Mistake blamed for US Ebola spread

[ClutchClark]

Fortunately there is always a politician along to provide us with some comedy relief.

A ** Senator Objects to Emergency Ebola Funding Because It 'Focuses on Africa'

No prizes for guessing which party.....

The most disturbing thing is that Obama actually has plans to fight Ebola on the African continent. That scares me a lot.

I have no faith in his abilities.

From everything I have read , he doesn't plan to go there in person to fight it...he plans on sending US Troops who have equipment and training in Biological and Chemical Warfare.

So you might be worried for nothin' ;-)

[bkkcanuck8]

Fortunately there is always a politician along to provide us with some comedy relief.

A ** Senator Objects to Emergency Ebola Funding Because It 'Focuses on Africa'

No prizes for guessing which party.....

The most disturbing thing is that Obama actually has plans to fight Ebola on the African continent. That scares me a lot.

I have no faith in his abilities.

From everything I have read , he doesn't plan to go there in person to fight it...he plans on sending US Troops who have equipment and training in Biological and Chemical Warfare.

So you might be worried for nothin' ;-)

Na, he is probably only sending republican voting US troops over

[Chicog]

I spoke too soon ( or too late ).

The British government has rushed through an order for 500,000 Ebola suits for British forces and health workers as the extent of the global Ebola crisis becomes clear.

Hull-based Arco is to deliver 100,000 Microgard suits, which offer protection from viral infections every month.

Managing director Thomas Martin said: Our original contract was for 50,000, but that was doubled this morning. Within three minutes of getting that order, we were on to manufacturers to work out how to meet the production schedule.

The suits will be used to protect British soldiers and health workers in war-torn Sierra Leone, one of the countries where the current epidemic is thriving.

http://metro.co.uk/2014/10/13/british-government-orders-half-a-million-ebola-suits-4903517/

Just curious, but the article itself says 100,000 and that 50,000 were initially ordered, but the order was doubled to 100,000. So is it 100,000 or 500,000 suits.

I think the total order is 500K, that one company's order doubled from 50k to 100k.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Chicog

[Chicog]

Fortunately there is always a politician along to provide us with some comedy relief.

A ** Senator Objects to Emergency Ebola Funding Because It 'Focuses on Africa'

No prizes for guessing which party.....

The most disturbing thing is that Obama actually has plans to fight Ebola on the African continent. That scares me a lot.

I have no faith in his abilities.

From everything I have read , he doesn't plan to go there in person to fight it...he plans on sending US Troops who have equipment and training in Biological and Chemical Warfare.

So you might be worried for nothin' ;-)

Na, he is probably only sending republican voting US troops over

Now you've said that, it will shortly become a "Fox News Alert".

[JDGRUEN]

I notice that this thread is dominated by at least two - maybe three individuals who have absolutely no credentials to talk about the subject matter...

[Chicog]

I notice that this thread is dominated by at least two - maybe three individuals who have absolutely no credentials to talk about the subject matter...

Maybe you should read the forum rules then.

[bkkcanuck8]

I notice that this thread is dominated by at least two - maybe three individuals who have absolutely no credentials to talk about the subject matter...

How long have you been a forum poster? If credentials are required, this forum and most others would be DEAD (aka boring). If you want credentialed postings, you get rid of open forums and have a blog where the blog posters must prove their credentials....

Being that you have been around, either you are daft -- or what you're really saying is people are posting things that don't follow your personal party line

I would be happy to see your credentials..... and defer to you if yours are better than mine

Edited October 13, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[Ulic]

Seams to me Ebola is much more contagious than the WHO or CDC are willing to admit.

[Johpa]

I think that the chief is trying to instill more confidence than he privately has with his assertion that the current barrier techniques are invulnerable if properly used. There have been too many instances of trained people in space suits getting infected and this latest instance is very alarming.

On the contrary, MSF has been working intensely within the heart of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and have clearly demonstrated that the safety protocols do work if implemented correctly.

[ClutchClark]

I think that the chief is trying to instill more confidence than he privately has with his assertion that the current barrier techniques are invulnerable if properly used. There have been too many instances of trained people in space suits getting infected and this latest instance is very alarming.

On the contrary, MSF has been working intensely within the heart of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and have clearly demonstrated that the safety protocols do work if implemented correctly.

So why can't you or anyone else provide specific details on which safety protocol(s) this infected nurse in Texas failed to follow?

Until you can provide such evidence, then the above claim appears wishful thinking at best and intentionally deceptive at worst.

Thanks

[bkkcanuck8]

I think that the chief is trying to instill more confidence than he privately has with his assertion that the current barrier techniques are invulnerable if properly used. There have been too many instances of trained people in space suits getting infected and this latest instance is very alarming.

On the contrary, MSF has been working intensely within the heart of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and have clearly demonstrated that the safety protocols do work if implemented correctly.

So why can't you or anyone else provide specific details on which safety protocol(s) this infected nurse in Texas failed to follow?

Until you can provide such evidence, then the above claim appears wishful thinking at best and intentionally deceptive at worst.

Thanks

Since no-one was there, and most people lie if they did something wrong - we will likely never know exactly where things broke down (the odds are something broke down -- since she is the last one to come in contact with the patient and the first showing symptoms).

It could be human error, a training problem, or a protocol problem - we can only guess and look at all to see where she could have come into contact.

The most important thing is fast contact checking and quarantining to keep things under control. There will be errors, humans involved in the process almost guarantees it -- but with fast contact checking etc. it can be correctable.

The hospital already had plenty of errors on the original contact which lead him to being sent home when he should have been under quarantine.

[ClutchClark]

Since no-one was there, and most people lie if they did something wrong - we will likely never know exactly where things broke down (the odds are something broke down -- since she is the last one to come in contact with the patient and the first showing symptoms).

It could be human error, a training problem, or a protocol problem

Yes, it could be any of these things as well as a poorly manufactured PPE or that the virus is more virulent as currently supposed.

You can no more rule one of the above out any more than you can say with certainty which it is.

That isa simple statement of fact.

As for your statement that the nurse was the last person to have contact with the patient prior to the patients death, that could support a hypotheses of the disease becoming more virulent the longer it is able replicate in a host.

And as far as your suggestion that the nurse would have "lied" -- this statement is preposterous and the mere suggestion that a nurse would lie about being exposed to a deadly virus rather than...rather than what exactly? Be reprimanded by her employer? Sent for additional training on proper HazMat protocol? The very suggestion removes almost any credibility to your position.

Edited October 13, 2014 by ClutchClark

[bkkcanuck8]

And as far as your suggestion that the nurse would have "lied" -- this statement is preposterous and the mere suggestion that a nurse would lie about being exposed to a deadly virus rather than...rather than what exactly? Be reprimanded by her employer? Sent for additional training on proper HazMat protocol? The very suggestion removes almost any credibility to your position.

When people make mistakes the initial response is to avoid responsibility for a lot of people - especially if being honest provides no benefit. Never rule anything out. Relying solely one one person being honest without corroborating evidence is often problematic. The situation is too serious just to act politically correct.

Edited October 13, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[ClutchClark]

And as far as your suggestion that the nurse would have "lied" -- this statement is preposterous and the mere suggestion that a nurse would lie about being exposed to a deadly virus rather than...rather than what exactly? Be reprimanded by her employer? Sent for additional training on proper HazMat protocol? The very suggestion removes almost any credibility to your position.

When people make mistakes the initial response is to avoid responsibility for a lot of people - especially if being honest provides no benefit. Never rule anything out. Relying solely one one person being honest without corroborating evidence is often problematic. The situation is too serious just to act politically correct.

Provides no benefit?

Just the opposite is true. How about greatly increasing the likelihood she will not be dead in a month? If the nurse was aware she had possibly been exposed to the ebola virus then the hospital would have immediately enacted countermeasures.

I am sorry if this sounds disrespectful but do you have any actual knowledge of how Medical facilities respond to an exposure to a known Bio-Hazard?

Politically correct? What?

What?

What are you talking about?

Aaaaaaarrrrggghhhh.

Cheers. Canadians are like Aussies--good people. So I am going to step away from this convo ;-)

Edited October 13, 2014 by ClutchClark

[bkkcanuck8]

And as far as your suggestion that the nurse would have "lied" -- this statement is preposterous and the mere suggestion that a nurse would lie about being exposed to a deadly virus rather than...rather than what exactly? Be reprimanded by her employer? Sent for additional training on proper HazMat protocol? The very suggestion removes almost any credibility to your position.

When people make mistakes the initial response is to avoid responsibility for a lot of people - especially if being honest provides no benefit. Never rule anything out. Relying solely one one person being honest without corroborating evidence is often problematic. The situation is too serious just to act politically correct.

Provides no benefit?

Just the opposite is true. How about greatly increasing the likelihood she will not be dead in a month? If the nurse was aware she had possibly been exposed to the ebola virus then the hospital would have immediately enacted countermeasures.

I am sorry if this sounds disrespectful but do you have any actual knowledge of how Medical facilities respond to an exposure to a known Bio-Hazard?

She may not have known she was exposed, but she could be aware of where she came infected after she became symptomatic. Treatment starts when you become symptomatic -- until then you are just under observation. Medical people involved in the response to the ebola outbreak should be keeping a medical diary and taking at least daily temperature readings etc. It is being done by western doctors that are in Africa right now, I don't know why the same protocol would not be followed for medical personnel in the US.

UPDATE: She was following same protocol which is why her case was identified early.

AP "The graduate of Texas Christian University's nursing school was monitoring her own temperature and went to the hospital Friday night as soon as she found out she was running a low fever. She's now in isolation and in stable condition. It's the first known case of Ebola being transmitted within the U.S."

Position held does not change things. The person that came from Liberia lied before boarding the plane, and I believe he lied again during the first visit to the hospital in the US (the first visit where he said he was from the hot-spot; he said he did not come in contact with an ebola patient). By the same logic, there would be no reason why he would lie about becoming into contact - it is not like they would deport him.

The NBC medical correspondent that was allowed to return to the US under voluntary quarantine put sunglasses on and went out to get pickup food at a local restaurant (i.e. lied).

And no, I am not a medical person - financial software development and math. Numbers don't lie, people do.

Edited October 13, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[bkkcanuck8]

The likelihood that someone would lie, is the reason why the use of single-sourced "interviews" to determine if someone is exposed is silly and only useful in pretending that you are actually taking action.

[Johpa]

I think that the chief is trying to instill more confidence than he privately has with his assertion that the current barrier techniques are invulnerable if properly used. There have been too many instances of trained people in space suits getting infected and this latest instance is very alarming.

On the contrary, MSF has been working intensely within the heart of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and have clearly demonstrated that the safety protocols do work if implemented correctly.

So why can't you or anyone else provide specific details on which safety protocol(s) this infected nurse in Texas failed to follow?

Until you can provide such evidence, then the above claim appears wishful thinking at best and intentionally deceptive at worst.

Thanks

I don't follow your logic. What we do know, the evidence, is that using safety protocols work because the protocols are indeed working in Africa. We do not have any video tape of the woman activities so we do not know where she may have broken those protocols. But the logical conclusion is that she did not follow one of the protocols exactly and not that the protocols do not work.

[ClutchClark]

CDC and hospital now backing off on claims that nurse failed to follow protocol:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/10/13/the-cdc-doesnt-know-how-many-health-care-workers-in-dallas-may-have-been-exposed-to-ebola/

"Still, the uncertainty about how the nurse was infected and the fact that she was infected while Duncan was isolated at a hospital raises more questions about how prepared hospitals and health-care workers are to deal with the additional Ebola cases that authorities say are likely to occur.

We need to consider the possibility that there could be additional cases, particularly among the health-care workers that cared for [Duncan] when he was so ill, Frieden said. We would not be surprised if we did see additional cases in the health-care workers who also provided care to [Duncan].

Figuring out exactly what protocols need to be strengthened and who else may have been exposed is particularly difficult because it is not known how the nurse was infected. The CDC is looking at every aspect of patient treatment, ranging from what types of equipment can be used to how protective gear is placed on and off, to try and determine if the current guidelines are strong enough."

[ClutchClark]

I think that the chief is trying to instill more confidence than he privately has with his assertion that the current barrier techniques are invulnerable if properly used. There have been too many instances of trained people in space suits getting infected and this latest instance is very alarming.

On the contrary, MSF has been working intensely within the heart of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and have clearly demonstrated that the safety protocols do work if implemented correctly.

So why can't you or anyone else provide specific details on which safety protocol(s) this infected nurse in Texas failed to follow?

Until you can provide such evidence, then the above claim appears wishful thinking at best and intentionally deceptive at worst.

Thanks

I don't follow your logic. What we do know, the evidence, is that using safety protocols work because the protocols are indeed working in Africa. We do not have any video tape of the woman activities so we do not know where she may have broken those protocols. But the logical conclusion is that she did not follow one of the protocols exactly and not that the protocols do not work.

We must be reading different literature. Everything I have read indicates that the protocols are not working in Africa due to various limitations in supply chain and funding and inadequate training and possibly as yet unidentified reasons.

Please look at the post I just left and you will see that the hospital is now acknowledging what I had already presumed--there might be additional healthcare workers that treated Duncan exposed to Ebola and at this time the hospital is uncertain the vector of exposure.

My logic is working on all gears amigo ;-)

Edited October 14, 2014 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

The likelihood that someone would lie, is the reason why the use of single-sourced "interviews" to determine if someone is exposed is silly and only useful in pretending that you are actually taking action.

You are attempting to compare apples to oranges.

It is true that a person in Liberia who fears they might be infected by Ebola has an "incentive" (motivation) to lie to authorities so that they can receive medical treatment at world class facilities in the US versus the overwhelmed and overcrowded and unhygienic facilities in Liberia.

However, a nurse in a hospital in the US who has possibly just been exposed to the virus has none of those same incentives. In fact, this nurse's incentive (motivation) would be to tell the truth so that she/he can receive immediate Medical Countermeasures. That nurse has zero benefit to keep such possible exposure to themselves because no possible alternative outcome is equal to or worse than contracting the Ebola virus.

And contrary to your earlier claim that treatment only starts when someone becomes symptomatic is not correct. In the event of an exposure of a healthcare professional, an immediate anti-infection countermeasure would take place including but not limited to irrigation of eyes, topical application and scrub of skin surfaces with minimum 70-90% ethyl-alcohol based sanitizers, etc..There is even discussion that UV light may kill the virus.

You darned Canadians. You had better stick with hockey ;-)

Edited October 14, 2014 by ClutchClark

[F430murci]

I notice that this thread is dominated by at least two - maybe three individuals who have absolutely no credentials to talk about the subject matter...

Like a degree in paranoia from Alex Jones University.

[Credo]

I notice that this thread is dominated by at least two - maybe three individuals who have absolutely no credentials to talk about the subject matter...

Like a degree in paranoia from Alex Jones University.

And a minor in hysteria.

[zydeco]

Yes, over-react. Why not? I would rather over respond than under respond. Especially with politically appointed medical experts claiming someone made a mistake after yet another one of their assurances goes awry. So . . . now the CDC is going to review their protocols. And what happens when the next nurse mistakenly misses page 545 and protocol number 10,000 and gets infected? Breach! Breach! Yes, a breach of protocol! NASA didn't have these many protocols to go to the moon. They will inherently fail.

What wouldn't fail is keeping West Africans out of the US. Or at least it would drastically reduce the chance of failure. What is it that is so important about West Africa and West Africans that the US cannot afford to keep them outside our borders until this ebola crisis is over?