'Self-monitoring' snafus: Is THIS the most enraging aspect of latest Ebola case? (Boy, it's up there)

Oh well. “Self-monitoring.” Case closed!

TX health official: 2nd case was NOT part of the original 48 we were monitoring – working on new pool of those we'll be monitoring

— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 12, 2014

As Twitchy readers know, a health care worker in Dallas, Texas, has tested positive in preliminary tests for Ebola.

CNN: health worker who tested positive for #Ebola cared for Duncan during his 2nd visit to hospital, was wearing protective gear

— Vaughn Sterling (@vplus) October 12, 2014

The CDC can’t get its story straight: Breach in protocol or not? But, shhh! Don’t ask any questions, guys, says a HuffPo journo.

Regardless, the “self-monitoring” aspect is a disturbing issue.

TX health official: H/C workers caring for Duncan were classified as "minimal risk" – so they were doing self-monitoring

— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) October 12, 2014

Minimal. Risk.

@ShannonBream #DrFrauci no worries b/c the HealthCareWorker was 'Self Monitoring'…WTHeck U mean she didn't feel good & took her temp!

— ?Colleen Colandene RN ?? (@MamaColandene) October 12, 2014

.@CDCgov director Tom Frieden: Patient was self-monitoring for fever. "Level of virus she had was low" upon initial testing.

— Dallas Morning News (@dallasnews) October 12, 2014

Oh, just a low level of blood vomiting and stuff.

Contacts with 1st #Ebola patient will be more aggressively monitored now. Many of them had been "self-monitored." http://t.co/JMV0AgsaOa

— CBSDFW (@CBSDFW) October 12, 2014

Now. Too little, too late?

… RT @sqwerin: @RBPundit Hospital employees who interacted w/ Duncan have been "self monitoring", but continuing work. @vplus

— RBe (@RBPundit) October 12, 2014