Posted on 10/19/2014 6:49:36 PM PDT by Dallas59
Edited on 10/19/2014 7:12:41 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
It's doubtful that the nurses (or anyone else) was infected at that point. First because it was not long after the family contact and they were not infected. Second because it is much more likely that the two nurses were infected when Duncan went acute and they had inadequate protection for that.
The hospital said the team treating Duncan were volunteers. What I would say to that is there are various definitions of that word.
Except they were using CDC guidelines. I believe that was proven to you on another thread. http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3214475/posts
Nothing of the sort was "proven."
Ebola: 5 things nurses say the Texas hospital got wrong.
Nurses: Hospital’s Ebola response put workers, patients at risk
With Ebola cases, CDC zeros in on lapses in protocol, protective gear
I know it makes for greater drama if they were using the proper PPE and correct techniques for removing it and still got Ebola. But that is not the case here.
Thousands of healthcare professionals manage to work with infectious disease patients every day without infecting themselves. When the proper PPE and correct procedures are not used, however, there are problems.
With proper PPE use, it is possible to take care of hemorrhagic fever patients without even knowing why they are sick, and avoid infection. It has been done before with Marburg, a virus very similar to, and more deadly than, Ebola.
Seriously. Waiting until the patient is definitively diagnosed and the CDC comes to town is a little late to start using proper PPE. THAT is the hospital's fault. It's not like proper PPE for treating hemorrhagic fever patients is some kind of big secret--it isn't.
Actually, the CDC investigation found that Duncan was contagious, and the nurses were using PPE incorrectly when they arrived on Sept. 30. Frieden said CDC investigators found that on Sept. 30, the day of Duncan's Ebola diagnosis, healthcare workers were donning "three or four" layers of protective gloves and gowns, thinking that would increase protection from the virus. But such measures, Frieden warned, may have increased infection risk. There were many issues with the PPE, not just the one quoted here. I do not want to quote too much from the LA Times, but the full article has a lot more information.
that is correct..but did you notice I said IF.
So why aren’t they being tested to help those that have been cursed by their Uncle.
Well, we now know Donna Brazile’s FR handle. When Big Gov fails, just blame the victim! Seriously, just stop. It was shown to you that the protocol was followed, but the CDC’s protocol was flawed. I’m sure DU would love your Big Gov boot licking, so just go there and trash the victims.
You do note that the head of the CDC claimed that nurses did not have to even have ANY head or foot coverings to treat Ebola patients, right??? He said all of this on a Megan Kelly interview show. Megan Kelley was quite incredulous, as were ALL of America!
A link to this thread has been posted on the Ebola Surveillance Thread
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/manoj-jain-md-mph/ebola-quarantine_b_6009176.html
I’ve read 40 days. Excerpts of this article, saying 5 percent risk after 21 days, and 0 percent risk after 40 days.
“For me, a recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine detailing the first nine months of the 2014 epidemic in West Africa raises concern about the short, often-mentioned 21 post-exposure-day periods in the guidelines. In the journal’s study of 4,507 probable and confirmed cases, “approximately 95 percent of the case patients had symptom onset within 21 days of exposure.” If we do the math, this means that approximately 5 percent or 225 of the Ebola cases in West Africa had symptoms 21 days after exposure, as reported by the patient or caregiver.”
“Charles Haas, professor at Drexel University, published a paper in PLOS Current Outbreaks that can help us delineate the probability of infection, based on the six Ebola epidemics. According to his model, 21 days after exposure the risk of acquiring Ebola is 0.1 percent to 12 percent. The risk reduces to 0.01 percent to 5 percent after 30 days and the risk is virtually zero after 40 days.”
I stand corrected.
Thought for sure I saw it documented as 42 at least in two separate articles.
With all due respect . . . why do you keep defending this guy? He was a fool to go into an infected apt, to drive them to the safehouse, and then to go home to his family and his daily duties. He is a pandering fool and what he did was criminally negligent. That isn’t showing any sort of bravado, it was a political ploy and his words and actions showed it.
Anyone else would have been super pissed the harm this family has brought on. And I bet if you look between the lines, this would have been a sham marriage to get this jerk into the USA. The number of sham marriages within the immigrant communities is outrageous and makes a mockery of the laws. Self serving pols like Jenkins know it and only make the situation worse.
I bet Clay Boy has had some restless nights and frequent temperature readings.
Oh and BTW, if there wasn’t still a risk after so many hours from Duncan’s departure from the apt, why do we continue to see video of fully suited hazmat workers in Amber’s apt?
There are Americans that are in the military, or police and fire departments that put their lives on the line every day.
This guy did not put his life at risk or anyone else’s life at risk.
You probably did see it stated as 42. I read articles that state 40. That’s the crazy thing, reports are all over the map. There’s no hard timeline, just statistics based on reported cases. But one thing for sure, people can carry and transmit the disease beyond 21 days. Most of the transmission happens in the 10 day range or so (I’m guessing here), and tapers off after that. But do we really want the government telling people they’re all clear after 21 days since first exposure, when the truth is far beyond that to be clear, more like 30 to 40 days or more? With such a deadly disease, we should err on the side of caution. With this president Obola, there seems to be no caring for the populace, it’s all politics to him.
Post to me or FReep mail to be on/off the Bring Out Your Dead ping list.
The purpose of the “Bring Out Your Dead” ping list (formerly the “Ebola” ping list) is very early warning of emerging pandemics, as such it has a high false positive rate.
So far the false positive rate is 100%.
At some point we may well have a high mortality pandemic, and likely as not the “Bring Out Your Dead” threads will miss the beginning entirely.
*sigh* Such is life, and death...
Unless they all died, too. They seem to have dropped off the face of the earth.
Ok, let’s say 20 people get exposed to Ebola the same day. At Day 21, none are showing symptoms. There’s a high probability that one of them will get sick from Day 22 to Day 42.
With enough exposures, 21 days won’t work.
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.