http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29439-2003Apr4.html
"Bill" <bill19...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b6l070$6eoto$1...@ID-148028.news.dfncis.de...
>At Melbourne University, students and staff are 'required to undergo
>voluntary quarantine'.
the white house press release is at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/iraq/20030404-8.html
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
It seems rather odd and unlikely to me that the US would have no
quarantine laws on the books already...
<curious>
-het
--
"Thanks to Bush and his war agenda, we've learned that the Tigris runs
through Iraq, and the Hubris runs through the White House."
-Larry Wilcox (in a letter to the LA Times)
SARS Info & News: http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/glinks.html#SARS
H.E. Taylor http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/
> It seems rather odd and unlikely to me that the US would have no
> quarantine laws on the books already...
It does, but they're at the state level. This is a national directive
that covers all the states and territories.
And ships at sea....
danny " is London calling? "
--------------------------------------------------------
"To summarize: it is a well known fact that those people who most WANT
to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to it. Anyone who is capable
of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
-Doug Adams _The Restaurant at The End of The Universe_
In my stupid recollection, plus 40 years as a licensed health
practitioner, it's been my assumption that each state's Public Health
Dept. had this power, as did any physician who recommended it.
What in the hell is this country coming to.
Territories and other protectorates are covered . . . the National
Directive is just one more erosion of YOUR rights, and more domination
by the idiot and his minions.
> Talk about overreaction. Worldwide since November we have fewer total
>cases than there were flu deaths in Michigan alone during 2001. It also has a
>mortality rate of 3.5% which has fallen since they started keeping track. This
>is not even a particularly virulent flu let alone Ebola.
This most certainly is a virulent flu! not in the physical sense, but
in the political sense. People are genuinely afraid of this because
they don't take the time to educate themselves. As a result,
politicians react to people's impression which is fear, not the actual
threat which is slight. After all, it's a lot easier to issue a
blanket quarantine order than it is to change the minds of 250 million
worried Americans, EMS personnel notwithstanding.
Isn't this a great system we've created for ourselves? Relax, it could
be worse..
Earle
>In article <b6l070$6eoto$1...@ID-148028.news.dfncis.de>,
><bill19...@yahoo.com> Bill wrote:
>>
>> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush issued an executive order on Friday
>> allowing the forced quarantine of patients with a mysterious new illness
>> that has killed 80 people, as well as patients with other diseases such as
>> Ebola...
>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29439-2003Apr4.html
>>
>
> It seems rather odd and unlikely to me that the US would have no
> quarantine laws on the books already...
It does. All that was done here was to add SARS to the list. Nothing
really new. (And it doesn't mean they really will quarantine anyone;
it just sets up the authority.)
Whether adding SARS is a good idea can be debated. Given the lack of
info at this point, they are being cautious -- better to over-react
than under-react. I'm not sure I disagree with that. Time will tell.
bob
>>
>
> It does. All that was done here was to add SARS to the list. Nothing
> really new. (And it doesn't mean they really will quarantine anyone;
> it just sets up the authority.)
>
> Whether adding SARS is a good idea can be debated. Given the lack of
> info at this point, they are being cautious -- better to over-react
> than under-react. I'm not sure I disagree with that. Time will tell.
>
> bob
>
Apparently, you don't think the Public Health Dept. of the states and
Territories and the Physicians who have authority over them have enough
brains to quarantine SARS victims. Only the great intellectual, that
lop eared Texas idiot would have the sense to do. I see where *you* are
coming from.
Will, crna
>Apparently, you don't think the Public Health Dept. of the states and
>Territories and the Physicians who have authority over them have enough
>brains to quarantine SARS victims. Only the great intellectual, that
>lop eared Texas idiot would have the sense to do. I see where *you* are
>coming from.
>
Just out of curiosity, how is that done when a new one comes along?
In most states can the head of the state board of health or someone similar
or does it have to be legislated.
Of course if you actually read the original EO you would probably have
an aneurysm since it was added to many such as anthrax, etc. that could be
quarantined under homeland security measures in case of attack. THAT was what
I found offensive.
Quarantine for anthrax? On what basis since there is no such thing as
person to person transmission of this disease?
http://www.courts.michigan.gov/scao/courtforms/infectiousdisease/pc110.pdf
"Kurt Ullman" <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:EXJja.10742$4P1.9...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...