This message was self-deleted by its author

[NJCher]

97. a check on the hysteria

I've re-read this thread and the people who are accusing those who are in favor of some type of quarantine for returning health care workers are not the ones exhibiting hysteria.

I think the hysterical ones are the people advocating that we go with self-monitoring.

This hysteria seems to be centered around the fact that there are those among us who admit to human error. Self-monitoring is a flawed concept simply because humans are flawed. Others have their own reasons, one of which is stated by Crunchy Frog, who maintains there is a lot we don’t know about this disease. See post 92, in which this concept is expanded.

Look at the inflammatory phrases and illogical sentences and phrases I've garnered:

Instead you want to take away their civil rights for no reason beyond public paranoia.

Above are two reasons, neither of which have anything to do with “public paranoia.” In fact, public paranoia is not a reason, it is a condition. I think the poster might be trying to say that those who advocate another position are paranoid, and if that is what the poster is saying, then they are attributing a motivation, which should not be done. It would be helpful if the poster read up on attribution theory.

Here’s a poster who wants a list of credentials:

94. You're a real font of opinion ...

what credentials do you have?


And another requesting that posters produce:

“peer-reviewed, published studies to prove your case.”

If you had been paying the slightest attention or knew jack shit about epidemiology. it's up to you to prove it by showing us the peer-reviewed research to back your outlandish insinuations.

there is no excuse for this anti-science attitude and rhetoric.

lack of sense hits me upside the head. science, common sense, logical and experience

You and your little friends need remedial reading comprehension.

Which might be somewhat appropriate if the only reasons for the quarantine position were medical or strictly confined to science, but they’re not. For example, my position is that we are depending on self-monitoring by humans. How many disasters in human history can, in retrospect, be attributed to human error? Oh, the Titanic, the Exxon Valdez, Challenger, Chernobyl, just to name a few.

I say "semi-appropriate" because I don't understand the need for four-letter words and denigration (ad hominem) attacks of those with a different point of view. What point does "little friends" accomplish, other than to possibly assuage the poster's own indignation. If this person is trying to convince, it's a poor way to do it.

Another position is that there is a lot we don’t know about this disease. Still others question certain points in the CDC protocol. What is the response to such questioning? Fuming and name-calling.

I could go on but I won’t. I’ve proved my point, and here’s what I see: a group of people who seem to need to believe that medical professionals are infallible and who are very upset that there are others who don’t. The foundation of their argument is fallacious, because it attributes the motive of “paranoia,” which is a condition and which is not necessarily reflected in the points of the posters who advocate a quarantine period. Those who are whipping themselves into a state of indignity are not even aiming at the right target.

Furthermore, many posters who are so indignant about this situation seem to feel the need to call in “science” to bolster their argument. Again, get the right target, please.

I, like many others, acknowledge that is important for the U.S. to have workers volunteering to help this crisis on the ground in Africa. It is absolutely essential if this scourge is to be eradicated. The quarantine doesn’t have to be a mandatory 21-day—it could be varied, based on the degree to which the worker dealt with Ebola.

Furthermore, quarantine doesn’t have to be horrible, even though in Kaci’s case, it certainly was. Being confined to one’s home isn’t the end of the world, in fact, many working people choose to take their vacations and stay home. The returning workers should not have been treated the way she was. All those things need to be ironed out. I agree that such treatment is inexcusable.

One more thing: if I were a returning health care worker, I would put myself in self-quarantine, regardless of what the law is. The cost, in view of what the consequences of spreading this disease could be, are inconsequential.


Cher