<p>“But, the fact is you would be stabilized or isolated. You would not be cured at no charge. Maybe, the next guy will go there and try it. Since, the US was not the best choice, apparently.”</p>
<p>You would not be cured because there are practically no treatments yet which cure Ebola - but all other treatments - like what Ebola Dallas received would, imo, at least be tried, and patient would not be charged. Also, I would bet that if the one drug that does seem to work was available - that would be tried. I don’t believe they would do nothing and just isolate patient until they died. </p>
<p>They do a cost/benefit analysis when deciding what treatments to approve for citizens. Its very controversial. Non-citizens are going to have an even harder time and will get billed beyond basic ER services. Public health threats are more complicated, of course. But, the complaints about people being allowed to die are legendary and date back decades so who knows?</p>
<p>Yes, they should be treated for moral, ethical and legal reasons. EMTALA law requires that they receive treatment or transferred to a facility that can treat them. I would personally care for an Ebola pt.</p>
<p>Yes, because there’s no way around it. And, he was treated. And, now the hospital is probably facing a lawsuit because mistakes were made in the ER and this family was looking for a lawsuit from the first day with the discrimination complaints about the quarantine. And, all of that shows up on every else’s bill. That was my point. </p>
<p>I do think experimental treatment takes this discussion into another area. Because, we all know insurance will also deny expensive drugs or protocols in many cases. So, the idea that everyone should just get everything is a little rainbows and unicorns, imho.</p>
<p>“Non-citizens are going to have an even harder time and will get billed beyond basic ER services.”</p>
<p>Ummm…no. Not free treatment for these illness only in the ER. I am sure, having had meningitis, that anyone presenting with those symptoms, will get admitted to hospital in the UK and receive the same treatment I got here in the US, but with no charge. </p>
<p>Again: </p>
<p>Treatment which is always free of charge:</p>
<p>“treatment for certain communicable diseases, such as tuberculosis, cholera, food poisoning, malaria, meningitis and pandemic influenza.”</p>
<p>Emily, you are confusing treatment with every possible treatment needed or imaginable. They get you going and send you on your way. It’s not like contracting a communicable disease is a ticket to free health care in the UK or anywhere else. I can’t believe people think this. There are ques for basics and denials based on age every day. Sometimes that age is not that old, btw. I just asked a UK subject who is currently laughing out loud. But, believe whatever you like.</p>
<p>“I would prefer banning people who may have Ebola from getting on airplanes.”</p>
<p>Should we start instituting the temperature check and banning anyone with a temperature from boarding a plane in Texas - since obviously, people in Texas have been exposed? </p>
<p>“Of course it may be different in an infectious disease case.”</p>
<p>IMO, they should try everything in Ebola cases- including experimental drugs and forget about the cost - as it’s in the best interest of the public as a whole - to find treatments which work, given the contagious nature of the virus. It also may be very difficult to try experimental drugs at this time in West Africa because of the large scale of the outbreak and lack of sanitary conditions and state of the art hospitals in the countries where the outbreaks are occurring. </p>
<p>He WAS treated. There isn’t a curative protocol for Ebola. The treatment right now is attempting to stabilize. They ran out of ZMAP which has a long production cycle and who know if that was the thing that did it for the first 2 patients anyway. As was mentioned, there isn’t some giant blood bank of Ebola antibody rich blood just laying around waiting for such an event. If the one possible person volunteers to donate and they aren’t a match then they aren’t a match. There also may be a differential in the starting health profile of the patients. Who knows what his health history and baseline condition were before he contracted Ebola? It’s a deadly disease. My friend’s daughter lost a dear friend to meningitis last spring. He was fine then dead in a day and he was treated. It’s a horrible tragic thing but some diseases are like that. Even among American citizens (or maybe even more among citizens) we forget that western medicine still isn’t a magic wand that can save everyone from everything. The medical community does great stuff, but we shouldn’t have the expectation that they can cure or fix anything. </p>
<p>I thought that the sponsoring aid organization paid to have the original two patients air lifted. The federal government didn’t just jump in a send a plane</p>
<p>“Emily, you are confusing treatment with every possible treatment needed or imaginable. They get you going and send you on your way.”</p>
<p>No, they are not just going to “get you going” and send you on your way if you have a communicable disease. Have you ever been in the hospital because of a highly contagious and life threatening disease? I have, and I was hospitalized for days and put in isolation for the first 48 hours while getting treatment and waiting for the confirmation on whether my meningitis was viral or bacterial. </p>
<p>There is no way a person with that disease is just going to be given some antibiotics in the ER and sent on their way. They will get admitted and treated for free in the UK. </p>
<p>That’s not what I said. And, that’s not what happened here, either. They didn’t know he had an infectious disease when they gave him antibiotics and sent him home. That part was an error, obviously. </p>
<p>You said they were going to be charged except for treatment hey receive in the ER. I don’t think you are correct. </p>
<p>This is what you said:</p>
<p>“But, the fact is you would be stabilized or isolated. You would not be cured at no charge.” </p>
<p>From my previous link</p>
<p>“Treatment which is always free of charge:”</p>
<p>"Some hospital treatment is free of charge for everyone who needs it, regardless of how long they have been or intend to stay in the UK. This is:-</p>
<ul>
<li>treatment for accidents and emergencies as an outpatient in a hospital’s accident and emergency department. In England and Wales, emergency treatment in a walk-in centre is also free of charge. However, if you are referred to an outpatient clinic or admitted to hospital from an accident and emergency department, you will be charged
*compulsory psychiatric treatment
*In England and Scotland, compulsory treatment under a court order
*treatment for certain communicable diseases, such as tuberculosis, cholera, food poisoning, malaria, meningitis and pandemic influenza. In England, HIV treatment is free. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, testing for the HIV virus and counselling following a test are both free of charge, but any necessary subsequent treatment and medicines may have to be paid for. If you have any problems with accessing HIV treatment, you can get advice from the Terrence Higgins Trust at THT Direct on 0808 802 1221"</li>
</ul>
<p>Treatment for communicable diseases, other than HIV treatment in Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland, are always free of charge. </p>
<p>This is why the companies I know, which have ex-patriots working in the UK, do not use the NHS system; they all have memberships in concierge services. I did the same thing in France when I lived there. I was part of an American-only concierge service and had access to top everything. My french colleagues were jealous beyond belief because I had better access to healthcare than their entire families ever did. </p>
<p>Re the UK (and French), the queues are unreal for basic things, and there is zero guarantee that a drug would be available. Sure they list they treat you or everything, but falls short because not everything is available - and we joke that they must do that on purpose. A great way to save money. The concierge service guarantees the reverse.</p>
<p>Back to the US - This is why we are joining a concierge service here and blowing off the ACA. We get access to all the top hospitals that the ACA insurance cannot get near, priority service at our hospital ER, guaranteed 48-hour max wait to see a doc, and max 48-hour after to see a specialist. This is similar to the concierge services of the UK and France.</p>
<p>EDIT: And in terms of economics, the fact that concierge services exist at a hefty cost, as compared to the free NHS tells us everything. People are willing to pay for something that is supposedly free elsewhere. No need to wonder why - they pay because free does not mean available, which it often is not. The NHS website is a great set of promises though. Great salesmanship. However, delivery is another issue.</p>
<p>I lived in London and had my first child there. We put up with the public health care system for a very short period of time. My H went to his employer and told them if they wanted him to stay they would have to cover private medical care. They immediately did so with no questions asked. Public system is a nightmare. You wait for everything and then continue to wait. And you better have all your ID and paperwork in order. I have no idea how they would have treated someone like Duncan who walked into an emergency room, but my guess is that unless his first contact at the ER suspected Ebola he would have been sent on his way. </p>
<p>“This is why we are joining a concierge service here and blowing off regular insurance and the ACA.”</p>
<p>What happens if you are traveling on the other side of the country, for instance, and suffer a heart attack - who pays for your hospital bills? </p>
<p>I guess is the reality will be a little different - the UK and Europe in general are not taken by the PC nonsense to the extremes we have here. They will set up quarantine centers and isolate these people from the general population rather expeditiously.</p>
<p>Yes, mistakes were made in the ER. Those mistakes might have cost Mr. Duncan his life, since some experts feel that it’s critical to begin treatment as soon as possible. </p>
<p>Dr. Smith’s credentials are about as good as they get for this situation, but even if you don’t believe him, it is inarguable that the Texas hospital’s mistakes resulted in many additional people being exposed to the virus.</p>
<p>Is it your contention that there should be no consequences to the hospital for a mistake with such far-reaching ramifications? </p>