<p>My post #334 was in response as to why no ban on flights re meningitis. </p>
<p>Simply, in the US, meningitis is very treatable and survivable, and does not have a mortality rate anywhere demonstrated for Ebola, which is why a ban on flights because of meningitis was and is not necessary.</p>
<p>And what is really is interesting to me though is how many people just gloss over the huge cost of protecting entire communities from just ONE Ebola-infected person. Do people not think ahead about the long-term effects and damage to communities? I am beginning to think not. </p>
<p>In contrast, I do not know of any meningitis outbreak ever costing greater than $10M for just ONE infected person, much less several hundred cases of meningitis. Even Princeton continued school, as normal. </p>
<p>I have reached the conclusion many taking decisions literally have no concept of costs outside their immediate jobs and of the disparate downstream effects bad policy makes. </p>
<p>I understand we differ on this, and thanks for your viewpoint.</p>
<p>IMO, Ebola FUD spread on message boards all over the US costs the US economy way more than $10M. Remember the anthrax scare? FYI, if you ever get anything shipped via US postal service, you are still paying for protection from anthrax. Reasonable costs?</p>
<p>Since I do not have a nursing degree, I am not qualified to be involved in patient care, but if need arises (do not think it ever will), I will not refuse to clean a room after an Ebola patient - the job that Ms Writebol did. If I can handle a chemical that can kill with just a tiny droplet and can handle nasty biomaterials, I can handle mopping floors with bleach while wearing a proper PPE. Can you?</p>
<p>Oh nooo!! A possible chocolate shortage!! NOW we are talking crisis!!</p>
<p>And this is not an issue of which disease is worse. This is a thread about Ebola. IMO Its really not necessary to ask and answer one’s own question. And no one is arguing that Ebola is a horrible disease and a horrible death, and more frightening than bacterial meningitis. That said, meningitis can have devastating effects on the survivors. Would prefer not to have either one. Ok, Not much more to say on that one.</p>
<p>Any risk of affecting the coffee bean supply? A shortage of coffee an chocolate wold definitely be a catastrophe!</p>
<p>Are you kidding? Would you rather Duncan have received less intensive treatment and that the city of Dallas have spent less on its response? Where do you think that would leave us now? </p>
<p>Exactly, sally. This (Ebola) is a contagious (under the right exposure conditions) and deadly disease.</p>
<p>Don’t get what viral meningitis has to do with anything. Its quite different in risk and outcome from bacterial meningitis. And again, neither really have anything to do with the discussion of Ebola, IMO. And the more dangerous one, bacterial meningitis, has a vaccination.That said, just as a passing comment, there were 2 students, at 2 different colleges from our community a few years ago who were healthy college students. Got meningitis at college (bacterial) and died. Not sure how/why they were permitted on campus without their vaccinations. Guess they filled out the exemption form. Unfortunate decision. Be sure your students is vaccinated. This disease is preventable.</p>
<p>What is the point of “which would you rather have?!” Neither!!! All that for what? </p>
<p>
Loss of limbs, for one, after DIC sets in. I saw a father of four lose both legs and a good portion of his fingers on both hands thanks to meningitis. No, don’t want to go there.</p>
<p>And yeah, @sally305, I’d like to know what the reaction would have been if Dallas didn’t do everything possible in its response to the community and to the patient. We’d be reading about that on this thread instead. </p>
<p>I think there are people who could not care less about anything but being argumentative, critical, and self righteous.</p>
<p>On a positive note, we are on day 16 after exposure for Duncan’s last contacts (not including the health care team, of course). This is looking pretty darn good for the more “casual contact” group of people and of course, I am still holding out hope for the four who were considered the most at risk.</p>
<p>More than that I think it’s that some get so fired up about certain categories of people “getting stuff for free” that they fail to see the larger picture. </p>
<p>Yes. I found out this morning that there’s an ignore poster option on CC. It won’t keep a thread from being locked, but it will be a relief not to be lectured to. It remains to be seen if it ruins the continuity of a thread, in which case I will have to “unignore.”</p>
<p>Yup, the ignore feature helps to keep one’s blood pressure down. Then again sometimes rubbernecking at the train wreck has entertainment value :)</p>
<p>There has been talk that they want to reduce the number of health care personnel working with/for the nurse patient. I know that if I were in her shoes, I could certainly do a lot of my own care in the early phases at least. That includes hanging/changing out IV bags, pushing drugs through the IV, central line care, etc.</p>
<p>The problem comes if she gets really ill. Obviously, at that point she needs the care and expertise of healthy people. However, as we are learning, the sicker the patient gets, the higher the viral load in all secretions, and thus the increased risk of exposure.</p>
<p>It’s certainly a challenging and scary proposition for the health care team. I am really hopeful that the plasma infusion will give her a big leg up on fighting this and avoiding severe illness. I also hope they are trying some antivirals.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that no one (at least don’t remember it on this thread, but we are almost 25 pages in!) is talking about pouring a large amount of aid into Africa to try to stop this there. Yes, some aid has been committed, but realistically not nearly what it will take to stop this. The outbreak HAS been stopped in a couple of countries there through sound epidemiology practices (following up contacts), strict protocols, and education. Can the world really afford to let this balloon to over a million cases in Africa as is now a possible projection? What would the impact be on the world economy as it inevitably spreads around the world with that number of infected people? Even if we cut off flights, it will spread. Are people really proposing essentially fencing in (via no flights and strict border controls) entire populations and letting them die of this disease? </p>
<p>While we are already late in the game to stop it there, it seems like about as sensible an investment in foreign aid that I have ever heard of for us and all first world countries to put in a pile of money and resources to try to slow and stop it there. A much bigger pile than has been committed so far… I don’t see how the world can afford to ignore this from an economic perspective, let alone a humanitarian one.</p>
<p>^^^You are right. If we don’t solve this at the source, these ebola blow ups are going to become a way of life, even if we are able to contain each one.</p>
<p>I just read this morning that there is a possible Ebola patient under observation in isolation in Maine, at the premiere hospital in the region. This article includes some interesting information about differing protocols, and about measures the hospital is taking to limit exposure by limiting staff who are involved at this stage:</p>
<p>On the CC front, no news regarding whether those who are afraid to go to Dallas to visit colleges are now crossing Bowdoin, Bates, and Colby off their lists, also. B-) </p>
<p>I vaguely heard on the telly this morning that the CDC may be changing or taking a second look or something like that at the recommended Ebola procedures. </p>
<p>Consolacion, that is an interesting article, thanks.
They must think there is a fair chance if they are holding the patient for 21 days instead of releasing & monitoring.</p>
<p>Also interesting that they are using a lot of the suggestions discussed on this thread - limiting the number of caregivers, having a buddy system, even using self-contained respirators for some situations. And that these are based on WHO guidelines, which are stricter than CDC guidelines.</p>
<p>Why do people bring up a longterm solution to a problem that is happening here and now? They are already building hospitals in West Africa. That should help in a few months. What do you suggest until then? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with that if it buys you time until fire engines arrive.</p>
<p>I am glad. Instead of talking the protocol must be broken never doubting the protocol may be inadequate. BTW how’s not blaming the nurse as someone mentioned earlier? It sounds like it. He was basically saying the protocol couldn’t be wrong so it had to be broken. A lot of people heard it that way.</p>