Is it a good idea for the containment of diseases like Ebola to handled at the state level?
The handling of this contagion could have global ramifications.
Why does Texas (whose governor, Rick Perry, is notoriously anti-science and thinks, for example, that prayer is the best way to cure drought) get to decide for the country and the world how this quarantine and cleanup should be managed?
Do Americans – particularly Americans in other states – really think that this is a good idea? Or should this be a federal responsibility?
This question is not meant to feed any Ebola hysteria. It may be “difficult” to spread the disease as long as containment is being handled properly – but there are some rather obvious errors being committed in Texas, which makes it harder to predict how well it can be contained.
Topics:
Observing members:
0
Composing members: 0
Composing members: 0
Answers
flutherother
(34518
)“Great Answer”
(3)
)“Great Answer”
(3)
talljasperman
(21916)“Great Answer”
(4)
)“Great Answer”
(4)
Kropotkin
(13761)“Great Answer”
(2)
)“Great Answer”
(2)
JLeslie
(65411)“Great Answer”
(4)
)“Great Answer”
(4)
Coloma
(47193)“Great Answer”
(2)
)“Great Answer”
(2)
Adirondackwannabe
(36713)“Great Answer”
(3)
)“Great Answer”
(3)
janbb
(62858)“Great Answer”
(2)
)“Great Answer”
(2)
JLeslie
(65411)“Great Answer”
(3)
)“Great Answer”
(3)
LuckyGuy
(43689)“Great Answer”
(1)
)“Great Answer”
(1)
