I think what has annoyed me most about the public message on ebola is this assumption that there can be no changes. I would feel better if CDC et al said they were watching all new developments so they can respond immediately to any changes they obseve in transmission.

Haas’ point that we really don’t know yet whether 21 days for a basic quarantine is sufficient is well taken.

It’s interesting to see how quickly websites like 538 set about debunking his concern, just like they tried to debunk calls for a travel ban a few days ago.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-21-days-long-enough-for-ebola-quarantine/

No, actually, that’s NOT what I’m talking about. Semen and breast milk do supposedly remain infectious for longer periods, but that would not affect the length of a basic quarantine.

I’m talking about this sort of thing.

“People remain infectious as long as their blood and body fluids, including semen and breast milk, contain the virus. Men who have recovered from the disease can still transmit the virus through their semen for up to 7 weeks after recovery from illness.”

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

The incubation given by WHO and the CDC and all the public health authorities is 2-21 days. That’s the usually accepted length of time. Some people say the outside figure is longer (I’ve heard by differing amounts). But my guess is that anything longer, if it occurs, is very much an outlier.

However, what is it all based on? I’m not especially paranoid, but I’ve come to distrust the CDC et al. But that is the commonly accepted figure.

Same case with that media doctor. If I had any outrage left, I would be bubbling over.

But that goes to the question of what their goal is. Is it to raise fear or to be effective in efforts to destroy? Because the more riled up the citizenry, the more difficult it is to succeed with future terror acts.