<p>
</p>
<p>Were these not in the CDC protocol? A doctor mentioned in the late stage of Ebola, caretakers need to double their protective gear and a self contained respirator. If the Dallas nurse got infected because she wasn’t given a proper geat towards end, CDC got some explanation to do.</p>
<p>No, if she got Ebola because she wasn’t given proper equipment the HOSPITAL has some explaining to do. If the training she was given or the resources she had were inadequate, that is the HOSPITAL’s fault, not the CDC’s.</p>
<p>But personally, even though the hospital’s performance has been distinctly sub-par–especially in regard to first apparently trying to throw the triage nurse under the bus, then blaming it on the information systems, and then finally admitting that the info was available to whomever diagnosed Duncan and sent him home (yes, after making a genuine effort to find out what was wrong with him via CT scans and so on, but apparently not bothering to read the nurse’s notes)–I really think that playing the blame game is a counter-productive exercise.</p>
<p>The productive response is to analyze what went wrong and what went right and learn from it. Quickly. That will only be impeded by finger-pointing that puts people on the defensive.</p>
<p>Not if the “protocol” didn’t include “double gear” and other more stringent measures laid out by WHO. Then the hospital followed the protocol but the protocol was inadequate.</p>
<p>As expected, both Boston scares (the one guy in Braintree and the airline passengers) turned out NOT to be Ebola:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/10/13/harvard-vanguard-said-followed-procedure-ebola-scare-case/zDXtnx7McTsaPFsvfmecRK/story.html”>http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/10/13/harvard-vanguard-said-followed-procedure-ebola-scare-case/zDXtnx7McTsaPFsvfmecRK/story.html</a></p>
<p>From the article:
</p>
<p>Interesting that Boston has dealt with “three or four other suspected cases” with no publicity and no fanfare.</p>
<p>Dallas hospital never mentioned “respirator” in their press release when they enumerated what equipment she was using, so I would think she wasn’t using one.</p>
<p>I am glad it was a false alarm. I’d say let people panic if they want. CDC has been saying they were fully prepared for months and people listened and treated Ebola something far away. It hit home and a number of things have gone wrong exposing people to the virus. So we panic. What else do you expect? It sounds like they don’t even have a proper protocol in place let alone preparing health professionals for proper execution of it. </p>
<p>If she wasn’t using a respirator at the late stage or double gear because it wasn’t mentioned in the protocol, then we have to hold CDC accountable for issuing improper protocol. You can’t fix what’s gone wrong if people aren’t held accountable.</p>
<p>“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>The meningitis vaccine doesn’t cover all types of meningitis. The one vaccine which covers the type of campus outbreaks that happened last year had to be imported and the CDC had to authorize it’s emergency use. That vaccine, for some reason, has not been approved by the FDA. </p>
<p>It’s also not surprising, imo, that so many of the suspected Ebola cases are turning out not to be Ebola. Which is a good thing. </p>
<p>Like many white powders back in the day were not turning out to be anthrax. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/ebola-poll-two-thirds-of-americans-worried-about-possible-widespread-epidemic-in-us/2014/10/13/d0afd0ee-52ff-11e4-809b-8cc0a295c773_story.html?hpid=z1”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/ebola-poll-two-thirds-of-americans-worried-about-possible-widespread-epidemic-in-us/2014/10/13/d0afd0ee-52ff-11e4-809b-8cc0a295c773_story.html?hpid=z1</a></p>
<p>2/3rds of Americans support a travel ban. </p>
<p>And the WHO announced that the Ebola death rate has gone up to 70%.</p>
<p>It’s flu season. Most people here in the USA who’ve been to West Africa recently and experience flu-like symptoms will have the flu, not Ebola. But until we have a reliable quick field test available, we have to treat every case as a potential Ebola case.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What percent of Americans don’t “believe in” evolution? 8-> </p>
<p>That said, if a pre-travel quarantine were to be set up for people leaving Liberia by plane, where would it be? In Liberia, presumably? Who is going to pay for it? All the countries requiring it, presumably? If Belgium doesn’t buy in, that will make it totally ineffective. Are you advocating setting up such quarantines in all of the affected countries? Or are we going to go it alone and create an Ellis Island like quarantine center, or centers, here? After all, there is nothing saying that a person flying in from Europe has to arrive in NYC. We would have to have centers in virtually every airport with international service, or people could evade the quarantine very easily.</p>
<p>Okay, I agree that it would at least cut down on the possibility of an infected person traveling, despite the HUGE opportunity for corruption, especially if it is located in Africa and run by locals, but what about people who travel to another country in the region before embarking?</p>
<p>This thread just continues on like a psychological thriller. There’s the this-is-no-big-deal crowd: No one has to rule out colleges in Maine now (ha ha smirk, smirk), but OMG we won’t have chocolate! Then there’s the world-coming-to-an-end crowd: I can’t believe no one is arguing for devoting billions to this disease! No travel bans are going to have any effect on stopping it!</p>
<p>In addition to the money from Gates’ foundation, Mark Zuckerberg and wife donated $25M to fight Ebola:</p>
<p><a href=“http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/zuckerberg-wife-donate-25m-cdc-ebola-26182641”>http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/zuckerberg-wife-donate-25m-cdc-ebola-26182641</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We need to address both the short- and long-term response to this disease. Even if it is contained now, it will likely come back in a more virulent form, as this outbreak has done. </p>
<p>Two points:
(1) If you barf on a plane and get hauled into isolation at the nearest hospital for 3 weeks, who is paying for that?
(2) It seems a little overboard for every hospital in the country to be having their own little “incident”, but OTOH, it’s probably good practice for them as a drill to see if they are ready for the real thing.</p>
<p>If your house is on fire, you put it out first and then install fire alarm. Or do you install alarm in the raging fire?</p>
<p>Why would travel ban not help contain the virus? I get that there will be some getting around bribing or otherwise. But it would discourage casual travelers like Dundan, wouldn’t it? They say people in Liberia bribe officials to keep dead bodies of Ebola victims so that they can have a proper burial. Does that mean the gov shouldn’t try to take bodies away? All the African nations who banned travel from the affected area are staying Ebola free so far.</p>
<p>Our house isn’t on fire, their house is on fire. To continue with that metaphor we are hosing down our own roof while hopefully fully supporting the fire fighters who are attempting to put out the fire in our neighbor’s house so it doesn’t spread.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why the US doesn’t temporarily stop issuing visas to people from “hot spot” countries sure it won’t stop 100% of travel out of impacted countries but if it only stops one infected person it would be better than doing nothing. </p>
<p>I do believe that all future cases should be concentrated at those hospitals accustomed to dealing with Ebola. So if another person tests positive, they should be stabilized, and moved to one of those facilites( Emory, Nebraska, etc)</p>