<p>The CDC has set up a straw man. There can never be zero risk. The risk can be very near zero if there is instituted vaccine program from birth of more than one generation.,but still then it is still not zero.</p>
<p>The straw man is the goal should not be zero risk, but the most reduction in risk possible. And the most reduction in risk possible is not what they are doing in the least.</p>
<p>There is a huge difference between creating a public panic and quietly instituting policies to reduce risk to said public. They are not the same things. Often, public panic is not controllable, but risk is. The government’s role here is to reduce potential harm re reduce risk first. </p>
<p>“It’s really a shame that we basically cannot believe a single freaking word that news outlets tell us. They are so frantic to get the story first that they don’t remotely seem to care about fact checking, questioning official sources who make conflicting statements or statements that defy common sense and belief. They run with a story, then spend the next week backtracking and revising it until the whole concept of truth and accuracy is completely lost on the public.”</p>
<p>So true. That’s why I can’t believe we’re even getting suckered into talking about this, when we really don’t have all the facts, and the stories keep changing.</p>
<p>Couple of things on the media. Tweet news is making this so much worse.This morning was great example. They are off the plane and good to go. Whoops, they’re being held in the airport. There they go through customs. CDC said it’s fine. No, they said they believe it’s fine but they took the sick passenger to the hospital in masks and moonsuits and are waiting for test results. Ahhhhhhh!!! But the public officials are hugely contributing to this problem by intentionally delivering unclear public statements.</p>
<p>"How do you know that is what “they do to most of the other uninsured who show up at emergency room?” </p>
<p>I think big city ER are used to seeing uninsured patients who present with similar symptoms all the time and don’t waste a lot of expensive hospital resources on them. Giving them a script for antibiotics cost them nothing and make the patient feel like they are being treated. </p>
<p>What do you think the Ebola patient’s examination entailed the first time he showed up at the ER? </p>
<p>The mix messages is the colliding of wanting a simple public policy that people can easily follow with science that the scientists know they are unsure of. </p>
<p>How could the CDC say on one hand say the virus can only live for a few hours outside the body and that it is OK to wash clothes with bleach and you should be fine, BUT then at the same time after 6 entire days, the guy’s apartment is still deemed a hazmat area and all his clothes, sheets etc are being permanently disposed as biohazard? </p>
<p>Has people not noticed that 6 days is 144 hours - way beyond a few hours. And the fact that the apartment is still determined, as a biohazard immediately tells you that the CDC has informed the medical personnel in Texas to be very, very careful. </p>
<p>If the CDC could get a picture on TV of people going into the apartment to clean it up in regular cleaning clothes and only using bleach, they would have done that! However, even the CDC is smart enough NOT to send people in without full protection even after 6 days. </p>
<p>This tells us that that few hours stuff is something they do not even trust. Nice sounding public policy, a few hours is fine and washing clothes is OK to then re-use, but I cannot tell you how many times in history stupid public policy has killed many a people. </p>
<p>I admit this could all be overkill, but the actions of the CDC re the apt cleanup tell everyone that even it is unsure about these new strains of the virus. Thus, better to have overkill than errant policy, which ends up exposing many more people. </p>
<p>^^^I think he was sent home because a)he showed up with vague symptoms they see all damn day every day and b)because a major fail occurred regarding the patient’s travel history and exposure to ebola. I don’t think it had anything to do with lack of insurance. We don’t call these “ebola like symptoms.” We call them “flu-like symptoms” or viral gastroenteritis. As I said in an earlier post, based on my own experience as a nurse, we’re not concerned with insurance or how expensive the care is. That’s not our job, it’s not what we concentrate on. </p>
<p>I received so many patients in my ICU and stepdown and cardiology units who didn’t have insurance. You don’t deliberately commit negligent malpractice and don’t think it won’t come back to bite you big time.</p>
<p>To those of you asking how Duncan could have obtained a tourist visa, it’s very possible that he got his visa a few years ago. When visas are issued, they can be valid for anywhere from 1 to 10 years. Remember, he had a good job with FedEx before he quit and he has family in the U.S. that he wished to visit. It’s not that unusual that he would have been granted a visa, although it was probably only valid for a year.</p>
<p>patsmom, if he had a job at FedEx, that explains things somewhat. The fact that he had relatives in the US is actually a big negative to the US immigration officials. You are right, he could have had a 10 year, possibly multiple entry visa, and possibly even a business visitor visa. I was under the impression that he was issued this visa recently. </p>
<p>Well of course it would have. If everyone cancelled their flights from those areas, like some other countries in Africa have, he would have had to get out of Liberia another way. Or if people were banned from originating in West Africa and continuing on to the US. It’s not rocket science. And they could easily bring aid workers and cargo inbound via military operations or cargo carriers.</p>
<p>That would require every country in the world to ban flights from Liberia, zero exceptions (or everyone would simply funnel out through that exception country). You obviously know more about this sort of thing than I do. Is that even a possibility? Who would give that order, and who would enforce it? </p>
<p>“Duncan was on his first visit to the U.S., visiting his sister, Mai Wureh, in Texas. During his time here, Duncan stayed with the family at the Ivy Apartments on Fair Oaks Avenue in Dallas, reports the Associated Press. According to the New York Times, Duncan worked for a shipping company, Safeway Cargo, in Liberia but resigned earlier in September. He was able to get a Visa to the United States so decided to go. Safeway Cargo is the customs agent for FedEx in Liberia.”</p>
<p>This explains nothing about the visa question. But, certainly makes it sound recent. Who knows?</p>
<p>Airlines might decide to limit flights on their own if Ebola fears start affecting their bookings & stock prices.
Isn’t Malaysia Air on the brink of bankruptcy because of their bad luck?</p>
<p>So this United plane in Newark - did it go on to its next flight as usual? Did they let a new passenger sit in the puking guy’s seat?</p>
<p>I don’t know who would enforce it, probably the ICAO would be responsible. Of course, if other countries refuse to let airplanes incoming from a specific country land, then they aren’t going to be taking off. I can’t imagine there are huge numbers of flights to/from the affected countries. Or they could enforce a quarantine for a designated amount of time before you are allowed to leave. Shoot, they do that with animals all the time, are humans that much less important? The issue is preventing the spread of the disease, not forcing every single city in the globe to be ready for and know how to treat it (not happening). Get enough assets and information into the affected regions, and contain it. That is more important than individuals desiring to travel.</p>
<p>This is an interesting article, mostly about the woman who called the ambulance. Apparently SHE told the emergency people not to come in without protection, having seen Duncan’s red eyes and fearing the worst. She is the one who made an effort to sanitize what she could with bleach, and warned her mother not to sleep in the bed where Duncan had lain. She sounds like she has her wits about her, I must say. (It also describes the “everyone goes to the ER” behavior that zoosermom mentioned earlier. ) Her household is apparently under more-or-less quarantine right now, especially her children. This must be agonizing for her and her partner, their father.</p>
<p>As to the “why sanitize the apartment after so long if it’s not contagious” question: bad publicity. People started talking about the inhumanity of leaving those people in the apartment so long with little or no help. And, of course, it makes the public feel better to see the virus being eradicated at that location.</p>
<p>"As I said in an earlier post, based on my own experience as a nurse, we’re not concerned with insurance or how expensive the care is. That’s not our job, it’s not what we concentrate on. </p>
<p>^^^^I get paid to be a nurse. Whether or not my patient has insurance affects me not one iota. It sure doesn’t protect me from being sued if I screw up.</p>
<p>I talked to a guy whose wife was an emergency room doctor in Florida. He said that she always gets paid her hourly rate, whether she is treating patients or not However, if there is no insurance and the patient doesn’t pay, she doesn’t get paid extra to treat them, as she would if they actually paid. So I make sure to loudly say I have insurance, and mention my job, if we end up in the ER. It’s got to make a difference in care if you know the person isn’t there expecting your services for free.</p>