Posted on 08/10/2014 12:46:23 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe
I have spent a little time compiling links to threads about the Ebola outbreak in the interest of having all the links in one thread for future reference.
Please add links to new threads and articles of interest as the situation develops.
Thank You all for you participation.
JUST IN: CDC confirms Dallas health worker test results positive for Ebola nbcnews.to/1stJ6Jb pic.twitter.com/T5fyhzRn1r
It is not looking good for the home team...
This is infuriating. They are throwing this nurse under the bus because they will not admit that their recommendations are woefully inadequate. They are not giving this LEVEL 4 (!!) pathogen the respect it requires. Their negligent policies and procedures are going to be the cause of more infections and possible deaths!
Meticulous. Riiiight.
I foresee HCWs saying, “Eff this.” I don’t blame them one bit. Freiden and his posse are playing with their lives.
Two likely sources for their infection:
1. Inadequate PPE and/or
2. No decontamination process of the PPE prior to its removal
The CDC and the WHO recommendations for personal protective equipment for Health Care Workers treating Patients with Hemorrhagic Fever are inadequate as mentioned by numerous others on this thread: BSL-2 gear for a BSL-4 pathogen. The MSF health care workers in Africa, while not using BSL-4 protective equipment, are certainly are using BSL-3 level equipment when treating Ebola patients: rubber boots, plastic head coverings, goggles, N-100 respirators, triple gloves, tyvek suits, plastic aprons, tape around glove edges: no inch of skin exposed!
Removal of potentially contaminated PPE is another potential occasion for exposure of the HCW, especially as the CDC guidelines do not mention decontamination of potentially exposed PPE is necessary prior to its removal. A decontamination process, using a minimum of 2 people, must be done prior to removal of PPE worn when treating patients infected with this virus.
Any Infectious Disease prevention protocols designed for HCW treating Ebola patients must consider that mistakes will be made. Procedures must be designed to prevent errors from occurring or minimize the impact of these errors on both the patient and the HCW. For example, the BSL-3 PPE worn by the MSF healthcare workers and the rigorous decontamination process in place prior to their removal minimizes the chance that should the HCW have a breach of protocol (i.e. touch their face with a glove), the HCW only touches the PPE, not their skin. Since their PPE is also thoroughly decontaminated prior to its removal, the HCW is not exposed to the virus.
The Dallas Hospital HCW should also be asking: Why were there no secondary infections of healthcare workers who treated Drs. Brantly and Sacra and Mrs. Writbol? Was it a result of the patients being treated in a facility specifically designed to handle patients infected with a BSL-4 pathogen? Was it a result of the HCW receiving extensive training in the use of BSL-4 PPE? Was it because the HCW in these specialized facilities used adequate PPE and employed exposure prevention procedures designed for treating a patient infected with a BSL-4 pathogen? - procedures that included decontamination before removal of their PPE? If future outbreaks of Ebola among U.S. HCW are to be prevented, hospitals must now begin to consider implementing different and more stringent infectious disease prevention protocols than those presently proposed by the CDC. At a minimum: 1. the HCW must be trained in and use BSL-3 gear such as that worn by the MSF and 2. a decontamination procedure must be implemented prior to removal of their potentially contaminated PPE. The cost of additional PPE and decontamination prior to its removal far outweigh the cost to the hospital of treating an Ebola infected employee, or worse, the death of an employee to Ebola. Hospital may also increasingly find themselves unable to locate HCWs willing to work in their infectious disease unit if it houses an Ebola patient.
I am wondering what the real agenda is. When AIDS appeared, the real agenda was to protect homosexuals from being stigmatized, so for a long, long time they tried to obfuscate the fact that gay sex was the primary means of spreading it. The secondary agenda was to protect IV drug users from the stigma. They were willing to risk the lives of all Americans (including, ironically, homosexuals and drug users) in order to do this.
With Ebola, I have to speculate on the following possibilities:
1. Avoid stigmatizing Africa.
2. Intentionally damage the US and its citizens. (Most of the other actions they have taken have accomplished this, so why not spread a plague, too.)
3. Some sort of tie-in with 0bamacare.
4. Population reduction. The left hates actual people and would love to kill a lot of them off “for the good of the planet.”
5. Financial incentives. Possibly my top guess. Someone always profits. Who stands to make the most money from anti-Ebola drugs? Who makes the most money if there is widespread panic? Who makes the most money if people hunker down?
6. Political incentives. How might this affect the upcoming elections? The 2016 election? Martial law? Who gets more power? (No surgeon general at this time. Who else might benefit? Head of CDC?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.