<p>
</p>
<p>If the facts in the NYT article are correct, I am just baffled why he did NOT tell them that.</p>
<p>Some cultures are excessively deferential to medical professionals - will not volunteer info or contradict a nurse/ doctor because that would be impolite.
Don’t know if that’s true for this guy, but I had older generation relatives like that. If the doctor said you had strep then the doctor was right.</p>
<p>We watched a show on Frontline last night about the denial of CTE in NFL players. While the NFL’s docs were most vocal, there are plenty of docs who are standing up to them, saying they’ve got it all wrong. The million dollar question is, who do you believe? But both sides are out there. I think if physicians truly believe a MAJOR mistake is being made in reporting information regarding Ebola that could cost people their lives, they’d find some way to disseminate that information. But I’ve heard nothing, which is surprising, because even in cases where the science is obvious to 99% of the community, there’s always one loose screw who claims conspiracy theory. </p>
<p>On Twitter from our local NBC affiliate:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have spent many hours in the ER with my mother in the last week (she does not have Ebola!) and I can tell you that even before the Texas diagnosis the professionals here were terrified. There is just so much traffic back and forth with Liberia here that I completely understand and respect their concern.</p>
<p>^^^^To be honest, I figured the first case would probably show up in New York due to that heavy traffic. Little did I know that there is a large Liberian community in my own city.</p>
<p>I think that implementing travel restrictions are only common sense. Of course, this must be combined with a massive effort to eradicate the virus and save as many lives as possible in W. Africa. There will be cases here, and in other countries, but we need to limit them to the extent possible. </p>
<p>Thanks, nrdsb4, that explanation is helpful. (Post 138). I’m speaking from ignorance here, but wouldn’t it be at least theoretically possible for a symptomatic patient in the early stages of the disease to mask a fever with ibuprofen or aspirin and thereby pass the screen? </p>
<p>Or for the symptoms to appear midway thru a 12-hour flight (and for the patient to not immediately report them?) </p>
<p>I have absolutely no reason to believe that is the case here and I absolutely trust that it is close to certain that he was not contagious while on the flight, but the CDC’s use of the term “zero chance,” without qualification, smacks more of PR language than scientific language, and for that reason it bothers me. </p>
<p>Again, I am speaking from ignorance here. It may be that the scientific community has reached 100% consensus, with 100% certainty, that a contagious patient would have symptoms detectible to an outside observer 100% of the time. In that case, the term “zero chance” would be appropriate. Otherwise “appears to be zero chance based on data collected thus far” would seem to be more appropriate.</p>
<p>In any case, if I had been sitting next to him on a flight, I would want to be notified. </p>
<p>It’s really BS that the CDC would not identify the flight the man flew on, stating that the man was likely not infectious at the time of travel. Then the CNN kept televising a graphic showing a non-stop flight path from Monrovia to Dallas-- there’s no such thing. There have been NO non-stop flights between Liberia & the US since Aug.</p>
<p>United came forward & declared that it flew the man. His itinerary was monrovia-brussels- washington dulles-dfw.</p>
<p><a href=“U.S. airlines in contact with government about Ebola concerns | Daily Mail Online”>U.S. airlines in contact with government about Ebola concerns | Daily Mail Online;
<p>I understand that 21 days is a range but my point was his friend went very quickly from contact to dead. The 21 days has been used to make it seem like not that big a deal and kind of put off the immediacy of the thing. I wish they were doing more for kids and families who came into contact with him or may have come into contact with all the infected fluids that he was spewing all over the stairs and parking lot of his apartment complex.</p>
<p>By not making me feel better I mean not comfortable with the “containment” of it so far and not comfortable with the human error and deception involved. That’s how it went from case 1 in Africa . . . lots of well meaning people who watched and waited and traveled when sick and were cared for by family members and health care professionals. </p>
<p>I would love for our tax payer dollars to cover anyone who may have been exposed who doesn’t have family medical leave (I used the acronym and got censored!) time to just be under quarantine. Give each one a CDC caseworker and nip it in the bud. Three weeks without the freedom to move around seems like a small price to pay to contain this while the numbers are small.</p>
<p>I got back from South Africa on August 15. A few days later, I wasn’t feeling too well (I didn’t have a fever, though), so I called the doctor’s office. They asked all sorts of questions about my itinerary, and asked me to wear a mask when I came in. I told them there had been more people in the US with Ebola (the doctor being treated) than in South Africa! When the doctor came in, he said, “Oh, you can take that off!” It shows that people in Maine have been thinking about this for awhile, though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It went from one case to thousands in Africa because they have lousy health care systems, pretty much non-existent epidemiological teams to track and contain the outbreak, very little equipment to protect healthcare workers and provide isolation and care for patients in hospitals, too few hospital beds to begin with, government officials who promote incorrect or inappropriate information about diseases, people who are suspicious of western medicine and hide/run away/stone aid workers, and customs of washing dead bodies at home. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>His “friend” was the pregnant woman’s brother. How do you know precisely when the “contact” was first made?</p>
<p>I didn’t say one to thousands. At the start, in the small numbers of one to 10s or low hundreds people traveled, went to doctors, weren’t diagnosed because they thought it was something else and sent home. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>People hear the word “Africa” and just assume it’s all the same general area. South Africa is probably at least 3500 miles from the hot spot, right?</p>
<p>On another forum I read, a woman was panicking that her family member had plans to go to South Africa and on to Thailand. She was telling this adult woman’s mother that she should FORBID her from going even if it meant physically restraining her. Other posters who tried to educate her didn’t have much luck.</p>
<p>Education doesn’t do much good with a lot of people, I have noticed.</p>
<p>Yes, about 3500 miles as the crow flies - longer by car. A friend at church came up to me in a panic a couple of weeks ago because her granddaughter was planning on going to South Africa. I did manage to calm HER down, at least!</p>
<p>I sometimes wonder if the consequences of public panic are worse than the disease (in the US, with good epidemiologists, etc.)</p>