I heard that number, 70, earlier and can’t believe it. How stupid are these people? You want the least number of people necessary to be in contact.
“I heard that number, 70, earlier and can’t believe it. How stupid are these people? You want the least number of people necessary to be in contact.”
As explained on another website, this represents days off, different shifts, different departments, etc...
In a Union Hospital, you aren’t going to get 24/7 coverage with just one or two people.
That’s something else that worries me. When my brother was in the ICU for a few weeks, near death last year*, one thing that bothered me was the way that nurses were rotated. It seemed that rather than keep a relative few caring for him, who would then have more consistent interaction with him, and more “hands on experience” with his case, the hospital rotated through so many we could not keep track of them. And, more often than not, if we had a question, the nurse did not know, would have to go check with someone or something, etc. The caregivers all seemed very compassionate and caring, and they did pull my brother through, but, well, it was disturbing, and frustrating for the family.
Later, when my brother was in rehab, he pretty much had the same nurses and other caregivers seeing him from day to day.
At any rate, my brother was not deadly infectious. In the case of a deadly infectious disease, having a large number of people in contact with the patient just seems nuts...
“I heard that number, 70, earlier and can’t believe it. How stupid are these people? You want the least number of people necessary to be in contact.”
They must’ve believed the administration that there was no risk.
If they have no clue what protocol was breached, how can they insure it won’t happen again?
Wasn’t there a Monty Python skit like that?
Oh the new hospitalist way is to assign “teams”, that way you spread out the risk of malpractice between 70 different people, see.
Universal precautions! That’s all that is needed and everyone is safe. You know - gloves, a paper jacket, eye protection maybe and a mask over you nose and mouth and all is good. This is for every possible disease and virus so and any questions or concerns are the result of racism or intolerance. Everything is equal and fine - hey no worries. I worked for years in a lab and hospital in Dallas around some very nasty stuff and any questions and I would get “universal precautions!” bit shoved down my throat from women more concerned with political correctness and inane overly broad and blanket facts and rules taught over and over in indoctrination modules all employees must take multiple times a year. Obviously universal precautions aren’t going to work with Ebola and other nasty virus and bugs while everyone says no problem because we followed the rules. Sorry I’m ranting I’ve just heard a few experts use the line on CNN and I used to get upset with it and the mindset at the hospitals of many - now they are all freaking out for sure. Lot’s of people being exposed have no business
being around them and to give people a 20 minute lesson on how to properly were a gown and gloves and dispose of them and then they are good to go and pretend they’re highly trained hospital staff ready for Ebola is lunacy.
This allows the hospital to bill more. Sadly they still see dollar signs because the taxpayers will pick up the bill.
What a racist hospital? Only 70 people? It should have been 75. And the family received $500,000 (likely more) of free care for their lying relative they will never have to pay back when it should have been $1,000,000
This is a ‘game of exponential fun’; does 70 include only those working with the patient or the others they contacted as well: friends/family/lunch-break/dinner associates?
BUT, but, protocol was followed...so we’re all safe, right?