Remember the original CDC guidance regarding Ebola? You know, no need to worry unless an exposed individual became symptomatic – and no recommended restrictions on their movement unless the person had a fever of 100.4F or higher? Those policies allowed the second US nurse who acquired Ebola in Dallas to travel halfway across the country while incubating (and, potentially, while in the early stages of being symptomatic).
Well, apparently even the CDC can recognize being whacked in the face by reality. They’ve now changed their tune much closer to what common sense says it should have been all along. The CDC now recommends that anyone who is at “high risk” for Ebola exposure should “stay home” for 21 days.
However, don’t start singing the “Hallelujah Chorus” just yet. Under the new CDC guidelines, “stay home” doesn’t really mean “stay at home 24/7”. Such individuals would indeed be allowed to leave their homes – to “jog in a public park”, for example – but would also be told to avoid “congregate gatherings” like sports events.
Yeah, that last bit makes just no freaking sense at all. Last time I checked public parks can get pretty damn crowded, especially in big cities. People jogging in a crowded park sometimes bump into other people – while sweating profusely. They also often drink from public water fountains while jogging or after they finish. Sometimes they clear their throat and spit, too.
I just can’t see how crowds at public parks differ substantially from other “congregate gatherings” like sports events. Those at high risk should be told to stay home – period.
Frankly, IMO the CDC simply hasn’t gone far enough here. “Stay home” should be unconditional.
And they’re IMO missing the boat in another way, too. Depending on voluntary, unenforced quarantines . . . is problematic. We’ve already seen multiple examples of people who knew they fell into the CDC’s “high risk” or “some risk” categories thumbing their nose at common sense (probably due to the “It can’t happen to me” mindset) and put others at risk by going out in public within 21 days of exposure.
Depending on voluntary self-quarantine will work just as well as the following. Put a cookie jar on a low table. Tell your mischievous 5 year old to keep their hands off, since they’ll be having dinner in a hour. Then leave them alone and unsupervised in the same room with that cookie jar for that hour.
In other words: without enforcement, home self-quarantine is just not going to work worth a damn. People are people; everyone thinks, “It can’t happen to me” – until it does. And all it will take is one idiot guessing wrong to cause a serious problem.
The CDC has also moved the goalposts on how it defines Ebola exposure risk categories – and IMO, this time they’re moving them in the right direction. Previously, spending an extended amount of time in close proximity to an Ebola sufferer without protective equipment was considered “low risk exposure”. Now, it’s categorized as “some risk” – a new, higher-risk category. Spending a brief period of time in close proximity to an Ebola sufferer was previously not categorized as any type of exposure. Now it’s categorized as a “low-risk” exposure.
Under the new guidelines, the CDC recommends local health authorities should make the call on whether or not to restrict movement of “some risk” exposure individuals. The whiny ditz and special little snowflake recently returned nurse who was quarantined in New Jersey, then allowed to return to Maine falls into the “some risk” category under the new guidelines.
Perhaps the Maine public health officials will show some backbone and continue to follow the New Jersey lead. Unfortunately, until there’s an outbreak there I’m not holding my breath.
Finally, in semi-related good news: the kid hospitalized in NYC as a possible Ebola case had a negative initial test for the virus. He’s still in isolation pending future follow-up testing. If that future testing shows he’s not infected, he’ll be given the green light to go home.
