Posted on 08/01/2014 10:25:35 PM PDT by CorporateStepsister
Now, should the medical workers in the Ebola infected countries use robotic technology to handle patients, administer certain drugs, and then do certain functions that could prevent the spread of the disease to the workers in the medical field?
I thought this would be a much better way to have patients taken care of and reduce risk drastically in regards to patient to doctor/carer transmission.
We aren’t there yet and certainly not in Africa.
And if we were there, who would maintain the robots?
That simply is not going to happen. There not only is a lack of trained personnel and effective isolation equipment in Africa, but the people now fear quarantine and isolation. They view it as a death sentence. The disease will simply run its course since there is no effective cure. No doubt politicians will make sanctimonious speeches, promise aid and comfort, but there will in effect be no effectual action since frankly it is not possible.
Everything that comes in contact with the patient will have to be thrown away. I can’t see them using robotics. It would be a good idea though if a robot was not so expensive.
Medical knowledge is not static, fortunately, and in the future there may appear better treatments for Ebola as well as immunizations for medical personnel.
Robotics is not good enough yet to handle many care issues today, but that does not mean it can’t be good enough tomorrow. I’d tend to say look to the Japanese to produce the required innovations.
It would be easier to sanitize a robot than a person.
Yes, but this disease uses the highest level of isolation techniques which is disposing of everything that comes in contact with the patient. That is why the pods they are using to transport the patients to the States will not be reused.
There were people in Africa refusing polio vaccines because they were told it was a western plot to sterilize them.
Robot doctors and nurses, like CP30 or the robot on ‘Lost Planet’? Or ‘Lost In Space? “Danger! Danger Will Robinson. Your innards are liquifying and the linings of your intestines are sloughing!”.
Robots are made out of things like metal and plastic... these can be sanitized if necessary. It would be worth it for a robot; not worth it for a pod.
There are many ways the approach and treatment to this and other diseases will be different in the future. However at the present this outbreak of Ebola will run its natural course the way prior outbreaks have done. It is a poor man’s disease since it is spread by the direct contact with the secretions of infected humans. Poor hygiene, close living and sleeping quarters and inadequate sanitation are the culprits. It is not likely to spread to first world nations in an endemic fashion.
“..these can be sanitized if necessary.”
I think I read where Ebola dies out in the cooler months (in Africa? Maybe I’m wrong.) But if it is temperature sensitive they could run stuff through the cooler for 24 hours. I think it only lasts on a hard surface for a few days anyway.
There was a photograph of heavy duty rubber gloves and boots hanging to dry in one photo - so obviously they aren’t throwing everything away. I imagine a good bleach solution and air-dry kills the virus. Of course that assumes they washed everything well.
Many of the people who are exposed never become deathly ill and some may not even notice symptoms. That is one of the insidious things about this bug.
I worked for four years in an isolation ward. At an ebola level of disease everything that comes in contact with the patient will have to be disposable. And a special effort will have to be made to burn whatever comes out of the room. So if they can make a disposable robot that they don’t mind destroying after treating one patient, I guess they would consider using a robot.
Truly... did you ever actually deal with an ebola case?
Do they throw out entire gurneys, etc.?
And you have forgotten about the option of a disposable skin for the robot... the underlying structure does NOT need to be destroyed. Watch your limiting assumptions.
I think this is a good concept.
The reponse of a given individual to an infection is dictated by genetics. either you have the genes that direct an effective immunological response or you don’t. throughout history a disease goes through a given population numerous times killing off the “susceptible” people who cannot mount an effective immunological response. Eventually the surviving population is “immune” since they have the necessary genes to mount an effective immunological response. Consider bubonic plague it ravaged Europe repeatedly until the late 17th century. Yet despite the horrendous conditions in urban areas, concentration camps and prisoner of war camps there were no outbreaks during WW II and its immediate aftermath. Why? The Europeans who’s ancestors had survived the bubonic plague as a population had the gene to protect them. Eventually and painfully the same thing will happen in Africa.Of course it would be beneficial to have an effective treatment or vaccine to mitigate the suffering.
To get Ebola, you have to have bare skin contact with the patient’s bodily fluids. As long as those handling the infected are properly attired, there will not be any further cases.
They probably brought them into the country so they can study it in a proper facility than an African one.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-20341423
“Growing concerns over ‘in the air’ transmission of Ebola”
The original Nature publication:
http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/121115/srep00811/full/srep00811.html
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.