Survey Update......Survey is now closed. Please go to Survey Results to see the response from the allnurses community.
Once again, it is a nurse who has taken the Ebola media spotlight this week. Kaci Hickox, a nurse who cared for Ebola patients in Sierra Leone found herself quarantined against her will in New Jersey upon her return to the US, in spite of the fact that she tested negative for the virus. After a 3 day isolation in less than desirable accommodations, she was transported home where she was supposed to remain under home quarantine but is now declaring that the quarantine is unnecessary and counterproductive, and is openly defying the order by going out in public.
Additional breaches in voluntary quarantine from those returning from Ebola-plagued Africa occurred when NBC medical correspondent, Dr. Nancy Snyderman in New Jersey and Dr. Craig Spencer in New York left their homes and ventured out into public spaces.
On Monday, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) called for voluntary home quarantine for workers with the highest risk for Ebola infection. It also specified that most medical personnel returning from Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea would not need to be kept in isolation.
In spite of this, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, mandated a 21-day mandatory quarantine policy for all healthcare workers exposed to Ebola. Although this move has received much criticism, it did get the support of Dr. Bruce Beutler, an American doctor and researcher and Nobel Prize winner for Medicine and Physiology for his work researching the the body’s overall immune system. He is currently the Director of the Center for the Genetics of Host Defense at the University of Texas Southwestern Center in Dallas. He favors Christie’s quarantine policy “because it’s not entirely clear that they can’t transmit the disease,” referring to asymptomatic healthcare workers like Kaci Hickox.
New York and Illinois have also have followed suit and mandated mandatory 21-day home quarantine policies. Although there is plenty of scientific evidence indicating there’s very little chance that a random person will contract Ebola unless they touch bodily fluids of an infected person, the thought is that the authorities need to do something to calm Americans’ fears. As Mike Osterholm, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota, says, "You want to try to eliminate not just real risk, but perceived risk."
There are thoughts on both sides of this issue which has led to heated discussions at times. There are concerns about the potential impact with both pathways of re-entry requirements for Ebola healthcare workers. What are your thoughts about this? Please take our survey to share your opinions. Let your voice be heard.
Okay, so post a scientific survey that supports your opinion then. You are still just stating your opinion. It maybe right and maybe wrong.
I think people are reevaluating their opinion on ebola and this nurse since everything has started to calm down, she won her court case, and World War Z hasn't broken out.
You want me to post a scientific survey that supports my opinion that the general public's opinion is a negative one toward Kaci Hickox? Do we really need a 'scientific survey' for this??
Ok. AllNurses.com recently put up a survey questionnaire, asking members of this website to answer questions about their perceptions of Ms. Hickox. The results are available on this website; actually tnbutterfly posted the link to the results of that survey on this very thread, just a few posts above these. It shows a very negative image of Ms. Hickox, and I can't even say the respondents are even really "the general public". In theory, we'd be much more a slice of healthcare workers than the general public. But the image is a negative one, according to the numbers.
I don't believe anyone's opinion can be right or wrong...it is an opinion. Now, the facts they base their opinion on may be right...or wrong. I am only stating (and continue to state) ONLY that there IS a broad PUBLIC opinion that Ms. Hickox is somehow in the wrong. I do not support the belief that she needs to be quarantined, never have. I am ONLY saying that she has done much to tarnish her own public image, by her media responses.
I DO hope that the public reevaluates their opinion, in that Ms. Hickox is not going to cause a horrific outbreak of disease. Just this morning alone, two people walked into my office for something (different times, they don't work together) and they both said something along the lines of 'I can't believe that nurse in Maine, she looks so foolish" and "she looks ridiculous". Do I have a scientific survey to support their opinions? No. It's their opinion, and one I have heard many, many times. TOO many, unfortunately.
You want me to post a scientific survey that supports my opinion that the general public's opinion is a negative one toward Kaci Hickox? Do we really need a 'scientific survey' for this??
Ok. AllNurses.com recently put up a survey questionnaire, asking members of this website to answer questions about their perceptions of Ms. Hickox. The results are available on this website; actually tnbutterfly posted the link to the results of that survey on this very thread, just a few posts above these. It shows a very negative image of Ms. Hickox, and I can't even say the respondents are even really "the general public". In theory, we'd be much more a slice of healthcare workers than the general public. But the image is a negative one, according to the numbers.
I don't believe anyone's opinion can be right or wrong...it is an opinion. Now, the facts they base their opinion on may be right...or wrong. I am only stating (and continue to state) ONLY that there IS a broad PUBLIC opinion that Ms. Hickox is somehow in the wrong. I do not support the belief that she needs to be quarantined, never have. I am ONLY saying that she has done much to tarnish her own public image, by her media responses.
I DO hope that the public reevaluates their opinion, in that Ms. Hickox is not going to cause a horrific outbreak of disease. Just this morning alone, two people walked into my office for something (different times, they don't work together) and they both said something along the lines of 'I can't believe that nurse in Maine, she looks so foolish" and "she looks ridiculous". Do I have a scientific survey to support their opinions? No. It's their opinion, and one I have heard many, many times. TOO many, unfortunately.
What I am implying is you are passing off your "opinion" as fact, which it isn't. The survey on allnurses is about as unscientific as it gets, and I saw the results.
Obviously, you or I neither one can speak for the "public's opinion", and you are basing your opinion on what the public thinks on the news media pitch which is by design sensational to gather viewers.
I disagree with your opinion and you disagree with mine, and that is fine. The only difference is I am not trying to state what the majority of the public thinks on this subject.
What I am implying is you are passing off your "opinion" as fact, which it isn't. The survey on allnurses is about as unscientific as it get, and I saw the results.
Obviously, you or I neither one can speak for the "public's opinion", and you are basing your opinion on what the public thinks on the news media pitch which is by design sensational to gather viewers.
I disagree with your opinion and you disagree with mine, and that is fine. The only difference is I am not trying to state what the majority of the public thinks on this subject.
Ah, I see what you're saying. You have the opinion that Ms. Hickox IS being FAVORABLY viewed by the majority of the American public, is that correct? You said you disagreed with my opinion that she is being NEGATIVELY viewed by the majority of the public, so....it must be that you feel she currently looks GOOD to them.
I guess I'm just surprised that you DO believe that Kaci Hickox is coming off well in the public opinion polls. I am surprised that you are interpreting 'the people's' commentary as favorable to her. Do people come up to you to discuss this...and if so, are they singing her praises? Or saying she's just terrific? I'm not trying to antagonize, I'm HONESTLY asking, because I have YET to have one single person come to me to tell me how great they think she is. They all tell me how much they think she looks.....anything but great.
My conclusion that most people find her to be a negative talking point, and to have a poor public image, is from what I hear, what I see, and what people all around me are telling me THEIR impressions of her are. Scientific? Guess not. But I didn't think it was really necessary to conduct a 'scientific' poll to find out how the people around me feel, when they are so freely willing to tell me without any survey. :) It really isn't based on a "news media pitch", as you called it; I have concluded that most people are not happy with Ms. Hickox based on what people tell me in person, and what people in general say about her here. It has NOTHING to do with whether I think they are right or wrong, just.....what I am 'getting' that they think.
I think that many members of the general public do have a negative opinion of Kaci Hickox. I think that the media forms people's opinions by portraying her a certain way. I wish that people would be more critical consumers of news, and not take everything as gospel truth.
Personally I see an intelligent, strong, articulate and level-headed person when I watch the interviews she's made. I don't see any arrogance at all. What specifically does anyone think that she's said or done that's so offensive or inflammatory? She stood up for her rights, and she has every right to do that. I'm impressed by her, both for the work she's done with MSF and for the way she's conducting herself now. I doubt that I'd manage to be as graceful.
My opinion of her is likely influenced by the fact that I believe that she's right (science does support her position). For the life of me I can't understand how anyone can regard her as arrogant. The only explanation I can think of is that if someone is very fearful and mistakenly thinks that she poses a threat to other people's health, it affects and distorts what they see and hear when they listen to her talk.
Yes it is because that is not how the disease progresses.
Never mind the fact that there are only 4,000 people in Fort Kent and any movie theater (or other public place) she goes to is very unlikely to be crowded...
Ah, I see what you're saying. You have the opinion that Ms. Hickox IS being FAVORABLY viewed by the majority of the American public, is that correct? You said you disagreed with my opinion that she is being NEGATIVELY viewed by the majority of the public, so....it must be that you feel she currently looks GOOD to them.
I guess I'm just surprised that you DO believe that Kaci Hickox is coming off well in the public opinion polls. I am surprised that you are interpreting 'the people's' commentary as favorable to her. Do people come up to you to discuss this...and if so, are they singing her praises? Or saying she's just terrific? I'm not trying to antagonize, I'm HONESTLY asking, because I have YET to have one single person come to me to tell me how great they think she is. They all tell me how much they think she looks.....anything but great.
My conclusion that most people find her to be a negative talking point, and to have a poor public image, is from what I hear, what I see, and what people all around me are telling me THEIR impressions of her are. Scientific? Guess not. But I didn't think it was really necessary to conduct a 'scientific' poll to find out how the people around me feel, when they are so freely willing to tell me without any survey. :) It really isn't based on a "news media pitch", as you called it; I have concluded that most people are not happy with Ms. Hickox based on what people tell me in person, and what people in general say about her here. It has NOTHING to do with whether I think they are right or wrong, just.....what I am 'getting' that they think.
But yes, everyone will "see" what they will see!
All I am saying it is your opinion and my opinion. There is nothing else that can be concluded without someway to quantify it like a scientific survey.
Never mind the fact that there are only 4,000 people in Fort Kent and any movie theater (or other public place) she goes to is very unlikely to be crowded...
She isn't symptomatic so she is not going to pass ebola, so it doesn't matter where she goes.
Besides that she already stated she wouldn't go to any public places until after the 21 days.
The EBV was detectable via RNA PCR without detectable ELISA ABs in asymptomatic individuals. The acute phase lasted 2-3 days. Not a matter of hours. There is also no evidence these individuals with contagious.
Sent from my iPhone.
EBOV was detected initially in 2 of the 3 patients it studied, one of the three did not have a positive EBOV PCR at the day 7 test. This even combined with any other data we have available certainly suggests that for many patients a positive PCR may occur simultaneously with a cytokine release, but we don't have conclusive evidence that this is always the case. So the question becomes what the burden of proof should be. Should we err on the side of protecting against what we haven't ruled out or should we just assume something probably won't happen despite sufficient evidence to call this an established fact.
The initial quarantine in New Jersey was not warranted, but the home quasi-quarantine is actually what is recommended by the CDC which is what she refused and was ordered by a court to follow. What I disagree with is her argument that it's not possible for her to have Ebola at that point and potentially develop symptoms, which scientifically is false.
wtbcrna, MSN, DNP, CRNA
5,128 Posts
Thanks Elvish that was great!