Posted on 08/28/2014 6:50:37 PM PDT by alexmark1917
Yes, but seven weeks is a long time.
And given the spread of HIV from patients who know they’re infected and have unprotected sex anyways I’m not comforted by allowing them out of quarantine until ALL of their secretions are negative for the virus.
It’s more than 7 weeks—in one case, infectious virus was found 82 days after first symptoms.
I think there is a rather large difference between HIV and Ebola patients. For one thing, most HIV carriers don’t have an emotional investment in preventing the spread of disease, given that their lifestyle is still based on casual encounters. One of the early HIV carriers had thousands of contacts and did a lot to spread the disease before it was identified (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga%C3%ABtan_Dugas). Most men, however, have an emotional attachment to wives or girlfriends, and would not want to risk their health by engaging in unprotected sex before they know they are non-infectious.
You’re assuming that no homosexuals will get ebola.
And there are plenty of very promiscuous bisexual and heterosexual men as well. Just one encounter with a prostitute could be another infection cluster.
I wouldn’t bet the farm that every patient who had ‘recovered’ would abstain from having sex for the next 2 or 3 months.
That’s just me.
Not to mention guys who would ‘do that’ to porn and leave the evidence in the wastebasket for the hotel staff to deal with. Or wherever.
Thanks for the ping!
You’re Welcome, Alamo-Girl!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.