizens. I have not seen this addressed yet?

A quarantine is necessary. As others have said, they should make it comfortable. Perhaps we should reserve an entire hotel near each of the major airports, and take everyone from infected countries directly to the hotel. Let them eat, relax, have Internet and TV, and then go home in 21 days.

But, how do we know it really happened like they are saying it did?

Does anyone else wonder WHY this nurse made a HUGE deal out of this on the first day of new state quarantine rules? Or maybe she complained just a bit, and the MSM and CDC jumped on it to make it a bigger deal than it needed to be. Why did some MSM make a HUGE deal of this for days? Does it have anything to do with the CDC and the federal government not approving of the state quarantines? Is it possible they staged or exaggerated this to cause a huge ruckus to get the states to back down on the quarantine?

Maybe this is a stretch of imagination. But, if it is possible that this nurse's complaints are contrived and exaggerated, why?

a reply to: ~Lucidity
I think you and I have agreed almost to a tee on the subject of ebola since it cropped up on ATS. Do we want FEMA camp style quarantines? NO! But it has become obvious that even intelligent people get pretty stupid when they can't be honest enough with themselves about possible symptoms they are having during the incubation period of this virus. As to the specific topic of this thread ... How will mass quarantines work? It works by preventing MASS quarantine. All volunteer health care workers going to any country with any Ebola cases will be INFORMED IN ADVANCE they will be quarantined in a specific location with comfortable amenities upon their return. They would not be crammed together like a hospital ward but have individual rooms. Since they are health care workers, they would be allowed to monitor their own temperatures and report on any symptoms they have in a video log. Personally I would err on the safety side and require a 40 day quarantine period. They would be financially compensated for this time just as if it were a vacation. Considering all the horror they have likely seen, they would be encouraged to use this time to "decompress" and share their experiences and insights, preferably in a video which can be viewed by future volunteers to prepare them.

A mass quarantine can be prevented if we make it clear to these individuals that they will be quarantined upon their return "just in case" to prevent spreading the virus. Yes, we should "treat Ebola in Africa" to prevent the spread worldwide. Any citizen that voluntarily goes to W. Africa will be subjected to quarantine and no one else from W. Africa will be allowed to enter the US until this crisis has passed.

a reply to: soficrow

I agree with doing a quarantine if anyone comes here that has arrived from any effected area.

I don't think the quarantine should take place in any hospital or doctors office which could potentially expose anyone to the Ebola virus that is already sick and in a weakened state of health.

They could open up some triage units in cities to setup quarantine facilities and procedures. The problem is trust in these facilities. For example: All the facilities we have heard about through the years that they say are FEMA camps... well in a situation like this those facilities could be extremely useful if done humanly and done right.

Do we have enough people trained to run such facilities if it gets bad enough. We do need to prep and consider it now before it gets really bad if it does. It is better to be prepared than not.

Otherwise it will be an after effect similar to Katrina which will cause even more non trust overall on how things get handled.

leolady

a reply to: Khaleesi

Very well said!

It is indeed the quarantine of a few that might prevent the need for mass quarantine.

But just in case, everyone should be prepared to hunker down for a few weeks, if needed. Keep supplies on hand. This is just common sense for any emergency. If an order comes that all schools, businesses, stores, etc. in some areas are to be closed for a time, it will indeed make an impact on the economy. But if your family is prepared, it could be more like a little vacation at home.

The nurse in question who is complaining about being quarantined needs to seriously put a sock in it.
If there was even a 1% chance she was infected - into quarantine you go, IMO.
It protects the community, and if it is Ebola - gives HER a head start on treatment.
Her behavior gives the appearance that all nurses are self absorbed bozo's. We are not.
She could care less about others. "The man who screened me for Ebola was meaaaaaaaaaan!" Boo-Hoo.
As I said elsewhere, if i was exposed, I would happily go into quarantine. I certainly wouldn't contact every news organisation I could think of and make myself look like a cry baby to the world. And by the way things are going now, Ebola being a BIG problem in the CONTUS isn't that far of a stretch.
All I request if I'm in quarantine is an internet connected device so I can keep tabs on ATS!

a reply to: justme2

No - no internet!!! That would be treating you too kindly.

a reply to: soficrow

Two words, one question.

It won't.

What the hell am I looking at in your avatar?

a reply to: justme2

I have to agree with you. Those of us that chose health care as a career are really tired of the cry babies in our profession. I knew when I got involved in health care that I would be dealing with less than pleasant things. Personally, if I were coming back from a volunteer tour in an Ebola infected country, I would be concerned enough about my family to seriously self quarantine for at least a month. If you have the financial resources to volunteer a chunk of time to go to a foreign country and give your time helping victims, you should be able to arrange for supplies to be brought to you upon your return. Communicate via skype with loved ones and give status updates etc. I salute these volunteers for what they do but maybe the stress of what they have seen overwhelms them when they get close to being home. Maybe psychological counseling should be considered routine for returning volunteers.

a reply to: Khaleesi
Exactly. Excellent clarification. Taking steps early will prevent the mass quarantines.

And we continue to agree, as I, too, would err more to the 40-day side. Once something like this is unleashed, it will be very hard to control. At this stage it is still controllable.

And for the thousandth time, she was the first. A few things went wrong. Oh well. She can help them FIX it.

Well, I don't think the OP was looking for us to all weigh in on whether we support forced quarantines or not, but since that's the way things are shaking out I'll get my vote in. I'm against it. It's unconstitutional. If they want to pass a law that states if you meet these criteria and are served notice that you are required by the law to follow quarantine protocol, then they need to get their happy little worthless arses in gear and pass the law, write the FIRM criteria, and develop the protocol. As well as provisioning to assist a notified person in getting all necessary supplies in order to comply with said protocol because once you're served notice you can't go horde-shopping, right?

Until that point, they are unlawfully detaining people (in the case of the nurse she hasn't even shown symptoms) out of fear....which is the exact same justification behind the Japanese internment camps during WWII.

Now, to the OP's question:

Remember the camps they were setting up and sending people to after Katrina? Think that way and I believe you've got your answer.

Looks like Florida will be the fourth state issuing some type of mandatory quarantine or monitoring, although Illinois, New Jersey and New York have mandatory quarantine.

Source

Gov. Rick Scott announced an executive order Saturday afternoon mandating that all people returning from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone take part in twice-daily health evaluations for 21 days.