Slashdot Mirror
NY Doctor Recently Back From West Africa Tests Positive For Ebola
An anonymous reader writes An emergency room doctor who recently returned to the city after treating Ebola patients in West Africa has tested positive for the virus, Mayor Bill de Blasio said. It's the first case in the city and the fourth in the nation. From the article: "The doctor, identified as Craig Spencer, 33, came back from treating Ebola patients in Guinea about 10 days ago, and developed a fever, nausea, pain and fatigue Wednesday night. The physician, employed at New York's Columbia Presbyterian Hospital, has been in isolation at Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan since Thursday morning, the official said."
I saw the news about the poor doctor in NYC. Yikes, before I draw any conclusions, do we have any pieces by Bennett Haselton on the Ebola outbreak or diseases in general? I'd like to see what his insight is first. He's a frequent contributor.
Kent Brockman: Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?
Professor: Yes I would, Kent.
IMHO, either Ebola is easier to transmit than we are being told _OR_ these Ebola doctors who get the disease are FSKING IDIOTS
if it is so damn hard to get, how the hell do Doctors who should be the best at following procedure can get?
i think people are just morons, no matter what degrees they have
Thank you Dave Raggett
My friend works at Bellevue, my other friend took the 1 train (train the doctor took to go bowling last night while experiencing "sick symptoms") the same night he did and I take the 1 train every day to and friend work.
There are people who live and are stuck in Africa who have a millions times more the reason to be concerned than I am, I understand this.
What I don't agree with are the people who are using things like Malaria and HIV statistics to try and show how the media is playing up this issue.
Both are less serious and more controllable diseases with much bigger sample sizes. As/if more Ebola cases arise, the contractions will increase exponentially and they'll stop comparing this to "more serious diseases".
What I don't understand is why they are letting doctors who work on Ebola patients back into teh country without being screened?
There are people arguing to shut down all travel from West Africa, even if that's too much in your opinion, at least screen these doctors.
Customs: What was your reason for leaving the country?
Doctor: I was treating patients with Ebola.
Customs: Due to national security, we can not let you into the country until you've been tested and cleared.
Doctor: But I have plans to go bowling in Brooklyn in about week!
Customs: You're retarded.
Chances are, the conversation wouldn't happen like that and the doctor would be understanding of the situation.
So why aren't we just doing that to begin with?
1) What is the likelihood of harm?
2) If harm occurs, what is the cost?
3) What is the cost of preventing harm, including the opportunity cost?
And allocate resources accordingly. In this case:
1) Extremely low. Approx. 3 people in the US have Ebola; all were in West Africa or treated someone already very ill. Nobody else in the US has been infected by these people (again, except someone providing health care to one of them). You are at much greater risk of heart disease, cancer, traffic accidents, hospital error, crime, and probably even lightening strikes and bee stings.
2) The cost is very high, including a substantial risk of death.
3) The cost is easily affordable for the US, but the opportunity cost is higher: The United States and the world have limited health care resources. For example, there's a good chance that many of the resources (doctors and money) would save many more lives and better protect US citizens by addressing heart disease (via prevention, treatment, or research) or controlling the outbreak in W. Africa than by responding to public panic.
I think you'll find that many experts in these fields will say that the panic is the greatest risk, greater than the disease.
Common sense isn't very common. At least not in 21st Century America.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
So that they first travel to another country that's Ebola free first before coming here to get around that, thereby exposing even more people in dense transit centers? Yes that makes total sense
"Is it time to put up a wall to quarantine texass? They've wanted a wall for some time. Should texass be allowed to infect good American blue states?
Red state texass let an Ebola patient out on the streets with some tums or antibiotics....
Epic healthcare failure." - muhutdafuga
http://blogs.westword.com/late...
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
If you bothered to RTFA (I know, the horror), you'd have seen that he was not symptomatic during his subway rides. Ebola is not contagious when it is asymptomatic. As soon as he began feeling ill, he isolated himself. When the symptoms worsened beyond that of a common cold, he contacted the authorities. The probability of him having infected anyone is close to nil.
Medical Screener: So I see you've been treating people infected with the Ebola virus
Dr. Ebola; Yup
Medical Screener: Are you infected?
Dr. Ebola: Nope
Medical Screener: Ok, ok enjoy your subway ride back to Manhattan.
If this is how we're going to manage this outbreak, we are completely screwed.
And it's likely already too late. That Dr took a few subway rides and likely infected at least a couple dozen people in the process.
Thats more than enough to start a substantial outbreak of panic around the US and likely the entire planet.
FTFY
Well, if you want to get specific about it, that was when good ol' Texas medicine was shown to be less than effective at preventing additional infections.
How about here. Another point is that Mali is next door to Guinea, where the outbreak this year is believed to have started. Is it really news that a disease crossed a border? Another case is the US is different because it is on a different continent and indicates that WHO is having difficulty containing the outbreak
Strictly speaking, he was not asymptomatic when he took the subway rides. He was not yet febrile, but "felt run down".
They were following CDC guidelines which apparently were contradictory and incomplete.
Basically what everyone is realizing is that the CDC is fucking clueless and everyone has to just use their own best judgement on the matter.
Beyond which... basic quarantine procedures would deal with this problem.
Nigeria is doing that and they're basically free from infection despite being right next to effected countries.
The US used to have such policies in the old days. Ellis Island had extensive quarantine facilities for example.
In this case we have a full blown Ebola outbreak and the fucking retarded administration wants to keep open transport because they're afraid it would look like discrimination. Let me be clear, if the damn outbreak were in the middle of Sweden, I'd still want quarantine procedures. This has nothing at all to do with race but rather everything to do with a very scary virus that isn't playing around.
Now am I actually worried about a mass outbreak in the US? No. I find that unlikely. However, this virus has a 50-70% mortality rate and there is no vaccine.
This is not something you take lightly. You pay this sort of virus the respect it deserves and enact BASIC quarantine procedures. Rudimentary.
Nothing fancy. You come back from one of these countries, your passport gets checked, they see the stamp, they have a blood sample taken or whatever is needed. Then depending on the relevance, you might need to wait for that to come back clean.
Sound inconvenient? It is a fucking plague. Tough shit.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
If that was your point, then next time try to make it clear by using the words "enforcing", "mandatory", "quarantine", "until", "window" and "passes" in your post the first time.
They are screening and putting every returning health care professional on a health watch. The issue is that the incubation period for ebola can be up to 21 days. The doctor in question arrived at John F. Kennedy Airport on October 17 with no symptoms. Symptoms did not show up until this morning when the doctor followed protocol and was hospitalized. The virus may not even have shown up in his blood on October 17. Remember that infection tests look for antibodies not the virus itself. If the virus had not attacked yet there would be no anybodies.
thanks for the response...
my point is, that if YOU know this then the people who make the procedures must also...and therefore there already be adaptations/improvements to procedures OR if that can't happen then quarrantine
if we know the threat exists, that's enough information to mitigate it in SOME way
that's the problem here IMHO...
Thank you Dave Raggett
That Dr took a few subway rides and likely infected at least a couple dozen people in the process.
Lets wait the 21 days before making outlandish claims.
i guess you can say i was going for "doing an idiotic thing" not "inherently an idiot"
maybe "being an idiot" or "made an idiotic mistake"
idk...but this isn't a cup of hot green tea here...the whole idea is they're supposed to cover all the angles!
Thank you Dave Raggett
i'm all for an abundance of caution...let them wear the HAZMAT stuff....
what kills me is that I've worked with hazardous materials in a construction setting, and there's always a trade-off between being bulky safety equipment and time
but...there is sort of a line you don't cross...like hard hats...some job sites are "Hard Hat Only" as soon as you enter the property...which is a bit silly...but you're an idiot if you are guiding a crane placing I-beams and don't have your Hard Hat on
see what I mean?
i just don't see why competent people can't get this right
Thank you Dave Raggett
If you have the virus in your body fluid and you project your body fluid then you can transmit the disease. Farts, Coughs, Sneeze, tears, blood etc. But the disease is exponential you have far far far more of it right after you die then before. Likewise far far far more of it when you are showing symptoms but you can spread it before its just much less likely So normal contact is safe early but can be deadly later on. There also seems to be a immune system lottery with some people being more able to fight it off than others. The problem with NYC is that one person just one who is highly contagious in the subway and thousands could catch it. One crazy homeless person who gets it and no one notices and goes to die by way of subway and its everywhere. Africa just doesn't have the density of NYC
well that's real talk...i can understand "circumstances" i suppose...it is still a dumb mistake IMHO
as i was saying above in another comment, I've worked with hazardous construction materials...nothing like Ebola obv...but we had to wear protective gear and it got annoying
ex: Hard Hat...some jobs require hard hats everywhere, even outdoors in the open air...it's not crazy to cheat a bit in that area...however, only an idiot would go into an area with heavy work being done above them w/o the hard hat...in fact, other workers would stop you as soon as they saw you b/c an injury on site wastes a ton of time
there's strict rules and then common sense and the the line you don't cross...what I'm saying is, given that he was a *doctor* and *knew he was handling Ebola* it seems weird that he'd do something that would put him near that line
Thank you Dave Raggett
In this case we have a full blown Ebola outbreak and the fucking retarded administration wants to keep open transport because they're afraid it would look like discrimination.
What you're describing is Obola.
IMHO your "opinion" is very very humble indeed and belongs in the category of "uneducated careless speculation with a sensationalist bent".
It may have escaped your notice, but doctors who help out in West-African hospitals come into close contact with a constant stream of very ill people who are in the stadium where they really are contagious, every day for months at a stretch.
Their protective clothing prevents transmission in the vast majority (say 99,9%) of cases (something you can tell by the fact that we still have doctors left treating Ebola patients). The real danger comes when you take off your protective suit. That has to be done carefully so as not to touch the splatters of blood, muckus, tears, sweat etcetera that very ill patients secrete and if possible it has to be decontaminated first.
Now I'm sure your "humble" and uneducated opinion never has been schooled in elementary probability so you wouldn't understand things like P(contagion_after_100_days) = 1 - [P(no_contagion_after_1_day)]^100, but try it this way.
Playing the lottery every day makes it unlikely that you won't win a single prize.
And so it is with medical personnel who treat Ebola patient for months. They run a risk.
So it's no conspiracy (I can feel your incredulity and disappointment) and no case of "fsking idiots" (a term which I'd like to reserve for you personally).
It's easy to shout your (thoroughly humble) head off about stuff you don't understand, but it's not helping anybody and it stands in the way of a rational attitude towards Ebola.
P.S. there is absolutely nothing "insightful" about your post. On the other hand it's revealing. Revealing of a mindset that couples a penchant for conspiracy theories with a complete lack of understanding of risk and a disdain for plain ordinary everyday scientific commonsense that seems to have whizzed over your (so very humble) head.
The ebola outbreak started on March. In 5 months there have been 10,000 cases in countries known for their low health care and sanitation standards. Considering that in many places the population is very crowded and many cases of infection do not get reported until the symptoms get very bad I bet that every person in infected areas would have been in close proximity with at least one ebola infected person. If ebola was as contagious as some people think don't you think a lot more than 0.045% of the population of those countries would be infected by now?
What may be a source of the concern is all the pictures of people in suits carrying body bags. This skews perception as those people are in contact with a corpse that has ebola laden excretions all over it. When an ebola victim has just died that is when they are the most contagious.
My friend works at Bellevue, my other friend took the 1 train (train the doctor took to go bowling last night while experiencing "sick symptoms") the same night he did and I take the 1 train every day to and friend work.
It's bad in Africa because they have terrible heathcare. Instead of seeking medical care people get care from friends and family who don't know what they're doing, thus they become infected themselves and the disease spreads.
This guy having spread the disease on the train is possible, but very unlikely.
There are people arguing to shut down all travel from West Africa, even if that's too much in your opinion, at least screen these doctors.
They are screened but the virus has an incubation period.
There are people arguing to shut down all travel from West Africa, even if that's too much in your opinion, at least screen these doctors.
Customs: What was your reason for leaving the country?
Doctor: I was treating patients with Ebola.
Customs: Due to national security, we can not let you into the country until you've been tested and cleared.
Doctor: But I have plans to go bowling in Brooklyn in about week!
Customs: You're retarded.
A travel ban is a terrible idea, people will still travel from West Africa but they'll do it from other countries so we won't know to track them. A 3 week quarantine (outlast the incubation period) isn't much different due to its huge burden.
There is one good idea though, remember that saying about terrorists, "we fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here". Well that's exactly the right approach for Ebola. If you want to protect the US from Ebola then you need to send US medical personnel and other resources to West Africa to help fight the outbreak. The risk to the US isn't a random few travellers from a handful of countries in West Africa. It's the disease continuing to flourish in West Africa and eventually popping up in India, China, and South America.
Whatever the ability of the US to handle a few lone cases it would be much worse for Brazil or Mexico. And whatever you think of the difficulty of keeping sick Africans out of the US it's far harder to keep out sick Mexicans.
If you want to stay safe then make it easy for US doctors to help in West Africa.
I stole this Sig
3. Flush anybody questionable with 2-5 days of IV vitamin C 80,000 mg tid, 50,000 iu vitamin D3 per day, selenium and zinc. These kill viruses.
Hahaha. :D
Ezekiel 23:20
However, this virus has a 50-70% mortality rate and there is no vaccine.
Does that mean it has a 30% - 50% immortality rate? Hmm....
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
Frank Hebert - Dune
Only investment in African infrastructure will stem infections coming from there. Saved lives are the only payoff though, so doubtful the 1% will be willing to go for that.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Mind numbing stupidity is right. I do wish people (like you) who know nothing about Ebola would shut up.
[FUCK BETA]
I hope robot companies are doing R&D on how their robots, instead of Ebola care-givers, could do dangerous work.
Gizmodo has an article on robots fighting Ebola. The article lists ways that robots could be used, including removing biowaste, and delivering supplies to people who are healthy but cut off.
That Dr took a few subway rides and likely infected at least a couple dozen people in the process. Thats more than enough to start a substantial outbreak around the US and likely the entire planet.
I don't know what's worse, that you think this is how Ebola works, or that someone modded you up for your clueless opinion.
One thing that seems very relevant, but never discussed: Why comes first, symptoms, or contagiousness?
If a person isn't contagious until well after showing symptoms, I can kind of see the current lax screening as being reasonable.
But otherwise, it seems inexcusable.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You can find more about what Nigeria has done here:
http://www.latimes.com/world/a...
Nothing they did was especially innovative. Their response was textbook. You quarantine anyone infected, you question anyone infected about everyone they've come in contact with, you investigate all of those people, and you do not take the virus lightly.
None of this is new. It is basic.
The people saying we can't have screening or quarantine procedures for political reasons don't seem to grasp that viruses don't care about your politics. It is like when Achilles says to Hector "there are no pacts between lions and men"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The virus will show no pity, no hesitation, and no remorse. It exists to eat and spread.
Just as we have procedures for dealing with forest fires or other natural phenomenon. You don't let politics dictate how you deal with them. There is a correct way and an incorrect way. If you choose the incorrect path because it is politically more correct, then that natural phenomenon will exploit your arrogance and do what it does.
Again, I'm not worried about an outbreak in the US. I am however concerned about the glaring and obvious incompetence of the government. I am routinely shocked by how stupid they are on so many issues.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
CNN Reports: "A Vectors Without Borders physician back from West Africa tests positive for Ebola at a New York hospital."
Seastead this.
Chances are, the conversation wouldn't happen like that
Mainly because the USA has signed treaties that make it illegal to refuse entry to a citizen.
That, and when you make a self-report of risk be a metric for spreading the risk, you increase the risk and the amount of lying. But you don't help anyone. So your plan fails for many reasons.
Learn to love Alaska
Sound inconvenient? It is a fucking plague. Tough shit.
Completely agree. Common sense is the only consistent solution to most of Humanity's problems. Unfortunately, we all know how 'commonly' it can be found in the wild.
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
Obama should have listened to his Kenyan brethren who cancelled all flights and implemented a 21-day quarantine period.
Why can they do it and we can't?
Enforce a 21 day quarantine and you won't be getting any travellers from ebola countries. Instead you'll get travellers from the neighbouring countries
Nope, because ALL neighboring countries have closed the borders.
Why can a country that borders on Libera/SL/Guinea close the border while a country half away can't? Care to explain that one?
or some convenient 3rd country where it's easy to switch flights. And no, there is no way to know who came from the ebola country.
Well, quite a lot of countries are cancelling flights so it will get harder and harder for that. And in fact it is possible to know from where one came - and if the person has a Liberan passport it's a no-brainer.
So some ebola-carrier would have to:
- take a flight to some moronic country that still allows flights
- fake a passport
- then take another flight under a different name
Seems quite unlikely. Also why should he take that hassle and not just stay in the first moronic country?
But for the sake of argument: OK, we may not prevent all infections but only the vast majority. Perfect safety is always difficult to achieve. But inperfect safety is still better than no safety at all.
So, why shouldn't we cancel all flights like Kenya and Nigera? Why shouldn't we implement a quarantine period like South Africa?
Chances are, the conversation wouldn't happen like that
Mainly because the USA has signed treaties that make it illegal to refuse entry to a citizen.
That, and when you make a self-report of risk be a metric for spreading the risk, you increase the risk and the amount of lying. But you don't help anyone. So your plan fails for many reasons.
Wait a minute. The USA ignores treaties left and right and constantly bombs and invades countries because they want to leave the US-dollar as reserve currency. They torture and hold people without trial. They pay millions to destabilize Syria, Ukraine and dozens of other countries.
But they can't refuse entry because of some treaty with Libera?
Since when did the USA care about any treaty?
In fact South Africa did implement such a window.
But you are right, we are screwed. Politicians care a lot more about political correctness than deadly viruses. They (and their mindless TV-educated zombies like "Nemyst") will tell us how it's "unlikely" that it will become a problem and that not a single flight to Liberia must be cancelled, because ... well just because we "can't leave West Africa". What happened to "yes we can"?
Well, Nigera, Kenya, South Africa, and many more countries have cancelled all flights. But Obama said that he "can't" do that. Why he can't do that he didn't say though.
This asshole should be shot in Times Square for this idiocy. Knowingly going to a place where he could contract the virus then BRINGING IT BACK TO NEW YORK CITY? He goes bowling in Willamsburg like there is nothing to worry about when he's within the gestation period?! What is the #1 way to prevent the spread of a virus? Anyone would say isolation. Why are we even allowing flights to/from these countries? Who ever is in charge of these government agencies should be forced to resign. This idiot should burn.
Fauci said he wasn’t sure how nurse Nina Pham became infected, but it was “likely” because “she was not completely covered.” Fauci also announced revised guidance for health care workers treating Ebola patients, which will include using protective gear "with no skin showing," Fauci said those caring for an Ebola patient in Dallas were left vulnerable because some of their skin was exposed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is working on revisions to safety protocols.
I read Hot Zone maybe 10 years ago. IIRC Ebola Zier was around 90% mortality rate, and Ebola Sudan was around 50%. Maybe that changed over the years but either way you're probably going to die if you get it.
I just wonder how long it will be until the virus "discovers" a carrier..
Someone who is immune enough to not show symptoms, but can still carry the virus enough to infect others.
See typhoid Mary.
...after all, he was just an ignorant shlub that brought Ebola here.
This dipshit however was a MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL, coming back from TREATING PEOPLE WITH EBOLA who 'felt like crap' for several days (enough so that he was taking his temp regularly) and couldn't apparently be trusted to quarantine himself out of basic precautionary concern. Nope, he had to maintain his urbanite/hipster lifestyle - jogging, taxis, bowling, etc.
Doc: "DO NO HARM" applies just as much to the millions of people around you, as to your actual patient.
Here's a general tip: if you're working directly with Ebola patients, how about you just say "hey, friends, I just got back from West Africa; I feel fine, but just to be careful I'm not spreading a highly communicable deadly disease, I'm going to hang out at home alone for a few weeks, just to be safe."
I'm going to guess your friends and colleagues will appreciate your concern.
-Styopa
He won't do it because it would be stupid.
Right now if they ask you at the airport if you've been to Liberia, Sierra Leone or Guinea, people have no incentive to lie, so don't. If you make that illegal, it won't stop them from flying out of somewhere else, it will just make them lie to the immigration officials, making the problem worse, not better.
No, a flight ban would be all airlines just temporarily suspend all flights to the three West African countries until the epidemic has subsided enough, only then the flights can continue. During the epidemic only military flights can fly into the affected countries, with tightly restricted passenger and cargo access. That way health care supplies etc. can be sent to the affected countries, and health care workers can fly between countries and back (after a 21 day waiting period) to whichever country they came from. Other travel restrictions may apply as well, but the sooner it's done the better, before the epidemic is completely out of control. The dimwits in this administration have it backwards.
And who would enforce the ban? Last I checked the U.S. constitution doesn't give the government the power to ban foreign airlines from flying to a foreign country.
From a practical standpoint, I'd point out that there really aren't that many military transport aircraft in the world, that a great many of them are American, and that they are blocked out literally months in advance. Would your 21-day waiting period also apply to aircrew? That will really bollix things up.
I strongly suspect (but do not know for sure) that the 3000-odd US Military personnel on the way to that part of the world are depending on civilian air transport for much of their logistics. Certainly MSF and other NGOs do so. I also strongly suspect that going to a purely military transport system for Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea would greatly reduce the flow of emergency aid to these countries at precisely the time that their needs are so large.
We should also be careful what we wish for. I am sure that if we institute some kind of silly travel ban from ebola-infected countries, a large number of countries around the world are going to enact a similar ban -- I say "similar" because the major difference is that they will also ban travel with the United States, home of the most ebola cases outside of Africa.
Why it's wrong that we don't require a mandatory 21 day quarantine for anyone travelling from these countries if we truly want to stop the virus from ever getting a hold?
Top it off - this guy went bowling while starting to show symptoms (thus, contagious). Who is going to replace and pay for EVERY bowling ball? What about decontamination of the facility? If I were the owner, I'd be pretty pissed off.
But Obama said that he "can't" do that. Why he can't do that he didn't say though.
Well, it's probably because he's not a dictator with unlimited power and can't shut down companies with a wave of his hand.
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
Gov. Perry just blew your thesis.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
It is not contagious until the patient is symptomatic. The question is, when is "symptomatic"? It seams from Duncan's case and the nurses in Dallas that usually (or always) the symptoms precede infectiousness. It also sounds like the doctor in NYC was checking himself twice a day and when his temperature went up he called authorities.
This thread is full of ridiculous ides like doorknob-ebola which from my limited reading seems absolutely not possible. Like man viruses, ebola does not live long outside the body -- that's why it's not transmitted through food/air/water.
That's true of the iPhone 6+, as well.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
But then Big Pharma doesn't profit. Therefore, it won't happen. A better idea IMO: dose *yourself* with appropriate amounts of these nutrients (I'd say much more than the current RDA, which is useless, but still less than you suggested, only because that much C would be prohibitively expensive and that much D could be toxic over long periods of time; 1-5g of C and 4800IU of D should suffice in a person not already sick). On top of a proper diet including lots of green leafy veggies, fresh fruits, and as little other sugar or high-glycemic carbs as possible. And start now. Odds are you will be much more resistant to any viral infection, and will defeat it much more easily should it happen anyway.
Nonaggression works!
he was not symptomatic during his subway rides.
I don't know about that. The reports that I've read have admitted that he was feeling ill in the days beforehand, but that he didn't have a fever. At least, he says he didn't have a fever, and he says he was taking his temperature twice a day, as he was supposed to. So I guess it depends on whether you want to take his word for it-- referring to the guy who knew he might have Ebola, was feeling sick, and still decided to go bowling.
If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on, "He wasn't checking his temperature and doesn't really know when the fever started."
I gotta ask, what is it with these Presbyterians who keep getting people infected with ebola?
Disclaimer: Christian, raised Presbyterian
Perception is the thin dividing line between reality and fiction.
Viruses don't eat, and are not alive. They exist ONLY to reproduce, using our cells' machinery to do it. Other than that, you're spot on.
What I don't agree with are the people who are using things like Malaria and HIV statistics to try and show how the media is playing up this issue.
You may not agree with it, but that is exactly what they are doing.
Both are less serious and more controllable diseases with much bigger sample sizes.
I don't even....
As/if more Ebola cases arise, the contractions will increase exponentially and they'll stop comparing this to "more serious diseases".
Not happening, at least not in countries with reasonable sanitary practices. Ebola is difficult to catch, and it has a high mortality rate. These two factors prevent it from becoming the next big pandemic. To wit, the guy who was first diagnosed in the US was in Dallas, a city of 1.5 million people. Out of those 1.5 million people, he infected two, and they were the nurses who were directly caring for him.
Yes Ebola is lethal, but so is EEE and yet I don't see you in a panic about EEE (and that's spread by mosquitos). You're far more likely to get EEE than Ebola (along with a whole host of other diseases). You're more likely to die falling out of your chair while reading this than die from Ebola.
What I don't understand is why they are letting doctors who work on Ebola patients back into teh country without being screened?
There are people arguing to shut down all travel from West Africa, even if that's too much in your opinion, at least screen these doctors.
Customs: What was your reason for leaving the country?
Doctor: I was treating patients with Ebola.
Customs: Due to national security, we can not let you into the country until you've been tested and cleared.
Doctor: But I have plans to go bowling in Brooklyn in about week!
Customs: You're retarded.
Chances are, the conversation wouldn't happen like that and the doctor would be understanding of the situation.
So why aren't we just doing that to begin with?
Because it would be ineffective. As has been mentioned numerous times, it's easy enough to lie and/or take a circuitous/non-documented route. Screening for possible Ebola victims would be about as effective as screening for terrorists: UST (Useless Security Theater).
~X~
They make use of the cell's own metabolic processes to reproduce which is their own bizarre form of eating. The cell is consumed in the process even if it consumes itself. Are they alive when they're outside an infected cell? Perhaps not... but then how alive is a frozen ice fish? When they enter a cell and start rewriting its DNA... it hard to not see the the will of the organism.
Beyond that, they do evolve.
I think it is problematic to classify strange forms of life as not being alive at all. Viruses are very different from all other known forms of life. But I think that is because they have everything extraneous stripped away from them.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
You made an incorrect assumption.
Most North American medical staff are *not* up to speed on proper procedures for this sort of thing, nor is the standard protective gear sufficient. That's why the CDC is going to be going around giving training at hospitals.
I heard that the MSF recommended procedures for removing the protective gear involves nine separate hand washings.
Also, medical personnel will be much less likely to want to travel to Africa to help out with the disease if the know they face a 3 week quarantine on return. As well, this limits the number of personnel available to help out.
Our best chance at fighting this disease is fighting it in Africa before it spreads. As such travel bans / quarantines on those heading to Africa to help out are very counter-productive.
If by 100% you mean 0%. The first case was brought in by Thomas Eric Duncan...he was not a healthcare worker, but had been visiting family.
Two nurses contracted the disease after direct exposure to Thomas Eric Duncan. Quarantine would have done nothing for them; better protocols for handling ebola patients should have been followed.
The doctor in new york contracted the disease while in Africa after direct exposure.
Quarantine would not have prevented ANY of these infections.
Given that it is a hemorrhagic disease, yes. It is pretty close to a binary flag that controls virus secretion.
Possibly...but just out of curiosity, how often are you directly exposed to the bodily secretions of other people, regardless of whether they are symptomatic or not?
Do people sneeze directly in your face that often?
It's not a matter of "how much of the virus" the person carries....it is a matter of exposure to bodily fluids. Symptomatic people are a higher risk for spreading the disease as the symptoms involve the nasty discharge of numerous fluids.
You are wrong. They were not following guidelines, though it is unclear that the appropriate guidelines were communicated well. (i.e. the people handling Duncan were clearly not properly trained).
Blaming the CDC when some Dallas hospital doesn't care enough about their staff to train them properly is stupid. And the CDC has changed policy. Active cases are now being transported to appropriate facilities instead of trusting that random regional hospitals know how to train their staff properly. (you make your own conclusions about mid-level health care from that.)
And that the administration is worried about political correctness is a complete strawman. They have said quite clearly that the problem with a travel ban or quarantine would be that it would make fighting the outbreak more difficult rather than better. The best chance here is to get the resources into west africa and stop the outbreak there. Travel bans and quarantines on non-symptomatic people only pointlessly waste resources to make you feel good about your ignorance.
How about they don't be self-centered pricks and accept quarantine instead of risking infecting thousands of people. Getting around quarantines like that should be highly illegal. The guy was a doctor, he should have known better.
Yeah, good luck with that. So many of the world's problems could be solved if only people would stop being self centered jerks! And then we could all link arms and sing Kumbaya!
These cases of doctors/nurses traveling even after exposure are particularly egregious, but human history is literally a case study in self centered and thoughtless behavior, "screw you i got mine" mentality and other related, unpleasant human traits. Why can't we all just get along??
Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
What a great xkcd
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
WHY THE FUCK AREN'T WE ENFORCING MANDATORY QUARANTINE UNTIL THE WINDOW PASSES?
Do you think someone got infected?
Also, Slashdot thinks I am yelling because I quoted your post in caps. It didnn't let me post.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Now am I actually worried about a mass outbreak in the US? No. I find that unlikely. However, this virus has a 50-70% mortality rate and there is no vaccine.
This is not something you take lightly. You pay this sort of virus the respect it deserves and enact BASIC quarantine procedures. Rudimentary.
It is obvious that there is no leadership. It is all political posturing now. It is very disconcerting watching the head of the CDC be so careful about keeping political talking points while conveying real information about preventing the spread of this virus is secondary.
Any sane person still working for the CDC can't possibly enjoy it anymore. I'd guess the best and brightest have moved to better pastures long ago. It isn't just the CDC either. I'd bet every other 3-4 letter agency is experiencing something similar. This worries me more than the actual virus.
From the WHO site;
Sudden onset of fever, intense weakness, muscle pain, headache and sore throat are typical signs and symptoms. This is followed by vomiting, diarrhoea, rash, impaired kidney and liver function, and in some cases, both internal and external bleeding.
The closest thing the doctor has before he quarantined himself was "feeling a bit fatigued". I doubt very much if he was infectious before his fever hit.
So this supports both sides of the article. First its hard to get infected in the early fever stages. Even Ducan's bedmate did not become infected. On the other hand two medical workers who thought they were taking precautions got infected when Ducan's disease had progressed further.
However, this virus has a 50-70% mortality rate and there is no vaccine.
Actually, if I'm not mistaken Ebola seems to have about a 12.5% mortality rate in the US, currently, and very likely to decline since the 1 death was the single one not treated with the vaccine you claim does not exist.
He's consistently full of shit. Ignore him.
Listen....and understand....
that ebola virus is out there....
it can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't understand pity, or remorse, or fear.
and it absolutely will not stop
ever
until you are dead......
Cuba was essentially banned from travel destinations for Americans. If you had a passport stamp from Cuba, then you were presumed a criminal, during the embargo. So, Cuba "retaliated" by stopping stamping US passports.
So how'd that work out for filtering based on passport stamps?
Also, it's estimated that 1% to 5% of Americans have multiple citizenships. So go to Libera on your "foreign" passport, and back in the US on the "clean" passport.
There are always health provisions in visa arrangements.
Baloney. Visas are agreements to go to a non-citizen country, you don't need a visa to go to the US on a US passport. So "arrangements" for health couldn't be made in a visa. Period. The US can prevent citizens from leaving, but not from re-entering.
The closest legal thing the US can do is to quarantine those who are suspicious. Quarantine all doctors for 30 days upon arrival, as well as any black-looking people. Right?
Learn to love Alaska
really..."look like a fool"
i said safety equipment can be bulky and annoying, and cheating in some areas is understandable, but there is a line you do not cross that everyone in the site understands
so...
what about that makes me "look like a fool"
be specific...it will help if you cite my original comment
Thank you Dave Raggett
And if an individual's immune response is slow or poor, there may not BE any antibodies until too late for the test to catch.
The obvious solution is a 4 week quarantine (to make sure every case is discovered -- a few may incubate beyond the usual) everyone who's been in West Africa.
This isn't "denying a citizen entry"; it's delaying it due to sheer common sense.
Better, tho, would be to quarantine the affected parts of West Africa as best we can; let people in, but don't let them back out. Because what we're doing now is pretty much guaranteeing ebola's spread.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Even if that worked, high doses of vitamin C can cause bleeding. Hmmm... maybe it was the gun after all.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Which is exactly what was has been talked about and dismissed as being an over reaction.
The main problem with the 28 day quarantine is that fewer people would be willing to help if they knew that they would have to not work for 28 days after they got back. This would decrease the number of available health workers and extend the epidemic.
Better, tho, would be to quarantine the affected parts of West Africa
Unless you can station soldiers along ever border of these countries all you are going to do is cause people to flee and spread the disease further.
The main thing we need to do is prevent panic. Both your suggestions will contribute to that panic. Your plan is basically wall them off and let them die. That is a bad plan.
I suggest sending Air Force One to Liberia, with Obama aboard. Wonder what tune he'd be whistling then...
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
If the choices boil down to "wall them off and let them die" or "spread the epidemic far and wide" -- yeah, I know which one I'd choose.
So far it appears that the more treatment is attempted, the worse it gets, because the caregivers are at such risk, and some will need treatment in turn... rinse and repeat until there are no caregivers left.
Quarantine may not be kind to the victims, but spreading it around so everyone can share isn't kind to anyone.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
In the entire world in the past seven months of the outbreak there has been exactly three cases of someone being infected by someone returning from the infected area. All of those cases were nurses who had close contact with a patient just before they died. All other cases outside the infected area have been people who were infected in the infection zone because the came in close contact with someone dying from the disease.
Read some facts about ebola before you spread disinformation and panic.The measures you propose are an overreaction.
Wrong. The high dose vitamin C is to kill the virus and stop the hemorrhagic episodes, poor Future Darwin Awardees.
Really?
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-...
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
That is a prediction from one doctor and may or may not come true. It is not based on any factual happening.
Considering that he discovered the virus and has established expertise, I'm inclined to give his opinion a lot more weight, including where he thinks it could go.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
His specialty is microbiology and not epidemiology. He is qualified to find the virus but not necessarily how the virus will spread. His work with Ebola was almost 40 years ago. Most of his recent work has been HIV/AIDS.
From the article;
"In Africa, there are many Chinese working there. So that could be a risk for China in general, and I assume that one day [an outbreak of Ebola in China] will happen," said Piot, director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
The word "assume" can be translated to "I have no evidence that it will happen but I will say it anyway".