Here is your original post:
I happen to be a research scientist with a lot of education and experience in this area. I have never said anything that is not supported in the scientific literature, and I am always willing to provide references to back up anything I say. The information I have provided on mode of transmission is absolutely accurate, and supported by research.
The thing about the scientific world, is that we constantly discuss how things are done, and if they could be done better. We always try to improve things. Ebola really has not significantly changed, but what is clear when a situation like Dallas comes up and two nurses infect themselves is that communication, education, whatever, fell down somewhere along the way.
The protocols are sound, people have been responding to Ebola outbreaks for decades without getting infected. So, when a couple of nurses get infected, we need to understand what went wrong so as to prevent it from happening again.
*******************************************************
I merely pointed out that you used a poor choice of words by saying that “two nurses infect themselves”, and I pointed out that the CDC protocol at the time was perhaps not as good as it should have been.
You have spent quite a bit of time justifying your choice of words with assumptions and a bet, and even stated that the CDC didn’t really change their guidelines.
Well, I saw people from the CDC and NIH state out right that the protocol they had was not sufficient for the hospitals, and that they were changing them.
Now here’s your current post:
I think you are upset because you assume that I am placing a moral judgment on the nurses by pointing out that they infected themselves by improperly using PPE.
It’s nothing of the sort.
*********************************************************
No I am not upset. I think you used a poor choice of words. I stand by that. In addition, I have merely pointed out that your posts in response to my first reply to you, were not scientific, and not based on research but had a lot of assumptions.
This undermines your credibility, especially when you claim that everything you say can be backed up by scientific research.
We do know that lots of health care workers (some with lots of experience) have died this time. Why that has happened as well as what happened with these nurses is at this point unknown, and does need to be investigated.
Your last question is beyond ridiculous. Nothing I have posted would even suggest such a thing, and is you again making assumptions, and being emotional rather than scientific.
No, you are upset. Just accept that I stand by my "poor choice of words."
Properly used PPE works. Hundreds (thousands) of people have managed to treat Ebola and Marburg patients without infecting themselves over the last few decades. Therefore, if an infection of a health care worker occurred, it was due to improper use of PPE. There is no other explanation. It does not require any leaps to conclusions: the nurses did not use the proper PPE, or did not use the proper PPE correctly. Either way, their actions resulted in their infections.
It seems, from the few reports on the issue, that the nurses were using improper PPE during the two days after Mr. Duncan was admitted and before he was definitively diagnosed.
Well, I saw people from the CDC and NIH state out right that the protocol they had was not sufficient for the hospitals, and that they were changing them.
The CDC's mistake was assuming that they could provide the PPE guidelines, and everyone would be experienced enough to use them. They have not significantly changed the guidelines, but they rewrote them to try to make them idiot-proof. It's the same principle that causes product warnings such as "Do not iron clothes while wearing them."