First american ebola case diagnosed

[barbos]

I don't drink/smoke, have full set hair on my head and have normal weight, do you have something relevant for me?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is alarming but, frankly, what I already suspected and commented on up-thread:





http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/health/texas-ebola-nurses-union-claims/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Hang on a second; the nurses are not union members, but want the union to help them anyway?

Isn't that like not buying car insurance, and then expecting an insurer to pay out if you are involved in a crash?

This is why you join a union - so that in the unlikely event that the shit hits the fan, you have someone to fight your corner. If you don't join the union, asking for their help after the free-standing air circulation device is impacted by faecal material is a bloody cheek.

The union wants to pretend that things would be better for the nurses if they joined the union.

 

[bilby]

Hang on a second; the nurses are not union members, but want the union to help them anyway?

Isn't that like not buying car insurance, and then expecting an insurer to pay out if you are involved in a crash?

This is why you join a union - so that in the unlikely event that the shit hits the fan, you have someone to fight your corner. If you don't join the union, asking for their help after the free-standing air circulation device is impacted by faecal material is a bloody cheek.

The union wants to pretend that things would be better for the nurses if they joined the union.

Pretend?

The nurses went to the union for help. They clearly felt that they needed that help. The nurses would have an advocate in their dealings with hospital management if they were members of a union, so things would be better. The union isn't 'pretending' anything.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The union wants to pretend that things would be better for the nurses if they joined the union.

Pretend?

The nurses went to the union for help. They clearly felt that they needed that help. The nurses would have an advocate in their dealings with hospital management if they were members of a union, so things would be better. The union isn't 'pretending' anything.

We don't know what they did, the union is doing the talking.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Hang on a second; the nurses are not union members, but want the union to help them anyway?

Isn't that like not buying car insurance, and then expecting an insurer to pay out if you are involved in a crash?

This is why you join a union - so that in the unlikely event that the shit hits the fan, you have someone to fight your corner. If you don't join the union, asking for their help after the free-standing air circulation device is impacted by faecal material is a bloody cheek.

The union wants to pretend that things would be better for the nurses if they joined the union.

Can you demonstrate that things would not be better for the nurses if they joined the union? You did state " The union wants to pretend that things would better for the nurses...." as if the union were aware that things would not be better for the nurses but pretended they would.

So, now I am asking to explain your statement rather than leaving it to that one liner.

Further, you seem to be questioning the positive influence of Union representatives in the context of a medical facility when it comes to insuring that the management will apply all necessary measures to protect their employees from exposure to infectious diseases as well as bodily injuries.

Questions :

1) Would "things have been better" if the management had conducted hands on training and drills regarding the proper and efficient use of the available PPE? Specifically a supervisor observing how health care workers put on their PPE and take it off. Specifically the drills in question taking place after all health care workers were mandated to attend a course detailing the vital step by step protocol of putting on and taking off their PPE.

2) Would "things have been better" if the available PPE had been upgraded to guarantee a 100% skin covering rather than leaving any skin area exposed. Rather than the "quick fix" with the medical tape health care workers were expected to rely on to protect their neck, neck exposed due to a PPE which does not guarantee a 100% covering of the skin. You should be made aware that the type of PPE, used by MSF and other specialized medical teams operating overseas and in areas frequently affected by infectious diseases, is a 100% skin covering PPE.

3) Would "things have been better" if contaminated material had been immediately disposed of in a bio hazard container rather than letting it pile up. The hospital is guilty of gross negligence when it comes to not observing the secure disposal of contaminated material. That is as bad as if a medical facility did not have bio hazard containers for the safe disposal of used sharps while letting them pile up somewhere. By not observing bio hazard protocols, the hospital management increased the risk of exposure and contamination for their employees.

Explain why and how the above listed "things would have been better" is only a pretense on the part of the Union that "they would have been better for the nurses".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I don't drink/smoke, have full set hair on my head and have normal weight, do you have something relevant for me?

You also aren't panicking about ebola. Anecdotally, my coworker's wife was at the grocery store yesterday (I'm in NE Ohio where Nurse Ratchett came up to) and some people appeared to be stocking up.

 

[dismal]

Ebola Patient Contacted CDC Before Flight, Agency Says

Vinson, 29, had been self-monitoring and was reporting her temperature to CDC epidemiology teams routinely.

The unidentified government spokesman told NBC News that Vinson called the CDC on Monday before flying from Cleveland back to DFW on Frontier Airlines Flight 1143, and she reported that she had a temperature of 99.5 degrees.

According to the government spokesperson, when Vinson called in, the staff she talked with looked on the CDC website for guidance. At the time, the category for "uncertain risk" had guidance saying that a person could fly commercially if they did not meet the threshold of a temperature of 100.4.

CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden had said earlier Wednesday on a phone press briefing that Vinson "should not have traveled on a commercial aircraft."

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Eb...79365622.html?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_DFWBrand

Right hand, meet left hand.

 

[barbos]

I don't drink/smoke, have full set hair on my head and have normal weight, do you have something relevant for me?

You also aren't panicking about ebola. Anecdotally, my coworker's wife was at the grocery store yesterday (I'm in NE Ohio where Nurse Ratchett came up to) and some people appeared to be stocking up.

I am not panicking yet, merely expressing proper amount of concern.

 

[ZiprHead]

IMOPRTANT: EBOLA IS NOW SPREAD THROUGH TOILETS.
Do not poop in your toilet. Find a safe place to poop.

The following are pooping sites are recommended:

• The trunk of your car.
• Your coworker's desk drawer.
• Dollywood.
• Alex Jones' mouth.

Sincerely,
The TF Ebola Response Team

Can we add Rush Limbaugh's gold-plated microphone, please?

 

[Derec]

I don't drink/smoke, have full set hair on my head

I think that was an artistic choice rather than a risk factor.

and have normal weight,

My weight is the opposite of normal, at least when I am standing on a level surface.

do you have something relevant for me?

Do you drive a car? Do you eat food (food poisoning, choking)? Do you have sex (STDs, heart attacks, accidents, jealous spouses)?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The union wants to pretend that things would be better for the nurses if they joined the union.

Can you demonstrate that things would not be better for the nurses if they joined the union? You did state " The union wants to pretend that things would better for the nurses...." as if the union were aware that things would not be better for the nurses but pretended they would.

So, now I am asking to explain your statement rather than leaving it to that one liner.

Further, you seem to be questioning the positive influence of Union representatives in the context of a medical facility when it comes to insuring that the management will apply all necessary measures to protect their employees from exposure to infectious diseases as well as bodily injuries.

Yeah, I'm questioning whether the union would actually use it's power for things like this rather than more obvious benefits like higher pay.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Can you demonstrate that things would not be better for the nurses if they joined the union? You did state " The union wants to pretend that things would better for the nurses...." as if the union were aware that things would not be better for the nurses but pretended they would.

So, now I am asking to explain your statement rather than leaving it to that one liner.

Further, you seem to be questioning the positive influence of Union representatives in the context of a medical facility when it comes to insuring that the management will apply all necessary measures to protect their employees from exposure to infectious diseases as well as bodily injuries.

Yeah, I'm questioning whether the union would actually use it's power for things like this rather than more obvious benefits like higher pay.

That's a good point. Unions never existed to require safe working conditions. They are just evil money grubbing bastards.

 

[Warpoet]

Relevant graphic

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Relevant graphic

View attachment 1310

But but but, according to people on the Internet, Ebola is so easy to transmit! The media is lying about Africa and what is happening in the US, which just proves their point. Your graphic... part of the media lie. We are all doomed. People say so on the Internet... and its all Obama's fault because... OBAMA PLAYS GOLF EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE!!!!

 

[credoconsolans]

Well, Presby has egg on its face. The government took the patients away from them.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Can you demonstrate that things would not be better for the nurses if they joined the union? You did state " The union wants to pretend that things would better for the nurses...." as if the union were aware that things would not be better for the nurses but pretended they would.

So, now I am asking to explain your statement rather than leaving it to that one liner.

Further, you seem to be questioning the positive influence of Union representatives in the context of a medical facility when it comes to insuring that the management will apply all necessary measures to protect their employees from exposure to infectious diseases as well as bodily injuries.

Yeah, I'm questioning whether the union would actually use it's power for things like this rather than more obvious benefits like higher pay.

I am not sure why you think that using its power to insure employees access "more obvious benefits" should exclude using its power for "things like this".

Let's see what the President of the Service Employees International Union has to say :

Mary Kay Henry, President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) said the following about the role of ordinary working women and men in defending against Ebola and the need for employers to better support them in their critical roles:

Service workers and healthcare workers, like the brave team of men and women in Dallas, are on the front lines of defending American communities against the spread of the Ebola virus. Last week we heard from airport workers who felt they had not been given adequate training or resources necessary to safely and effectively screen for the virus in our nations airports which are the gateway for spread. Today, with the news of another care team member diagnosed at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, we are hearing from our nation's nurses and hospital workers that they need their employers to fully support them to be ready to respond effectively and maximize patient safety.

SEIU nurses, doctors and healthcare workers use infection control procedures daily and have successfully tackled a variety of public health emergencies - including the AIDS crisis and the flu. The Ebola virus presents a new and different challenge with protocols that are intensive and require the right equipment, regular drills and enhanced staffing.

Every healthcare employer has a role to play in keeping Americans safe and healthy, in the workplace and within their communities, and must do their part to expand hands-on training opportunities. Everyone, from the CEO of an organization, to management, to front-line workers has a role to play in defending our nation against this virus.

We must ensure that working women and men who are on the front lines of protecting our communities have the necessary training and support that will enable them to safely and effectively limit the risks of Ebola exposure across the United States.

It speaks for itself.

Now going back to the so called "outbreak " in the US. Some important points which need to be repeated even if ad nauseum so it will hopefully sink in :

1) There is NO evidence that this strain of Ebola is air transmitted therefor presents any risk of epidemic within to the US general public. The fact that as we are nearing the 21 days line for Mr Duncan's contacts, to include 3 individuals(his girl friend, son and nephew) who came in close physical contact with him as he was already symptomatic, and none of those contacts so far have developed any symptoms , is an indication that this strain of Ebola is not air transmittable. If it were (once more), considering those 3 individuals had to be in close air transmittable proximity of symptomatic Mr Duncan and considering that air transmittable pathogens are most infectious versus physical contact with bodily secretions/fluids, it is safe to conclude that there was no exposure due to air transmittable properties.


It is also an indication that contamination by direct physical contact with bodily secretions and fluids occurs only under other added specific vectors. Such as the virus "finding" a port of entry into a new host. Port of entry being cuts or abrasions in the skin. Ports of entry being mucous membranes.

2)Again, the specific category of individuals who present the highest risk of exposure and contamination : health care workers assigned to the care and treatment of Ebola infected patients and that due to the very nature of their jobs. I hope I do not have to detail what the nature of their jobs is about.

3) We should not expect in the US a similar scenario of contaminated health care workers infecting the general public as it has been the case in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea. Containment measures addressing US health care workers who were exposed to Ebola are expected to be far more efficient in the US than they could ever be in all 3 affected nations.

4) I am not concerned about any hazards to the US general public. My concern is for the highest risk category :health care workers assigned to the care and treatment of Ebola infected patients. Whether they be physicians, nurses, lab techs, nurses assistants etc... Second highest risk category being individuals employed by bio hazard disposal companies and cleaning crews in charge of decontamination. What all those categories share in common is that by the nature of their jobs, it is inevitable they come in contact with infected bodily secretions and fluids or/and contaminated material/surfaces. Which is not the case for the US general public.

And last but least, I do not recall the Ebola type frenzy surrounding the news of a diagnosed TB case. Or several for that matter.

 

[Toni]

And last but least, I do not recall the Ebola type frenzy surrounding the news of a diagnosed TB case. Or several for that matter.

You are correct that in all likelihood, more people in the U.S. will become infected with TB than with Ebola. But people don't die within days or weeks of contracting TB, TB is treatable and curable, and perhaps most importantly: here are the risk factors for contracting TB:

People at High Risk for Becoming Infected with M. tuberculosis

Close contacts of people known or suspected to have TB

People, including children, who have come to the United States within the last 5 years from areas of the world where TB is common (for example,
Asia, Africa, Russia, Eastern Europe, or Latin America)
Low-income groups with poor access to health care, including homeless people
People who live or work in high-risk residential settings (for example, nursing homes, homeless shelters, or correctional facilities)
People who inject illegal drugs
Health care workers who serve high-risk clients
High-risk racial or ethnic minority populations, as locally defined Infants, children, and adolescents exposed to adults in high-risk groups

People at High Risk for Developing TB Disease after Infection with M. tuberculosis

People living with HIV
People recently infected with M. tuberculosis (within the past 2 years)
People with medical conditions known to increase the risk for TB
silicosis
diabetes mellitus
severe kidney disease
certain types of cancer
certain intestinal conditions
organ transplant
immunosuppressive therapy (including prolonged use of corticosteroids and tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α] antagonists])
low body weight
People who inject illegal drugs
Infants and children younger than 4 years

In other words: mostly people who are already prone to infections of any kind. VS risk factors for Ebola: coming into contact with body fluids of any infected person.

TB is highly treatable with antibiotics. Treatment for Ebola is mostly supportive care.

Protocols to protect health care workers and the general public from contracting TB from people with infectious TB are well established and effective. Protocols to protect health care workers from contracting Ebola from infectious patients seem to be proving inadequate, or at least poorly implemented.

Of those who are infected with TB, about 90-95% are asymptomatic. This contrasts dramatically with Ebola which kills rapidly and dramatically.

Ebola is an acute infection; TB is usually a chronic infection. While TB is far more prevalent, rates are falling in the US and elsewhere. Parts of the world are experiencing a dramatic surge in Ebola cases.

 

[Sabine Grant]

And last but least, I do not recall the Ebola type frenzy surrounding the news of a diagnosed TB case. Or several for that matter.

You are correct that in all likelihood, more people in the U.S. will become infected with TB than with Ebola. But people don't die within days or weeks of contracting TB, TB is treatable and curable,

http://www.cdc.gov/tb/topic/drtb/default.htm

Aside from drug-resistant TB which is not to be ignored,TB is susceptible to cause an epidemic in the US because TB is far more transmittable than Ebola. The point being that airborne infectious diseases remain far more transmittable than physical contact with infected bodily fluids and secretions such as Ebola when it comes to the US general public. Further, the fact that TB may remain asymptomatic for an extended period of time signifies that TB hosts may not be identified and diagnosed as fast as Ebola hosts will.

Further as any other air transmittable infectious disease, contact tracing becomes extremely difficult if not impossible. Versus Ebola contact tracing where, in the US, it has demonstrated the CDC effectiveness in identifying through "rings" which specific individuals have been susceptible to exposure and contamination within the US general public. While relying on a vector which points towards individuals who may have come in contact with bodily fluids and secretions of an infected Ebola patient. Mr Duncan's traced contacts illustrating such effectiveness.

If Mr Duncan had been diagnosed with TB, contact tracing would have to be extended to any person who was in any close proximity while relying on the airborne vector.

Ebola is far more easy to contain in the US based on the above than TB would be. A fact which seriously reduces hazards for the US general public.

and perhaps most importantly: here are the risk factors for contracting TB:

People at High Risk for Becoming Infected with M. tuberculosis

Close contacts of people known or suspected to have TB

People, including children, who have come to the United States within the last 5 years from areas of the world where TB is common (for example,
Asia, Africa, Russia, Eastern Europe, or Latin America)
Low-income groups with poor access to health care, including homeless people
People who live or work in high-risk residential settings (for example, nursing homes, homeless shelters, or correctional facilities)
People who inject illegal drugs
Health care workers who serve high-risk clients
High-risk racial or ethnic minority populations, as locally defined Infants, children, and adolescents exposed to adults in high-risk groups

This paragraph is introduced with the following sentence :

People at High Risk for Becoming Infected with M. tuberculosis

Close contacts of people known or suspected to have TB

The subsequent list indicating which categories of people are susceptible to be carriers of TB and be infectious to the US general public. The Us general public being "people at high risk for becoming infected with M. TB" when and if they have "close contacts" with people listed in the susceptible pre infected categories. Which is no way reassuring.

To add that when it comes to Ebola, the "People at high risk for becoming infected with M tuberculosis" remain contained to health care workers in the US. Whereas the vast majority of highly susceptible per infected listed categories of people in that paragraph are part of the US general public and susceptible to come in "close contact" with the US general public. And by "close contact", it signifies proximity close enough to be contaminated via microscopic droplets exiting the TB host via something as simple as :

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/tuberculosis/understanding/pages/transmission.aspx

TB is primarily an airborne disease. The bacteria are spread from person to person in tiny microscopic droplets when a TB sufferer coughs, sneezes, speaks, sings, or laughs. Only people with active TB can spread the disease to others.

Good luck conducting an effective contact tracing allowing for containment when contacts are to be identified under the conditions above.

People at High Risk for Developing TB Disease after Infection with M. tuberculosis

People living with HIV
People recently infected with M. tuberculosis (within the past 2 years)
People with medical conditions known to increase the risk for TB
silicosis
diabetes mellitus
severe kidney disease
certain types of cancer
certain intestinal conditions
organ transplant
immunosuppressive therapy (including prolonged use of corticosteroids and tumor necrosis factor-alpha [TNF-α] antagonists])
low body weight
People who inject illegal drugs
Infants and children younger than 4 years

In other words: mostly people who are already prone to infections of any kind. VS risk factors for Ebola: coming into contact with body fluids of any infected person.

And again, the list above concerns individuals who are part of the US general public. Versus the Ebola highest risk category in the US being health care workers. And again due to the nature of their jobs which inevitably implies coming in contact with infected bodily fluids and secretions. There is no route of transmission such as "speaking, singing, laughing".

TB is highly treatable with antibiotics. Treatment for Ebola is mostly supportive care.

As if the fact it is generally treatable (rather than "highly" considering drug resistant strains) somehow eliminates the potential for an epidemic affecting the US general public considering the active TB routes of transmission versus the much lower transmit ability of Ebola.

Protocols to protect health care workers and the general public from contracting TB from people with infectious TB are well established and effective.

And you are supporting my initial point here that despite of the airborne property of active TB which makes it far more transmittable than Ebola for the US general public, the CDC has been able to contain effectively TB cases to isolated incidences. And that while adding that contact tracing for TB cannot be as effective as Ebola contact tracing has been in the US. Supporting my point that the CDC history of having been able to effectively contain those TB cases ought to reassure the US general public that the CDC will be able to contain Ebola in the US.

Protocols to protect health care workers from contracting Ebola from infectious patients seem to be proving inadequate, or at least poorly implemented.

I am not sure we can draw such broad wide conclusion based on 2 health care workers who were infected in the same hospital. Versus all the health care workers and attending medical personnel who were assigned to treating and caring for the first 2 infected med evacuated(from Liberia) US humanitarian health workers in different medical facilities than Dallas Health Presbyterian Hospital. Keeping in mind that none of those numerous medical teams got infected despite of exposure due to the nature of their jobs.

Of those who are infected with TB, about 90-95% are asymptomatic. This contrasts dramatically with Ebola which kills rapidly and dramatically.

Asymptomatic not meaning that a TB carrier is not susceptible to become an ACTIVE TB carrier. Further, the fact TB may remain asymptomatic for an extended period of time makes it even more difficult to identify TB carriers/hosts and apply prophylactic treatments to prevent an active TB status.

Ebola is an acute infection; TB is usually a chronic infection. While TB is far more prevalent, rates are falling in the US and elsewhere. Parts of the world are experiencing a dramatic surge in Ebola cases.

"parts of the world" being 3 defined nations in Western Africa where Ebola containment has totally failed. I recall having covered much earlier in this thread which factors have contributed to such Ebola epidemic in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra leone. No "dramatic surge " of Ebola cases in their neighboring nation, Senegal. 2 cases were easily contained. No "dramatic surge" in Nigeria. In fact an effective containment down to only 20 cases, 8 having been fatal. And that despite of the fact that index patient Mr Sawyer imported Ebola(from Liberia) into one of the most populated cities in that geographical area.

You see Toni, when I see a phrasing such as" parts of the world are experiencing a dramatic surge in Ebola cases" while there is no balancing of such statement with information such as the ones I just provided, though I am certain it is not your intention, such phrasing can only fuel irrational fear.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, Presby has egg on its face. The government took the patients away from them.

You know what, after 9/11, all the worrying, the bullshit from the W Admin about chemical and bio attacks, and it appears our hospitals aren't equipped to deal with any of it.

Dear Homeland Security:

I want my money back.

Sincerely,

A Citizen that is Paying Attention

 

[ZiprHead]

Well, Presby has egg on its face. The government took the patients away from them.

You know what, after 9/11, all the worrying, the bullshit from the W Admin about chemical and bio attacks, and it appears our hospitals aren't equipped to deal with any of it.

Dear Homeland Security:

I want my money back.

Sincerely,

A Citizen that is Paying Attention

Hey, you got your dangly-bits handled by the TSA guy. That should be worth something.