Ebola (2 Viewers)

[TheIronSheik]

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. And this doctor was responsible enough to self monitor himself when he got home.

Yet, somehow he got Ebola.

What does this mean? And what Is your overall point here?

That means that if doctors wear the protective gear, scrub up and make sure they are taking all precautions to avoid contracting Ebola. Yet, somehow he managed still to get it. So when someone on the Internet says, "Don't worry. He's a doctor. He was self monitoring and making sure he was taking his temperature as to not spread the disease", it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

Fair enough. No offense, but I think you're being absurd. This doctor just spend who knows how long treating Ebola patients in West Africa. He probably engaged in hundreds of hours of close personal contact with those known to be stricken with the disease, and he may have also come into contact with people who had caught the disease but were not yet under a doctor's care. His chances of catching Ebola are going to be phenomenally higher than anyone who doesn't spend their time treating Ebola patients, no matter what precautions he takes.

And I totally get that, too. All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing. Fear mongering and inducing panic? No. That's stupid. But I think you can be extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer. Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures. That's all I'm saying.

 

[matuski]

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. And this doctor was responsible enough to self monitor himself when he got home.

Yet, somehow he got Ebola.

You have to be trolling at this point.

 

[siffoin]

Just saw a crawl. He tested positive for Ebola

damn it. I thought I was going to be done.

Deceased: Thomas Duncan

Need an update as Pham is good to go

Wow, Pham and Vinson sure recovered quickly.

Ebola patients treated in US: 9

Patients Infected in Africa: 7

Patients infected in US: 2

Non health care workers infected in US: 0

Patients released: 7

Patients under treatment: 1

Deceased: 1

Current mortality rate of Americans treated in US: 0%.

Current mortality rate of all treated in US: 11%

Cured: Nina Pham (nurse of Duncan); Amber Vinson (nurse of Duncan); Ashoka Mukpo (cameraman), Unidentified Aid Worker (AKA CIA), Dr. Kent Brantley , Dr. Rick Sacra, Nancy Writebol

Under treatment: Dr. Craig Spencer (the bowling, uber riding, hipster, doctors without border doctor)

Deceased: Thomas Duncan

While factually accurate. Attempting to draw any broad conclusion from this data set is misleading.

1) The sample size is extremely small.

2) Sample size is not comprised of a wide demographic set - limited to (prior to catching the disease) healthy adults.

3) Patients are being treated in specialized hospitals with maximum round the clock professional specialist medical care who have no concern for cost control.

To have any measure of significance/effect of how an outbreak of Ebola would impact in America, I think you'd want to see at a minimum:

1) A much larger sample size - 100 would be much better...1000 more so.

2) Sample size including adults as well as children and senior citizens.

3) Patients that have been treated in local hospitals - with consideration to cost control (like all other diseases).

Certainly don't think Ebola is cause for great concern at this point but cause for zero concern based on such data is silly.

I understand the sample size is small. I started tracking in response to people coming in to the thread in a panic. We don't know the mortality rate in America, but we do know it won't be the 50-70% rate that everyone threw around. The US is not Africa.

We will never have 1000 people with Ebola in the US. I seriously doubt we will ever have 100.

Humans have been "plagued" by pandemics throughout history. It is possible (I'd go as far as to say probable) that at some point in the future we will be plagued by another. Is Ebola THAT plague? I doubt it...but we are in a historical moment of risk where that is possible. And I think it best not to be extreme to any side of the emotional spectrum. Rather take a logical and practical approach.

I agree. I doubt we'll have a large enough sample size in regards to treating Ebola in the US to garner any real statistical significance. But we don't know the future either.

 

[timschochet]

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. And this doctor was responsible enough to self monitor himself when he got home.

Yet, somehow he got Ebola.

What does this mean? And what Is your overall point here?

That means that if doctors wear the protective gear, scrub up and make sure they are taking all precautions to avoid contracting Ebola. Yet, somehow he managed still to get it. So when someone on the Internet says, "Don't worry. He's a doctor. He was self monitoring and making sure he was taking his temperature as to not spread the disease", it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

Fair enough. No offense, but I think you're being absurd. This doctor just spend who knows how long treating Ebola patients in West Africa. He probably engaged in hundreds of hours of close personal contact with those known to be stricken with the disease, and he may have also come into contact with people who had caught the disease but were not yet under a doctor's care. His chances of catching Ebola are going to be phenomenally higher than anyone who doesn't spend their time treating Ebola patients, no matter what precautions he takes.

And I totally get that, too. All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing. Fear mongering and inducing panic? No. That's stupid. But I think you can be extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer. Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures. That's all I'm saying.

What specific safety measures are we "drawing back" which we shouldn't be?

 

[Mister Martie]

@ 98.7 being a fever.

 

[urbanhack]

Good chance an MD doesn't know he has a fever.

Yes. Because every doctor knows immediately when their temperature is no longer 98.6. Excellent point.

I know when my temp is higher than normal. Not rocket science.

Congratulations?

It's like a gift I suppose. One that I apparently share with almost everyone other than you. Sorry nature was so unkind.

Yes. Everyone knows when their temperature hits 98.7. You are truly a genius.

98.7 automatically means you have a fever?

I would think anyone over the normal temperature would have a fever, yes. Do you not think that? If not, what temperature do you consider a fever?

No...I don't think that. My temp was 98.00001 when I got out of the sauna on Wednesday.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. And this doctor was responsible enough to self monitor himself when he got home.

Yet, somehow he got Ebola.

What does this mean? And what Is your overall point here?

That means that if doctors wear the protective gear, scrub up and make sure they are taking all precautions to avoid contracting Ebola. Yet, somehow he managed still to get it. So when someone on the Internet says, "Don't worry. He's a doctor. He was self monitoring and making sure he was taking his temperature as to not spread the disease", it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

Fair enough. No offense, but I think you're being absurd. This doctor just spend who knows how long treating Ebola patients in West Africa. He probably engaged in hundreds of hours of close personal contact with those known to be stricken with the disease, and he may have also come into contact with people who had caught the disease but were not yet under a doctor's care. His chances of catching Ebola are going to be phenomenally higher than anyone who doesn't spend their time treating Ebola patients, no matter what precautions he takes.

And I totally get that, too. All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing. Fear mongering and inducing panic? No. That's stupid. But I think you can be extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer. Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures. That's all I'm saying.

What specific safety measures are we "drawing back" which we shouldn't be?

We're not yet. I didn't say we were.

 

[Doug B]

As spreading the disease, the doctors do not know the EXACT temperature that you become contagious.

I was thinking caontagiousness was not related to the fever at all -- only to the outward expression of body fluids.

Hypothetically -- though I kid you not I'd risk this for publicity or some kind of gain -- if a confirmed, just-out-the-shower ebola patient, fever and all, washed their hands well with regular ol' Ivory soap and then immediately made me a sandwich bare-handed, I'd be happy to eat it.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Good chance an MD doesn't know he has a fever.

Yes. Because every doctor knows immediately when their temperature is no longer 98.6. Excellent point.

I know when my temp is higher than normal. Not rocket science.

Congratulations?

It's like a gift I suppose. One that I apparently share with almost everyone other than you. Sorry nature was so unkind.

Yes. Everyone knows when their temperature hits 98.7. You are truly a genius.

98.7 automatically means you have a fever?

I would think anyone over the normal temperature would have a fever, yes. Do you not think that? If not, what temperature do you consider a fever?

No...I don't think that. My temp was 98.00001 when I got out of the sauna on Wednesday.

Sorry. Didn't realize we were talking in absolutes again. Yes, you are right. It is possible to not have an actual fever if your body temperature goes above 98.6. I guess you got me there.

 

[timschochet]

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. And this doctor was responsible enough to self monitor himself when he got home.

Yet, somehow he got Ebola.

What does this mean? And what Is your overall point here?

That means that if doctors wear the protective gear, scrub up and make sure they are taking all precautions to avoid contracting Ebola. Yet, somehow he managed still to get it. So when someone on the Internet says, "Don't worry. He's a doctor. He was self monitoring and making sure he was taking his temperature as to not spread the disease", it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

Fair enough. No offense, but I think you're being absurd. This doctor just spend who knows how long treating Ebola patients in West Africa. He probably engaged in hundreds of hours of close personal contact with those known to be stricken with the disease, and he may have also come into contact with people who had caught the disease but were not yet under a doctor's care. His chances of catching Ebola are going to be phenomenally higher than anyone who doesn't spend their time treating Ebola patients, no matter what precautions he takes.

And I totally get that, too. All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing. Fear mongering and inducing panic? No. That's stupid. But I think you can be extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer. Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures. That's all I'm saying.

What specific safety measures are we "drawing back" which we shouldn't be?

We're not yet. I didn't say we were.

Well, then I don't understand what you ARE saying. What exactly is your overall point here?

Or put it this way: if you were in charge of this, how exactly would you be "extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer"? What does that mean, precisely, and what is it that we are not doing that we should be doing?

 

[TheIronSheik]

As spreading the disease, the doctors do not know the EXACT temperature that you become contagious.

I was thinking caontagiousness was not related to the fever at all -- only to the outward expression of body fluids.

Hypothetically -- though I kid you not I'd risk this for publicity or some kind of gain -- if a confirmed, just-out-the-shower ebola patient, fever and all, washed their hands well with regular ol' Ivory soap and then immediately made me a sandwich bare-handed, I'd be happy to eat it.

And that's cool. You can do what you please. But after you ate that sandwich, I'd want you quarantined for the next 21 days.

 

[jon_mx]

I'm more surprised that these doctors, who are being so selfless by going over there to help people and putting themselves in harm's way, don't apply the same mindset when coming back before kissing their girlfriends or spending a night with friends. It just seems so inconsistent.

Because it's currently accepted as iron-clad fact that ebola cannot be spread by a asymptomatic carrier. If new information ever comes in to change that understanding, hopefully behaviors will change as well.

Amber Vinson's fellow passengers flying from Cleveland to Dallas were Test Case 1. The Uber riders and Craig Spencer's bowling buddies in NYC will be Test Case 2. Will an asymptomatic Ebola patient ever spread the virus to another person thgough social means a la colds and flu? Stay tuned.

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected. I would assume the most dangerous part is taking off the protective items after they have been contaminated. Those fluids can infect for a substaintial period after leaving the body.

The problem with a person without symptoms is he has to notice the symptoms immediately and remove himself immidiately. But if he is on a 12 hour flight when the symptoms first appear, then what does he do.

 

[timschochet]

I'm more surprised that these doctors, who are being so selfless by going over there to help people and putting themselves in harm's way, don't apply the same mindset when coming back before kissing their girlfriends or spending a night with friends. It just seems so inconsistent.

Because it's currently accepted as iron-clad fact that ebola cannot be spread by a asymptomatic carrier. If new information ever comes in to change that understanding, hopefully behaviors will change as well.

Amber Vinson's fellow passengers flying from Cleveland to Dallas were Test Case 1. The Uber riders and Craig Spencer's bowling buddies in NYC will be Test Case 2. Will an asymptomatic Ebola patient ever spread the virus to another person thgough social means a la colds and flu? Stay tuned.

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected. I would assume the most dangerous part is taking off the protective items after they have been contaminated. Those fluids can infect for a substaintial period after leaving the body. The problem with a person without symptoms is he has to notice the symptoms immediately and remove himself immidiately. But if he is on a 12 hour flight when the symptoms first appear, then what does he do.

he doesn't do anything. He sits away from the other passengers, and when he lands he checks into a hospital, gets treated, and recovers. And nobody else is at risk of catching the disease. Pretty simple.

 

[Sinn Fein]

@ 98.7 being a fever.

Sounds like a tag line for a radio station: 98.7, The Fever....we play all the hottest hits.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. And this doctor was responsible enough to self monitor himself when he got home.

Yet, somehow he got Ebola.

What does this mean? And what Is your overall point here?

That means that if doctors wear the protective gear, scrub up and make sure they are taking all precautions to avoid contracting Ebola. Yet, somehow he managed still to get it. So when someone on the Internet says, "Don't worry. He's a doctor. He was self monitoring and making sure he was taking his temperature as to not spread the disease", it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

Fair enough. No offense, but I think you're being absurd. This doctor just spend who knows how long treating Ebola patients in West Africa. He probably engaged in hundreds of hours of close personal contact with those known to be stricken with the disease, and he may have also come into contact with people who had caught the disease but were not yet under a doctor's care. His chances of catching Ebola are going to be phenomenally higher than anyone who doesn't spend their time treating Ebola patients, no matter what precautions he takes.

And I totally get that, too. All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing. Fear mongering and inducing panic? No. That's stupid. But I think you can be extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer. Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures. That's all I'm saying.

What specific safety measures are we "drawing back" which we shouldn't be?

We're not yet. I didn't say we were.

Well, then I don't understand what you ARE saying. What exactly is your overall point here?

Or put it this way: if you were in charge of this, how exactly would you be "extremely cautious without being a fear mongerer"? What does that mean, precisely, and what is it that we are not doing that we should be doing?

Holy cow, dude. I like you, but I feel like you're trying to argue here when I'm not arguing. Here's what you said:

I think you guys are missing one extremely important fact about this disease, as it relates to it's spread in the USA:

Most people recover.

Much of the concern regarding Ebola, even more than how it spreads (which we've spent pages and pages discussing) is that it's a deadly disease, fatal to anyone who catches it. Well that's not even true in Africa where the mortality rate for victims is still under 50%. Here it's not true at all. Only one person has died thus far, and proper treatment was lacking. Before it's all said and done , the percentage of people who die from the common flu may be higher.

So if you're one of the extremely few people who will ever catch this disease in the USA (you have a better chance of being struck by lightning twice in the same day, I would guess) you'll likely recover.

You're making the case that Ebola, which has a mortality rate of 50% to 70%, is actually not that bad. And you are using the facts that a couple people in the US did not die after getting it.

My point, from the beginning of our conversation has been that you are very wrong on this. You're saying you have a better chance of getting hit by lightning twice in the same day than dying from Ebola. This is idiotic. YOU are underhyping this. From that, I'm saying, let's not start patting each other on the back yet proclaiming that we've cured this disease and saying not to worry about it anymore.

Is that clear?

 

[El Floppo]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

uke:

:drink:

oh wait... I'm ok drinking puke, or no?

 

[jamny]

I'll always remember Bellevue as a crazy house.

Is it the same place?

Not the same building. The original shut down in the mid-80's and became a homeless shelter for a while until being abandoned a couple of years ago. Not sure what's up with the building now.

Alice: I’ll go fix my lipstick. I won’t be gone long, Killer. I call you Killer ’cause you slay me.

Ralph: And I’m calling Bellevue ’cause you’re nuts!

—The Honeymooners

 

[Fennis]

Humans have been "plagued" by pandemics throughout history. It is possible (I'd go as far as to say probable) that at some point in the future we will be plagued by another. Is Ebola THAT plague? I doubt it...but we are in a historical moment of risk where that is possible. And I think it best not to be extreme to any side of the emotional spectrum. Rather take a logical and practical approach.


I agree. I doubt we'll have a large enough sample size in regards to treating Ebola in the US to garner any real statistical significance. But we don't know the future either.

A lot of the debate has been what is logical and practical. Some of the questions debated at least in here:

Should there be a travel ban to from West Africa?

Is forcing people who treated Ebola patients to be quarantined logical and practical?

Can people who treated Ebola patients go on a cruise? On an airplane? On a bus? Bowling? Take a cab?

If passengers took an airplane ride with someone who eventually became symptomatic do all those passengers need to be quarantined?

If one of the passengers is a school teacher should children attend their class?

Should banks be closed because a teller was on that airplane?

 

[Apple Jack]

People in the US have immediate access to healthcare. Many in West Africa do not. The keys to survival appear to be early detection, closely monitoring and treating dehydration, and having access to dialysis if need be. The 50%-70% number has little to no relevance to the mortality rate under the US healthcare system.

 

[3C's]

People in the US have immediate access to healthcare. Many in West Africa do not. The keys to survival appear to be early detection, closely monitoring and treating dehydration, and having access to dialysis if need be. The 50%-70% number has little to no relevance to the mortality rate under the US healthcare system.

I think before anyone starts throwing around 50% death rate they should view that video that was posted recently (yesterday?). it kind of shows why the mortality rate in 3rd world countries is as high as it is.

 

[TheIronSheik]

People in the US have immediate access to healthcare. Many in West Africa do not. The keys to survival appear to be early detection, closely monitoring and treating dehydration, and having access to dialysis if need be. The 50%-70% number has little to no relevance to the mortality rate under the US healthcare system.

This may be true. As I've said many times, I'm not saying that's not a correct assumption. But right now, that's all it is. An assumption. I don't think it's fair to assume this after 5 cases.

 

[matuski]

As spreading the disease, the doctors do not know the EXACT temperature that you become contagious.

I was thinking caontagiousness was not related to the fever at all -- only to the outward expression of body fluids.

Hypothetically -- though I kid you not I'd risk this for publicity or some kind of gain -- if a confirmed, just-out-the-shower ebola patient, fever and all, washed their hands well with regular ol' Ivory soap and then immediately made me a sandwich bare-handed, I'd be happy to eat it.

And that's cool. You can do what you please. But after you ate that sandwich, I'd want you quarantined for the next 21 days.

The schtick of pretending not to understand the simplest aspects of the virus is growing on me.

 

[timschochet]

Look, Iron Sheik, I'm not trying to have an argument with you either. I want to understand you better, but you're refusing to answer my questions. And it has nothing to do with what I wrote about Ebola not being fatal. It has to do with what YOU wrote about how a doctor caught Ebola despite taking precautions. Let's backtrack:

You wrote:

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. Yet somehow he caught Ebola.

I asked you what you meant by that, and you stated:

it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

I pointed out that the doctor in question spent a long time around Ebola patients, and you agreed, but then you wrote:

All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing.

And:

Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures.

I didn't understand this response either, so I asked you to explain how we are drawing back safety measures. You replied that we weren't, which makes me wonder why you brought it up. Then I asked you what it meant to be "overly cautious", since you seem to believe that we're not being that now. No answer. Which leads me back to wondering what was the overall point you are trying to make here?

 

[El Floppo]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

uke:

:drink:

oh wait... I'm ok drinking puke, or no?

too late- if this is a problem, I'm blaming you lot.

 

[matuski]

Look, Iron Sheik, I'm not trying to have an argument with you either. I want to understand you better, but you're refusing to answer my questions. And it has nothing to do with what I wrote about Ebola not being fatal. It has to do with what YOU wrote about how a doctor caught Ebola despite taking precautions. Let's backtrack:

You wrote:

Ebola is very hard to catch if you do everything right. Yet somehow he caught Ebola.

I asked you what you meant by that, and you stated:

it makes me think that maybe we shouldn't just assume that doctors know enough to contain the disease.

I pointed out that the doctor in question spent a long time around Ebola patients, and you agreed, but then you wrote:

All I'm saying that this early in the process of it being in our country, I don't think being overly cautious is a bad thing.

And:

Let's get a couple more cases under our belts before we start drawing back our safety measures.

I didn't understand this response either, so I asked you to explain how we are drawing back safety measures. You replied that we weren't, which makes me wonder why you brought it up. Then I asked you what it meant to be "overly cautious", since you seem to believe that we're not being that now. No answer. Which leads me back to wondering what was the overall point you are trying to make here?

Schtick is the answer.

 

[jon_mx]

I'm more surprised that these doctors, who are being so selfless by going over there to help people and putting themselves in harm's way, don't apply the same mindset when coming back before kissing their girlfriends or spending a night with friends. It just seems so inconsistent.

Because it's currently accepted as iron-clad fact that ebola cannot be spread by a asymptomatic carrier. If new information ever comes in to change that understanding, hopefully behaviors will change as well.

Amber Vinson's fellow passengers flying from Cleveland to Dallas were Test Case 1. The Uber riders and Craig Spencer's bowling buddies in NYC will be Test Case 2. Will an asymptomatic Ebola patient ever spread the virus to another person thgough social means a la colds and flu? Stay tuned.

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected. I would assume the most dangerous part is taking off the protective items after they have been contaminated. Those fluids can infect for a substaintial period after leaving the body. The problem with a person without symptoms is he has to notice the symptoms immediately and remove himself immidiately. But if he is on a 12 hour flight when the symptoms first appear, then what does he do.

he doesn't do anything. He sits away from the other passengers, and when he lands he checks into a hospital, gets treated, and recovers. And nobody else is at risk of catching the disease. Pretty simple.

As long as he does not cough, vomit, or have diarrhea. You know, things people typically do when they get this.

 

[Apple Jack]

Hopefully anybody (presumably a healthcare worker with cause to suspect Ebola) feeling the symptoms come on during a long flight is going to tell the crew who can then get the plane on the ground asap.

 

[matuski]

I'm more surprised that these doctors, who are being so selfless by going over there to help people and putting themselves in harm's way, don't apply the same mindset when coming back before kissing their girlfriends or spending a night with friends. It just seems so inconsistent.

Because it's currently accepted as iron-clad fact that ebola cannot be spread by a asymptomatic carrier. If new information ever comes in to change that understanding, hopefully behaviors will change as well.

Amber Vinson's fellow passengers flying from Cleveland to Dallas were Test Case 1. The Uber riders and Craig Spencer's bowling buddies in NYC will be Test Case 2. Will an asymptomatic Ebola patient ever spread the virus to another person thgough social means a la colds and flu? Stay tuned.

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected. I would assume the most dangerous part is taking off the protective items after they have been contaminated. Those fluids can infect for a substaintial period after leaving the body.The problem with a person without symptoms is he has to notice the symptoms immediately and remove himself immidiately. But if he is on a 12 hour flight when the symptoms first appear, then what does he do.

he doesn't do anything. He sits away from the other passengers, and when he lands he checks into a hospital, gets treated, and recovers. And nobody else is at risk of catching the disease. Pretty simple.

As long as he does not cough, vomit, or have diarrhea. You know, things people typically do when they get this.

The hypotheticals people come up with are awesome.

What if they poop on me? HUH? WHAT THEN!?!

 

[timschochet]

I'm more surprised that these doctors, who are being so selfless by going over there to help people and putting themselves in harm's way, don't apply the same mindset when coming back before kissing their girlfriends or spending a night with friends. It just seems so inconsistent.

Because it's currently accepted as iron-clad fact that ebola cannot be spread by a asymptomatic carrier. If new information ever comes in to change that understanding, hopefully behaviors will change as well.

Amber Vinson's fellow passengers flying from Cleveland to Dallas were Test Case 1. The Uber riders and Craig Spencer's bowling buddies in NYC will be Test Case 2. Will an asymptomatic Ebola patient ever spread the virus to another person thgough social means a la colds and flu? Stay tuned.

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected. I would assume the most dangerous part is taking off the protective items after they have been contaminated. Those fluids can infect for a substaintial period after leaving the body.The problem with a person without symptoms is he has to notice the symptoms immediately and remove himself immidiately. But if he is on a 12 hour flight when the symptoms first appear, then what does he do.

he doesn't do anything. He sits away from the other passengers, and when he lands he checks into a hospital, gets treated, and recovers. And nobody else is at risk of catching the disease. Pretty simple.

As long as he does not cough, vomit, or have diarrhea. You know, things people typically do when they get this.

So long as he stays away from other passengers, why would any of those things matter?

 

[3C's]

I'm more surprised that these doctors, who are being so selfless by going over there to help people and putting themselves in harm's way, don't apply the same mindset when coming back before kissing their girlfriends or spending a night with friends. It just seems so inconsistent.

Because it's currently accepted as iron-clad fact that ebola cannot be spread by a asymptomatic carrier. If new information ever comes in to change that understanding, hopefully behaviors will change as well.

Amber Vinson's fellow passengers flying from Cleveland to Dallas were Test Case 1. The Uber riders and Craig Spencer's bowling buddies in NYC will be Test Case 2. Will an asymptomatic Ebola patient ever spread the virus to another person thgough social means a la colds and flu? Stay tuned.

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected. I would assume the most dangerous part is taking off the protective items after they have been contaminated. Those fluids can infect for a substaintial period after leaving the body.The problem with a person without symptoms is he has to notice the symptoms immediately and remove himself immidiately. But if he is on a 12 hour flight when the symptoms first appear, then what does he do.

he doesn't do anything. He sits away from the other passengers, and when he lands he checks into a hospital, gets treated, and recovers. And nobody else is at risk of catching the disease. Pretty simple.

As long as he does not cough, vomit, or have diarrhea. You know, things people typically do when they get this.

So long as he stays away from other passengers, why would any of those things matter?

Have you been on a flight recently? They jam us in like sardines man! Sometimes I think I might be more comfortable in the overhead bin.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Apparently they're quarantining people who came into contact with this doctor even though they haven't shown any symptoms. Epidemiologists who actually understand how this works seem to think that quarantines are warranted.

Self-monitoring symptoms (with 12-hr call-ins to medical staff), or quarantines? Also, what level of contact are we talking here? Girlfriend makes sense. Bowling alley patrons? Uber riders?

Quarantines. From what I saw on CNN, it was the girlfriend and two other friends.

 

[Doug B]

As long as he does not cough, vomit, or have diarrhea. You know, things people typically do when they get this.

Yeah. but those things can't infect at a distance.

Also, this just a personal impression, but: I don't think anyone will ever get on a plane with no fever, no nothing, then develop full-blown external symtpoms over the course of a 12-hour flight. From what I know, that can't be totally ruled out ... but the flights from, say, Monrovia to Brussels, and then Brussels to JFK aren't 12-hour flights. The situation you present is contrived to allow for a slim possibility.

 

[Doug B]

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected.

Callously: this fact is not significant when evaluating the risk of a non-healthcare worker (e.g. the average American). Especially when the fact is presented without numbers. Doctors are getting infected? Well, there's a big difference between one in four and one in four thousand.

No human protocol is 100%, nor should it be expected to be.

 

[sn0mm1s]

People in the US have immediate access to healthcare. Many in West Africa do not. The keys to survival appear to be early detection, closely monitoring and treating dehydration, and having access to dialysis if need be. The 50%-70% number has little to no relevance to the mortality rate under the US healthcare system.

This isn't entirely accurate... I pointed out a few pages back that health care is great and seemingly safe when the patient receives it in a bleeding edge biocontainment facility with an army of doctors waiting to work on that patient. IIRC Fennis posted an article about a doctor treating a patient in Nebraska. He was basically kept in effectively a bubble and there were 70 doctors/nurses trained in handling a disease such as Ebola on hand to receive the patient.

OTOH, the one patient that is treated in a regular hospital (which we were told time and time again could handle Ebola patients) dies and infects two others.

Ebola isn't a threat to the US as long as the number of infected are small. I would expect a fairly high recovery rate and a zero transmission rate if done in a biocontainment facility. If done in a normal hospital that doesn't have the infrastructure for such a patient, one infected person may be too much to handle much less a handful.

I don't think there should be a travel ban - but I do think all people coming from those countries should be required to state that they were coming from a region with an Ebola outbreak and have to check in with the CDC daily for 21 days.

I don't think anyone should be treated in a regular hospital while biocontainment facilities have beds.

If (and I doubt this would happen) said biocontainment facilities ever reach 50% capacity then a travel ban is put in place. I don't trust the average hospital to be able to treat/contain Ebola patients. So I would never want the number of infected to ever exceed the number of patients treatable in the specially designed facilities. While DougB, wouldn't mind an Ebola patient vomiting on his hands, washing them, then eating a sandwich and/or touching a baby in the NICU, I have a feeling that most US healthcare workers infected had less direct contact than that with bodily fluids. There is a reason for the BSL4 protocols when just studying the virus - our goal should be to treat those infected in as close to that level of environment as possible.

 

[Doug B]

Quarantines. From what I saw on CNN, it was the girlfriend and two other friends.

Thanks for responding, Ivan.

 

[siffoin]

Humans have been "plagued" by pandemics throughout history. It is possible (I'd go as far as to say probable) that at some point in the future we will be plagued by another. Is Ebola THAT plague? I doubt it...but we are in a historical moment of risk where that is possible. And I think it best not to be extreme to any side of the emotional spectrum. Rather take a logical and practical approach.


I agree. I doubt we'll have a large enough sample size in regards to treating Ebola in the US to garner any real statistical significance. But we don't know the future either.

A lot of the debate has been what is logical and practical. Some of the questions debated at least in here:

Should there be a travel ban to from West Africa?

Is forcing people who treated Ebola patients to be quarantined logical and practical?

Can people who treated Ebola patients go on a cruise? On an airplane? On a bus? Bowling? Take a cab?

If passengers took an airplane ride with someone who eventually became symptomatic do all those passengers need to be quarantined?

If one of the passengers is a school teacher should children attend their class?

Should banks be closed because a teller was on that airplane?

I'm not sure what is logical or practical.

That the "experts" have said "it's close to impossible to catch" but then in action take extraordinary measures for each case- seems they are more concerned than they are letting on.

I don't have the answers. But I don't think there is Zero risk as your numbers suggest, nor do I think the End is Neigh.

1) I don't think it's possible to fully close borders.

2) I think it's reasonable that the "hero's" who work with Ebola patients be quarantined for a time...at least until we have better data how transmittable the disease is in a modern healthcare system.

3) I think modes of public transportation should be sanitized regularly.

4) I think (in general) a PSA campaign about hygiene - how and when to wash hands. How to be a "good citizen" when you are sick. How to be a "good citizen" when you are at risk of being sick etc..would be helpful not necessarily for Ebola but in preventing illness in general.

5) If someone randomly flying on a plane got Ebola from another passenger - I think it reasonable to set up more defensive measures, but not until that happens.

 

[jon_mx]

It is also a fact that even doctors with proper protective gear, training, and knowledge are getting infected.

Callously: this fact is not significant when evaluating the risk of a non-healthcare worker (e.g. the average American). Especially when the fact is presented without numbers. Doctors are getting infected? Well, there's a big difference between one in four and one in four thousand.

No human protocol is 100%, nor should it be expected to be.

Health care workers represent about 25 percent of those infected. Of course most do not follow strict protocols or even have the resources to do so. But when someone does and still becomes infected, it might suggests that Ebola is a bit more contagious than believed.

 

[Doug B]

OTOH, the one patient that is treated in a regular hospital (which we were told time and time again could handle Ebola patients) dies and infects two others.

Can you source that. Some in this thread (incl myself in this thread) wrote that more regular hospitals should be brought up to speed so that they could credibly handle an Ebola patient. But I don't recall anyone in authority actually saying what you're claiming.

While Doug B, wouldn't mind an Ebola patient vomiting on his hands, washing them, then eating a sandwich and/or touching a baby in the NICU

Not nearly what I said. You're mixing up a few quotes of mine, and the part about the baby in NICU didn't come from me.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

 

[urbanhack]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

Great recap.

 

[Doug B]

That the "experts" have said "it's close to impossible to catch" but then in action take extraordinary measures for each case- seems they are more concerned than they are letting on.

They mean -- and probably need to spell out -- that (a) it's going to be practically impossible for the average American to catch, and (b) more specifically, ebola is absolutely known not to spread socially like cold and flu.

They don't mean that it's hard for healthcare professionals, dealing with body fluids, to contract.

 

[sn0mm1s]

OTOH, the one patient that is treated in a regular hospital (which we were told time and time again could handle Ebola patients) dies and infects two others.

Can you source that. Some in this thread (incl myself in this thread) wrote that more regular hospitals should be brought up to speed so that they could credibly handle an Ebola patient. But I don't recall anyone in authority actually saying what you're claiming.

While Doug B, wouldn't mind an Ebola patient vomiting on his hands, washing them, then eating a sandwich and/or touching a baby in the NICU

Not nearly what I said. You're mixing up a few quotes of mine, and the part about the baby in NICU didn't come from me.

1) I am sure the head of the CDC said that (along with others) I don't feel like tracking down the article/soundbites.

2) Well, you basically said you would feel perfectly safe if an Ebola patient vomited on your hands (and you cleaned up) and that if an Ebola patient showered/washed hands and made a sandwich you would eat it.

Your quote after washing off Ebola puke: "As for touching the baby in NICU -- no chance of me passing on Ebola, but my other hand would be grubby with other pathogens."

 

[Apple Jack]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

That must be a really big bowling alley.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

Great recap.

thanks... I hope he wasn't the sweaty guy I yelled at when he was trying to muscle his way past me getting on the jammed packed number 2 train outside of central park Saturday.

 

[Apple Jack]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

Great recap.

thanks... I hope he wasn't the sweaty guy I yelled at when he was trying to muscle his way past me getting on the jammed packed number 2 train outside of central park Saturday.

iTUff.

 

[Doug B]

But when someone does and still becomes infected, it might suggests that Ebola is a bit more contagious than believed.

A suspicion of mine, no info or data:

When a healthcare worker does contract Ebola, it always represents a breach in protocol or some kind of an accident. Every time. Perhaps an incredibly subtle breach, but a breach nonetheless.

...

When you say that "Ebola is a bit more contagious than believed", what do you mean? Can you put a finer point on it? For isntance, do you feel like there is a method of transmission that is being downplayed or ignored?

 

[Fennis]

Remind me to cancel my dinner with Doug

 

[Josie Maran]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

Great recap.

thanks... I hope he wasn't the sweaty guy I yelled at when he was trying to muscle his way past me getting on the jammed packed number 2 train outside of central park Saturday.

I'd start getting your affairs in order GB. Being a mile from where an Ebola patient will eventually be is practically a death sentence.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

Great recap.

thanks... I hope he wasn't the sweaty guy I yelled at when he was trying to muscle his way past me getting on the jammed packed number 2 train outside of central park Saturday.

iTUff.

No just a 52 year old man that doesn't like being knocked around by anybody...let alone a rude sweaty New Yorker. Manners boy...I say, I say where are your manners.

 

[Apple Jack]

I would like to welcome the flood of New Yorkers to our little thread.

Not a New Yorker but just went on a quick trip October 16-19th..... JFK, Manhattan, and Williamsburg Brooklyn (pies and thighs)...about a mile from the bowling alley this hump was at.....Some doctor...Hey I just got back from treating ebola patients...I think I will go mingle with 4 million of my closest friends...I told the ####### government several weeks ago to start quarantining these people when they return.

Great recap.

thanks... I hope he wasn't the sweaty guy I yelled at when he was trying to muscle his way past me getting on the jammed packed number 2 train outside of central park Saturday.

I'd start getting your affairs in order GB. Being a mile from where an Ebola patient will eventually be is practically a death sentence.

Central Park? 2 train? Williamsburg Brooklyn? JFK? Manhattan? Pies and Thighs? A mile from teh Ebolaz? TELL ME MORE ABOUT YOUR EXCITING ADVENTURE TO THE BIG CITY, PA!