Meanwhile, the transmissions in Dallas have all been in keeping with the things the usual suspects were saying (health care workers did become infected there, but they are known to be at higher risk, PPE is known not to be 100% safe, the hospital did not have great PPE procedures in place).
As for Dallas, the plural of anecdote is not data. We just don't know yet; for example, in 1st World conditions where IV saline etc. are standard, the death rate may be well below the 70% currently estimated in West Africa. Although your points about the Dallas Ebola Magnet Hospital of Excellence's, are correct: while following the then current CDC "protocols" (scare quotes since the CDC and others invested so much into their sanctity vs. health care workers following them), were inadequate, e.g. no neck coverage.
Heck, look at the standard Bellevue Hospital PPE picture that's been floating around for many days, e.g. http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/bellevue-hospit... Based on what we suspect the person on the right would stand a serious chance of getting Ebola, and that's no longer the protocol.
Or look at this gem from the U.K. press: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2805930/Should-Offic...
You don't suppose there's some environmental, population density, etc. differences that might make NYC's experience different than Dallas'?
That doesn't mean chickens need to start running at axes the second a known case is identified and isolated.
Which is being advocated by precisely who?
My major theme here is that people, and most especially "authorities" should not be lying, e.g. not making absolute statements about things which aren't. So fat that that has resulted in a constantly changing the party line as preceding versions have turned out to be lies. But there's worse, in the most brazen example I know of, http://cnsnews.com/news/article/brittany-m-hughes/cdc-you-ca... contradicting yourself in consecutive sentences.
You want "panic"? Convince the American people the authorities responsible for keeping us from getting an epidemic of Biblical proportions are systematically, even routinely lying to us. We're well along the road to that.
He wasn't very clear there. But the CDC statements have been reasonably consistent and clear, especially in the face of the ridiculous questions they get from reporters. A softer reading is that transmission from an asymptomatic person who is later found to be infected is not believed to be possible at the time they are asymptomatic. Health workers with exposure should still, out of an abundance of cation, avoid contact with large groups of hard to trace people.
My main takeaways were (starting 25 minutes in): - There's a lot we don't know, especially about the current strain
- He's heard of patients that did not have a fever through the entire infection
- There have been incidents/experiments where we do not understand how ebola, this strain in particular, passed between animals
