<p>
</p>
<p>I know that. That’s why they shouldn’t act as if they can guarantee anything. They should issue a guideline if anything happens. They should let us know how to clean up after someone vomitted. When my dog threw up, I just clean up with soap and flush it down the toilet. Is it safe to do the same when someone from affected area throws up? </p>
<p>@Iglooo you made me google. Came up with this from a site called worldwide janitor
<a href=“How to Clean Up an Ebola Virus Mess | Worldwide Janitor”>https://worldwidejanitor.com/library/how-to-clean-up-an-ebola-virus-mess/</a></p>
<p>I wondered the same thing about animals eating the vomit. Dogs, squirrels, rats, whatever. Does this then become like rabies and anyone bitten is at risk?</p>
<p>
If the events regarding the nurse are true, then he/she should lose their job. Period. And the only jobs open should be cleaning up vomit from parking lots. There is no excuse - no overworked, lazy, intimidated to speak (fgs in an ER?). If any of these things are true, then you should not be working in a hospital, especially an ER. </p>
<p>This is a spectacular fail. Not only because they potentially allowed the virus additional time to spread, but because it erodes the confidence of the public in the ability of the system to deal with this on any scale. I know I personally have zero confidence. We’ve been told for months that our hospitals and medical professionals are prepared, we’re ready, we will stomp this out if it shows up here. This is a huge hospital in a major American city, not some country bumpkin operation in the backwoods. </p>
<p>This type of thing infuriates me.</p>
<p>
Did you read more than one sentence of the report? If you did, you should understand that taking that single sentence out of context is exactly the sort of thing an anti-government yakker will do. Perhaps the use of the words “while sick” make that sentence too hard for some people to understand, but it’s still not the only sentence in the report.</p>
<p>“CDC and healthcare providers in the United States are prepared for the REMOTE possibility that a traveler could get Ebola and return to the U.S. while sick…”</p>
<p>Ok, let’s nitpick the language here. “Return to the US” - this talks about US residents travel abroad. </p>
<p>scholarme, thank you for the link. It’s not that i come in contact with West Africans. Good to know just in case.</p>
<p>Also how about blood transfusions? An infected person not showing symptoms yet can give blood. Would the virus survive in the blood and infect recipients?</p>
<p>I have no confidence in the government either. They have yet to articulate a valid reason why people coming from the infected countries are allowed entry into the U. S. The 21 day incubation period means that people showing no symptoms can get on planes and then come to the U. S. and potentially infect others. And yes, they may not infect people on the plane, but like the Dallas case, infect those who come in contact with them later. Now 80 people in Dallas are being monitored. </p>
<p>If anyone sees a poll on whether travel into the U. S. from the infected countries should be restricted, please post. I’d imagine overwhelming support for ‘no entry’.</p>
<p>@TatinG mammals can catch Ebola. They have found the virus in African fruit bats, in antelopes, porcupines, rodents, pigs (this was the Reston strain which does not seem to kill humans, luckily, because they suspect it does infect airborne), and in dogs.
I worry that it could infect squirrels, deer, etc too.</p>
<p>CDC has updated its page to address the case that has occurred: <a href=“http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/qa.html”>http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/qa.html</a></p>
<p>It states that the risk of spread in the U.S. is low. Everything I’ve read suggests that this is true. But “low” doesn’t mean impossible (nor does “remote,” for that matter).</p>
<p>Well, for now I will assume that the sick fellow is relatively blameless in the bureaucratic malfunction at the Dallas hospital. However, I’m thinking twice about the descriptions that he is an ordinary Joe from West Africa and therefore is an unsophisticated victim of circumstances. Yes, Liberia is not a wealthy nation, but the elite in Liberia live a relatively luxurious life (I repeat, I said “relatively!”). Liberia has deep historical roots in the U.S. (and ties to England, for that matter) and it’s quite non-remarkable for a member of the middle class to have traveled (or received an education in) the U.S. or Europe, despite the tragedies of the recent wars there. See reporter Helene Dennis’ book. If this fellow had the means to travel to the U.S. he certainly is no village peasant. </p>
<p>As I said earlier, my borough is home to the largest community of Liberians in the US. There is a massive amount of travel back and forth and the last two presidents of Liberia have been from our Little Liberia. The elites of the country travel, of course, more often, but there is a huge amount of money raised here and sent back for all sorts of things and one of those things is travel. I think people are often surprised by how large, engaged and active the LIberian community is. They have special refugee status and are incredibly savvy and politically connected. I think the perception some people have is very different from the reality.</p>
<p>“They have yet to articulate a valid reason why people coming from the infected countries are allowed entry into the U. S.”</p>
<p>Because we do not restrict liberty? </p>
<p>Nigeria is being rightly lauded for its approach to handling Ebola in its territory because the crisis there appears to have passed (thank God), and one of the tools used was barring travel from infected areas, either by the government or specific airlines. Whether it is the right thing to do (and I don’t think quarantine is the wrong thing to do, and has a long history of being used and accepted by the US government), is an open question that reasonable people can discuss, it is not an example of bigotry.</p>
<p>I am wondering about the family members/friends he was visiting, who have been required to stay at home for 21 days. Certainly, quarantine is absolutely necessary. But what kind of support are they getting? Did emergency responders clean <em>their</em> apartment(s) in the way described in the link above to help decrease the chances that if they were not already infected they would not become so? Did anyone disinfect the area outside the apartment where he was seen to vomit? Have arrangements been made to bring them food (friends and community could do this), monitor their health, help them in any way? These unfortunate people are expected to simply sit inside the apartment for 21 days looking at each other, waiting for someone to fall ill. Are they getting any emotional/psychological support from anyone? Clergy, psychologists, et al?</p>
<p>BTW, I heard the woman described as his “wife” several times. </p>
<p>What you deem fear-mongering I think of as caution. Forewarned = forearmed.
So don’t read my posts. Or do you feel it is your job to make sure I don’t scare others? I assume that posters here are parents and therefore adults and so can judge for themselves.</p>
<p>
It’s not a question of doing anything wrong. It’s a question of stopping the spread of a communicable disease. Surely you can understand the difference. Or perhaps not.</p>
<p>
This is the kind of information appropriately given by the governor of the impacted state. I would also like to know.</p>
<p>He told the nurse that he had come from Liberia but apparently didn’t tell the nurse, his family members or girlfriend that he had been in direct contact with an Ebola victim. </p>
<p>I deleted several posts. Please show some restraint in your posts so that the thread can remain open.</p>
<p>I think it’s weird to take sick relative to the hospital, receive antibiotics, and promptly call the CDC to complain. Actually, I think that’s way beyond weird.</p>