CNN has a new link, "The most outrageous statements about Ebola," here.
Update: Oct. 19
What happens with passengers who had flown from Cleveland to Dallas on Monday, Oct. 13 but who live in Cleveland and need to return home. Are they kept from flying back? Who pays for this? Important policy and legal question. This could happen to me with a later situation.
Update: Oct. 20
There is some analysis claiming that the incubation period for Ebola behaves asymptotically, with possibly 5% of cases occurring after 21 days, because they had started with low exposures. The link (quoting a WHO study) is here. It refers to a WHO study. CNN reported it today, but has softpedaled it. Thoretically, those already released in Dallas could be re-quarantined if this report held up. It could also mean, theoretically, that people could be trapped out of town for 42 days, in the worst case scenarios. Again, who pays for it? The link for the story is here.
I think we need to be more reasonable, though, about extremely casual exposures, which really have no chance of transmission. Most of those under observation had trivial exposures with no chance of illness. That would be true of the bridal shop in Ohio.
We really need a different kind of test, that could detect infected monocytes by some kind of external molecular negativity before there are symptoms. We need to be able to test an clear people within 72 hours of very incidental exposure. Is some sort of "Andraka Test" for early testing based on electronegativity concepts possible?