creekland Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I study epidemiology, especially influenza, as a hobby, and haven't been the slightest bit nervous until hearing of the nurse in Madrid. She is the first case of ebola contacted outside of Africa and with very limited exposure to the virus, which may hint that it is perhaps more easily transmissable than previously thought. I still think there was some unknown lapse or break in her precautions, because frankly I think we would have seen more cases outside of Africa by now. However, it is still concerning. I am checking flutrackers.com on a daily basis to updates, since they gather information from news sources all over the world. I'm guessing that there might be some difference in how susceptible any one person is - or if the virus has to hit some sort of sweet spot in a body. One guy I saw interviewed said that the average rate of getting the disease among close family members (without protection) is just 1 in 7. He didn't provide support to his data, but even if the real data were 1 in 3, one has to wonder why that 1 gets it and the other 2 (or 6 or whatever number) do not. They all have to have been exposed similarly. There has to be something else involved. After hearing his averages, I've been quite curious as to how many in his family - those with close contact - will get it. They are at their peak time to show signs of developing it (fever, etc) now. Then we'll also see about anyone with less contact. It is also condescending and elitist to think that we rubes can't handle the truth and are too stupid to do anything but panic. My family deserves to know the truth and prepare for it regardless of whether or not others might overreact and panic. But again, I'd rather be told nothing than lied to. I don't think anyone has lied. I think it's too new to know every detail folks would like to know. And I don't think it's possible to underestimate the likelihood of way too many rubes panicking due to not understanding the facts. I think back to the poster who mentioned someone cancelling a kid's birthday party out of concern for ebola! Unless that person had any sort of contact... yeah, that's overreacting, and quite frankly, stupid. It beats those who opt to drive rather than fly due to concerns about crashes... or those who opt not to vaccinate due to concerns about side effects more than diseases (NOT meaning those who can't get immunizations for medical reasons). MANY people simply don't "get" risk. Those of us with intelligence can take in multiple reports, interviews, data, etc, and decide for ourselves what's appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie12345 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Those of us with intelligence can take in multiple reports, interviews, data, etc, and decide for ourselves what's appropriate. This. Except... Okay, here's where I admit I am starting to freak out a little. Not so much about ebola, but the enterovirus. I was worried about that before, especially when my kids got sick last month, but that was before all of these unexplained effects started popping up. And then I learned of the little boy in NJ right before leaving the house for an all-day co-op, where we have a big NJ/PA overlap. I did spend the day trying to keep up with 4 kids on different schedules in a large building, nagging them to scrub up, avoid sharing, leave their faces alone, still realizing it couldn't possibly all that effective against hand rails on multiple stair cases, bathroom doors, child care room toys, group projects, communal lunch, and gym classes. And tomorrow is Lego club. :::shiver::: I'm trying to find the sweet spot between precautions and crazy, but the lack of information on this particular virus is causing me more anxiety than anything else. Even when we all had the swine flu, I knew what we were supposed to watch and do and I was confident in our ability to get any potential complications treated. But the idea that a child could have this virus and die without any obvious symptoms... Yeah, ebola's on the back burner for me right now. At least I have vague ideas of how THAT one might go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeacherZee Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 This. Except... Okay, here's where I admit I am starting to freak out a little. Not so much about ebola, but the enterovirus. I was worried about that before, especially when my kids got sick last month, but that was before all of these unexplained effects started popping up. And then I learned of the little boy in NJ right before leaving the house for an all-day co-op, where we have a big NJ/PA overlap. I did spend the day trying to keep up with 4 kids on different schedules in a large building, nagging them to scrub up, avoid sharing, leave their faces alone, still realizing it couldn't possibly all that effective against hand rails on multiple stair cases, bathroom doors, child care room toys, group projects, communal lunch, and gym classes. And tomorrow is Lego club. :::shiver::: I'm trying to find the sweet spot between precautions and crazy, but the lack of information on this particular virus is causing me more anxiety than anything else. Even when we all had the swine flu, I knew what we were supposed to watch and do and I was confident in our ability to get any potential complications treated. But the idea that a child could have this virus and die without any obvious symptoms... Yeah, ebola's on the back burner for me right now. At least I have vague ideas of how THAT one might go. I don't want to be flippant and I don't want to minimize your fears, but in all honesty the worrying you are doing is probably more detrimental to your health than any risk of you catching Ebola right now, or in the forseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie12345 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I don't want to be flippant and I don't want to minimize your fears, but in all honesty the worrying you are doing is probably more detrimental to your health than any risk of you catching Ebola right now, or in the forseeable future. I don't disagree. Not sure it's more detrimental than the risk of any of my 5 kids getting the enterovirus right now or in the foreseeable future, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Okay, here's where I admit I am starting to freak out a little. Not so much about ebola, but the enterovirus. The enterovirus is more worthy of concern IMO - esp when one has young children and esp if they have asthma or other known risk factors (but even if not). It is difficult when the powers that be just do not have answers - or solutions. :grouphug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeacherZee Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The enterovirus is more worthy of concern IMO - esp when one has young children and esp if they have asthma or other known risk factors (but even if not). It is difficult when the powers that be just do not have answers - or solutions. :grouphug: :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeacherZee Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Sorry Carrie, my reding skill are lacking a bit today, the teenagers have driven away all brain cells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 This was just discussed on the radio here. What they actually need in Liberia is trained medical personnel not more money. Yes. They were discussing that too. That Obama is building/promised 7 hospitals to be built and iirc, two are close to being done within a couple WEEKS. The guy was saying this is great except the need is NOW and they have no one to staff the hospitals. He said 152 health workers had contracted Ebola and over 79 had died, which made it hard to get health workers willing to come help. So we are building all these hospitals and expecting the international community to work together to send health workers. But there is a very real problem of not finding workers willing to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie12345 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Sorry Carrie, my reding skill are lacking a bit today, the teenagers have driven away all brain cells. Heh. I completely understand THAT! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I guess that leaves you with training the local people who are willing. Oh, wait, that's part of what the US troops are supposed to do. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I'm finding this site helpful, as I want to stay informed but don't have time to read all the news outlets. http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/africa-ebola-outbreak-2014/ It's a bit like a twitter feed with headlines about ebola from all over the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonfirmath Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I was listening to NPR broadcasting the BBC this morning and they were discussing with some Liberia head of health guy that patients and not just being turned away, but there is no one to give vaccines for things like measles and malaria or help deliver babies and they are starting to see a rising death toll from these and related other preventative things bc they are so over-stretched and bc ppl fear seeking medical care due to all the Ebola . I can totally understand that. If I were pregnant and about to have a baby, I wouldn't want to do it in a hospital with Ebola either. If I had a baby due for vaccines, I'd totally be thinking, hey Ebola sounds waaaay worse than malaria, I think I'll wait until this passes to go in for that shot. And that's if I had the option. In places that have a hard time meeting medical demand as it is, I can easily picture they wouldn't have the capacity in medical personnel, facilities or equipment. Their fears are justified. In at least one case, ebola was SPREAD to pregnant woman coming for vaccines because they use the same needles over and over. (Just like HIV was spread because of using the same needle for shots for multiple people) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I wonder if they could offer the survivors, who have apparently at least a short term immunity a ridiculously large salary to work as nurse's aides. That's probably the help they need most, given the immense need to clean up body fluids with a disease like that. And training would take two weeks, or maybe two days if it was limited to how to clean people up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrookValley. Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 It just came across my news feed that Mr. Duncan has died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I just saw that as well. :sad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 This. Except... Okay, here's where I admit I am starting to freak out a little. Not so much about ebola, but the enterovirus. I was worried about that before, especially when my kids got sick last month, but that was before all of these unexplained effects started popping up. And then I learned of the little boy in NJ right before leaving the house for an all-day co-op, where we have a big NJ/PA overlap. I did spend the day trying to keep up with 4 kids on different schedules in a large building, nagging them to scrub up, avoid sharing, leave their faces alone, still realizing it couldn't possibly all that effective against hand rails on multiple stair cases, bathroom doors, child care room toys, group projects, communal lunch, and gym classes. And tomorrow is Lego club. :::shiver::: I'm trying to find the sweet spot between precautions and crazy, but the lack of information on this particular virus is causing me more anxiety than anything else. Even when we all had the swine flu, I knew what we were supposed to watch and do and I was confident in our ability to get any potential complications treated. But the idea that a child could have this virus and die without any obvious symptoms... Yeah, ebola's on the back burner for me right now. At least I have vague ideas of how THAT one might go. Carrie - what I'd do is build up the immune system starting in the gut with good quality probiotics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I'm sorry for his death. I hope that those most in danger of getting the disease do not get it but if they do that they will get prompt treatment as that seems to be so important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinNY Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I am also saddened about Mr. Duncan's death. May he rest in peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie12345 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Carrie - what I'd do is build up the immune system starting in the gut with good quality probiotics. That's the kind of thing I'm trying to learn more about now. I've always avoided antibacterial cleaners, all of the kids but the teenager eat healthy diets, they've had plenty of exposure to routine bugs... I was pretty confident until now, so I feel like I'm back to square one in learning about good immunity boosters, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pen Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I wonder if they could offer the survivors, who have apparently at least a short term immunity a ridiculously large salary to work as nurse's aides. That's probably the help they need most, given the immense need to clean up body fluids with a disease like that. And training would take two weeks, or maybe two days if it was limited to how to clean people up. I heard that some survivors have been helping even without pay. And I heard that a woman who survived though her husband died has been taking care of orphaned children who others are afraid to care for, not knowing if the children do or do not have the virus. One problem though seems to be that some survivors are survived, but not actually well, that for some people impairments persist. I forgot what the nature of that was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I heard that some survivors have been helping even without pay. And I heard that a woman who survived though her husband died has been taking care of orphaned children who others are afraid to care for, not knowing if the children do or do not have the virus. One problem though seems to be that some survivors are survived, but not actually well, that for some people impairments persist. I forgot what the nature of that was. I would think there would be some serious liver damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songsparrow Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 There is now a report that there is a 2nd possible case of ebola in Dallas in one of the people who had contact with Mr. Duncan. The identity of the person with the new case is not given. ETA: I note that the report came from Care Now, which is apparently a walk-in clinic. That makes it sound like this person was not one of the people being closely monitored with twice-daily fever checks by the CDC. That makes it very concerning if this does turn out to be a second case. I will hope that it turns out not to be ebola. And my sympathies go out to Mr. Duncan's family. ETA 2: The article was just updated to state that the affected person is "an employee of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office, and had been in the apartment Duncan was staying in before he was hospitalized Sept. 28." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ocelotmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Sounds to me like we need a well-publicized procedure for what to do if you have risk factors for Ebola and are experiencing symptoms. "Call this hotline", not "Mosey on down to the nearest Urgent Care center and potentially infect everyone there". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan in TX Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 There is now a report that there is a 2nd possible case of ebola in Dallas in one of the people who had contact with Mr. Duncan. The identity of the person with the new case is not given. ETA: I note that the report came from Care Now, which is apparently a walk-in clinic. That makes it sound like this person was not one of the people being closely monitored with twice-daily fever checks by the CDC. That makes it very concerning if this does turn out to be a second case. I will hope that it turns out not to be ebola. And my sympathies go out to Mr. Duncan's family. ETA 2: The article was just updated to state that the affected person is "an employee of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office, and had been in the apartment Duncan was staying in before he was hospitalized Sept. 28." I sure hope this is a false alarm. Susan in TX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wapiti Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Okay, here's where I admit I am starting to freak out a little. Not so much about ebola, but the enterovirus. No one really knows, of course, but my guess is that if one's family has healthy immune and neurological systems (what that means can be debated for sure, but let's say without even controversial issues), my guess is that they'll come out ok. Speculating wildly, my take is that there may be unique issues with immune systems of the very sick kids that are not really on the radar of mainstream medicine so much - the mysterious connections between the immune system, the nervous system, and the gut, etc. FWIW, Ev68 is in our area (confirmed, at the PS). Right now all my kids have colds - including my two with messed-up immune systems - and I kind of suspect this virus, but so far, so good. A couple of the non-asthma kids are on the wheezy side but not out of control - I gave a bit of albuterol. My asthma boy, IgA deficient with eosinophilia and neutropenia as of this summer, looks a little under the weather but not terrible. Dh woke up in the night feeling unable to breathe the other night, too gunky, but he'll be all right. I'm shovelling out a lot of bovine colostrum in the morning. No fevers so far. In a few days, once I'm sure we're past any danger zone, I may be hoping this was EV68 so that it'll be behind us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I'm shovelling out a lot of bovine colostrum in the morning. No fevers so far. In a few days, once I'm sure we're past any danger zone, I may be hoping this was EV68 so that it'll be behind us. :grouphug: Hope everyone is feeling better soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Sounds to me like we need a well-publicized procedure for what to do if you have risk factors for Ebola and are experiencing symptoms. "Call this hotline", not "Mosey on down to the nearest Urgent Care center and potentially infect everyone there". Exactly what I thought when I heard this report! Why would anyone who had contact with Mr. Duncan go anywhere if they thought they were getting sick? Wouldn't a wise thing be to call 911 or the hospital or even the sheriff's department and ask for transport and help? Was this person afraid no one would help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeritasMama Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The second suspected case is a Deputy who was ordered to go inside the apartment last week to communicate with the family. He had no direct contact with the first victim, just with the family inside the apartment. This article from last week shows that the deputies were upset that they were ordered to go into the apartment without any protective gear: http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/03/lisa-monnig-michael-dallas-cdc-ebola-sheriff-dyer/16672385/ Hopefully his man has an illness other than Ebola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisbeth Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Here is an interesting article from NPR that shows how leadership is needed to deal with a situation like this and what that leadership looks like: Firestone Did What Governments Have Not: Stopped Ebola In Its Tracks http://www.npr.org/blogs/goatsandsoda/2014/10/06/354054915/firestone-did-what-governments-have-not-stopped-ebola-in-its-tracks I love this. Immediate quarantine, no wait-and-see. Wait-and-see drives me crazy. I am a nip-it-in-the-bud kind of girl. Amazingly, it works for multiple scenarios in life. Back to reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The second suspected case is a Deputy who was ordered to go inside the apartment last week to communicate with the family. He had no direct contact with the first victim, just with the family inside the apartment. This article from last week shows that the deputies were upset that they were ordered to go into the apartment without any protective gear: http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/03/lisa-monnig-michael-dallas-cdc-ebola-sheriff-dyer/16672385/ Hopefully his man has an illness other than Ebola. :iagree: Since he had no contact with the victim and none of the family members have signs of Ebola, based on what the medical experts have told us, it should be impossible for this man to have contracted Ebola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisbeth Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The second suspected case is a Deputy who was ordered to go inside the apartment last week to communicate with the family. He had no direct contact with the first victim, just with the family inside the apartment. This article from last week shows that the deputies were upset that they were ordered to go into the apartment without any protective gear: http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/03/lisa-monnig-michael-dallas-cdc-ebola-sheriff-dyer/16672385/ Hopefully his man has an illness other than Ebola. Wow, that article is pretty infuriating. I hope he doesn't have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wapiti Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 :grouphug: Hope everyone is feeling better soon. Thanks, snowbeltmom! I'm being extra-vigilant with the kids having vitamins and supplements and asthma meds, and so far this has been just a typical cold, truly no big deal. Now if I could do something about a certain person's snoring...LOL. Part of why I think this is that virus is how it has affected my dh - he has willingly taken the supplements I've given him, which is a sign that he was concerned about himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy101 Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Listening to NPR/BBC again... It's sadly or not the bulk of my news sourcing bc I'm in the van all the live long day and night it seems... Anyways.. The man was saying in Liberia and Monrovia the survivors are stigmatized and ostracized and communities won't let them back, not even if they are health employees who have recovered. These survivors are immune now, but the community is scared of them. They don't beleive they are immune or they think they could still be carriers. Fear is a hard thing to over come even in the best scenarios. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songsparrow Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 This article from last week shows that the deputies were upset that they were ordered to go into the apartment without any protective gear: http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/03/lisa-monnig-michael-dallas-cdc-ebola-sheriff-dyer/16672385/ I'd be furious if I was one of these deputies or a family member. The article says that on Friday, they met with county health officials who told them the danger of contracting ebola was remote because no people in the apartment were showing symptoms - yet - the next day they were told to bag up the clothes they had been wearing and their cars were pulled out of service. Who made those decisions? Was it a health official? Why were the cars quarantined but not the people? Why was the bagging up of the clothes not done until the next day? The article also seems to answer the question of why he went to the walk-in clinic -- he was just doing as instructed: "He says they were told to check their temperature at least once per day, and if they begin to show any flu-like symptoms to immediately go to the doctor." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I'd be furious if I was one of these deputies or a family member. The article says that on Friday, they met with county health officials who told them the danger of contracting ebola was remote because no people in the apartment were showing symptoms - yet - the next day they were told to bag up the clothes they had been wearing and their cars were pulled out of service. Who made those decisions? Was it a health official? Why were the cars quarantined but not the people? Why was the bagging up of the clothes not done until the next day? The article also seems to answer the question of why he went to the walk-in clinic -- he was just doing as instructed: "He says they were told to check their temperature at least once per day, and if they begin to show any flu-like symptoms to immediately go to the doctor." They really should have changed the instructions to immediately go to the ER. Because with instructions like that, his insurance probably REQUIRED him to go to a walk in clinic or be fined $300 or whatever the charge is these days. I bet the people at the walk in clinic are furious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Sounds to me like we need a well-publicized procedure for what to do if you have risk factors for Ebola and are experiencing symptoms. "Call this hotline", not "Mosey on down to the nearest Urgent Care center and potentially infect everyone there". Exactly what I was thinking. The second suspected case is a Deputy who was ordered to go inside the apartment last week to communicate with the family. He had no direct contact with the first victim, just with the family inside the apartment. This article from last week shows that the deputies were upset that they were ordered to go into the apartment without any protective gear: http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/03/lisa-monnig-michael-dallas-cdc-ebola-sheriff-dyer/16672385/ Hopefully his man has an illness other than Ebola. I was upset for them. How crazy. I love this. Immediate quarantine, no wait-and-see. Wait-and-see drives me crazy. I am a nip-it-in-the-bud kind of girl. Amazingly, it works for multiple scenarios in life. Back to reading. I just don't understand. I really don't. I have been saying from the beginning that it hasn't been handled properly. I really hope he just caught a cold or anything else besides ebola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I'd be furious if I was one of these deputies or a family member. The article says that on Friday, they met with county health officials who told them the danger of contracting ebola was remote because no people in the apartment were showing symptoms - yet - the next day they were told to bag up the clothes they had been wearing and their cars were pulled out of service. Who made those decisions? Was it a health official? Why were the cars quarantined but not the people? Why was the bagging up of the clothes not done until the next day? The article also seems to answer the question of why he went to the walk-in clinic -- he was just doing as instructed: "He says they were told to check their temperature at least once per day, and if they begin to show any flu-like symptoms to immediately go to the doctor." Haven't we been told that it is impossible to catch Ebola if the individual is not showing symptoms? My definition of "remote" is not the same as "impossible." If people have a remote change of contracting Ebola from people who are not showing symptoms, the public has been misled. These individuals should have been quarantined to protect their families and the general public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathnerd Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Another possible ebola case: a sheriff deputy who went into the apartment? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/08/second-texas-ebola-frisco-patient_n_5954454.html ETA: It is the sheriff's deputy that is being transported to the hospital according to other news sources. I am so sorry for him and his family :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 They really should have changed the instructions to immediately go to the ER. Because with instructions like that, his insurance probably REQUIRED him to go to a walk in clinic or be fined $300 or whatever the charge is these days. I bet the people at the walk in clinic are furious. I don't think he should have gone to the ER, either. We don't want him possibly infecting those in the waiting room in the ER. He should have been instructed to call 911 and had an ambulance take him directly to the hospital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The article says that on Friday, they met with county health officials who told them the danger of contracting ebola was remote because no people in the apartment were showing symptoms - yet - the next day they were told to bag up the clothes they had been wearing and their cars were pulled out of service. Who made those decisions? Was it a health official? Why were the cars quarantined but not the people? Why was the bagging up of the clothes not done until the next day? I do agree that a lot of this has been mishandled. Haven't we been told that it is impossible to catch Ebola if the individual is not showing symptoms? My definition of "remote" is not the same as "impossible." If people have a remote change of contracting Ebola from people who are not showing symptoms, the public has been misled. These individuals should have been quarantined to protect their families and the general public. The possibility was "remote" because they were still in the apartment that had not yet been cleaned where the sick guy had slept, vomited, etc. He DID have symptoms and was in the apartment. You are talking about a totally different way of contracting it than the way in which there was a remote possibility of them contracting it. Two different things. The public has not been misled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowbeltmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I do agree that a lot of this has been mishandled. The possibility was "remote" because they were still in the apartment that had not yet been cleaned where the sick guy had slept, vomited, etc. He DID have symptoms and was in the apartment. You are talking about a totally different way of contracting it than the way in which there was a remote possibility of them contracting it. Two different things. The public has not been misled. So you think it is possible that the deputies came in direct contact with vomit or other bodily fluid from the sick man? Isn't that the only way we have been told that someone can catch this? I have a hard time believing that the deputies would have touched anything in the apartment, and we have been told that this in not airborne disease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ocelotmom Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I don't think he should have gone to the ER, either. We don't want him possibly infecting those in the waiting room in the ER. He should have been instructed to call 911 and had an ambulance take him directly to the hospital. I agree with this. I heard about an ER in, I think, North Carolina that had a sign on the door saying that people believing themselves to be infected with ebola should go to the ambulance bay and ring a bell there. That makes sense to me, and might be the best option for reducing exposure since there's no ambulance and EMTs involved. But I think a triage hotline that can evaluate the situation and direct people to the most appropriate hospital is the best idea. That way the hospital is prepared to expect a potential ebola patient, cases can be concentrated on the hospitals best equipped to handle it, and conversely, one hospital is less likely to get overwhelmed because cases can be distributed appropriately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 So you think it is possible that the deputies came in direct contact with vomit or other bodily fluid from the sick man? Isn't that the only way we have been told that someone can catch this? I have a hard time believing that the deputies would have touched anything in the apartment, and we have been told that this in not airborne disease. It isn't airborne. And I don't know what they may have come in contact with? And we don't actually even know if they've contracted the disease. This is pure speculation right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Haven't we been told that it is impossible to catch Ebola if the individual is not showing symptoms? My definition of "remote" is not the same as "impossible." If people have a remote change of contracting Ebola from people who are not showing symptoms, the public has been misled. These individuals should have been quarantined to protect their families and the general public. I completely agree with you, and felt everyone should have been quarantined (the real way) from the beginning. But, apparently, this would cause hysterics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 So you think it is possible that the deputies came in direct contact with vomit or other bodily fluid from the sick man? Isn't that the only way we have been told that someone can catch this? I have a hard time believing that the deputies would have touched anything in the apartment, and we have been told that this in not airborne disease. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaillardia Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I love this board. While we are working on solving the world's problems this time, I wonder if health officials or CDC are going to require patients with suspected cases of Ebola to go to a certain hospital in the Dallas area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songsparrow Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 I love this. Immediate quarantine, no wait-and-see. Wait-and-see drives me crazy. I am a nip-it-in-the-bud kind of girl. Amazingly, it works for multiple scenarios in life. Back to reading. My first instinct, too, is quarantine. However, I can understand (intellectually) that *IF* the CDC and other experts are correct in their analysis of how the disease is transmitted, then the protocols in place should be sufficient. The CDC states that people do not begin to shed the virus until they begin to run a fever, and even then in the beginning they shed very little virus until the illness progresses. So if you believe you have a risk of exposure, then it is sufficient to take your temperature twice a day and to go to the ER / get quarantined at the first sign of fever, because you cannot infect anyone else prior to that point. That saves people from the psychological and personal financial costs of quarantine (unable to work for 3 weeks, etc.), and it saves society the costs of establishing quarantine facilities for a large number of potential contacts who never get sick. I do hope they're right about how the disease is transmitted. But I am not yet (personally/emotionally) convinced of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Ugh. I really hope the poor deputy just has food poisoning and anxiety. The sign to go to the ambulance bay instead of through the ER is brilliant. I'm scared that some people might be carriers but not get sick. He'd been out of the apartment for two days before those deputies served the papers. Scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeritasMama Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Haven't we been told that it is impossible to catch Ebola if the individual is not showing symptoms? My definition of "remote" is not the same as "impossible." If people have a remote change of contracting Ebola from people who are not showing symptoms, the public has been misled. These individuals should have been quarantined to protect their families and the general public. The apartment was contaminated by the first victim who was ill inside the apartment. The deputies couldn't have caught it from the family members as they were not showing symptoms, but the apartment had not been decontaminated yet when they were ordered to enter without protective gear. The deputies were put on leave, but I don't think they were quarantined. Hope and pray this man does not have Ebola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts