<p>To be truly private, shouldn’t they be able to choose to treat or not? If the fed chooses not to limit travels from the area and risk the exposure, should they be held to take on the consequences? Not being political, I wouldn’t like to be forced something I am not ready for and be responsible if the result is not good. </p>
<p>My friend works in the hospital lab in Maine where the patient being tested for ebola was seen. The lab was not told which patient it was - the employees just figured it out when they were testing someone who’d come in with a fever - they were looking for malaria and dengue fever. Kind of shocking. My friend was worried about her colleague who was working with a blood sample from the ill person.</p>
<p>There is no one “list” these are but a few of the resources. These include recommendations to standardize the PPE equipment to improve infection control.</p>
<p>I still go back to this story, of the woman in Africa who took care of her whole family with Ebola, all but one family member survived, and she did not have a hazmat suit, nor was her neck covered etc. This tells me, that it probably was a breach, meaning they touched fluid, or inadvertently rubbed an eye, or something of that nature. I can only imagine how hard it would be not to do those things, since you dont realize that you are doing it.</p>
<p>I really feel sorry for the nurses that have contracted this, because they deserve a medal for agreeing to care for Duncan.</p>
<p>Dr Gupta demonstrates what the CDC guidelines entails in the video posted in #381. It exposes neck and such. WHO guidelines and I believe what Doctors without borders follow is doubling up the gear and a self-respitory system in late stage. IMO, CDC guidelines were inadequate. In addition, I object that CDC issues guidelines that require extensive training to implement. They should have found a better way, namely employ a special team to deal with this exclusively.</p>
I find political attacks aggravating. The motivation for MY QUESTION (which you were referencing) was to respectfully discuss something that I found worthy of discussion. There was no racial or political component, despite what you may have projected. I think that discussing when enough is enough is a valid topic in this thread. If you have issues with people criticizing the CDC, quote those posts and address them. My post wasn’t one of them.</p>
<p>
Maybe. And it is also possible that in the end stages, there is no real “safe,” there is only “lucky.” I don’t know and you don’t either, but it could be discussed without disingenuous attacks. Your post that I quoted left itself open to such an attack, but I will refrain because I think this is an important thread to keep open.</p>
<p>A lot. It’s not just the equipment. One needs extensive training to use them. They need to develop muscle memory. I believe it’s 6 weeks. One needs manpower to train and to replce the workforce being trained. It’s a herculean task. Do we need that at every hospital or should we come up with more viable alternative, like a appoint a few special team to deploy or transport them to Atlanta/Nebraska?</p>
<p>That is a very good point, and the Dallas hospital is going to highlight the problem of private money versus public expectations.</p>
<p>The question that will be debated going forward is, “Are private hospitals and companies, such as Dallas Presbyterian, responsible for paying for services the people magically think they should get?” That is the issue here. </p>
<p>Now, if the people in Dallas (and elsewhere) decide that this is something they want available all the time, then a mechanism should be in place for the people in Dallas to pay for what they want or expect, as a service. But, this concept that private money is at the whim and use of the public wishes makes no sense. </p>
<p>But, it goes one step further into another question, “Why should private hospitals and companies be responsible for a problem created by errant public policy, in this case, in dealing with a disease?”</p>
<p>I suspect the answer will end up being that if people want X services available all the time, then they will have to find a way to pay for it and should not expect private money to be at their disposable. No different than one’s private money is not at the disposable of one’s neighbors because they want new four-wheel vehicles because the county has a bad policy in fixing the roads.</p>
<p>Maine, there are many blood-borne diseases. Every lab tech should be exercising universal precautions no matter if it is ebola or AIDS. Adherence to these principles in the lab should protect them. As a nurse, I’ve always practiced “I’m going to pretend you have AIDS when I start your IV or check your groin after you’ve come back from the cath lab or when I’m drawing blood, etc.” </p>
<h1>565 that woman was amazing. She was able to construct her own PPE using multiple layers of trashbags. Note that trashbags are thick and waterproof compared to the paper gowns CDC ok’d. She used 4 layers of gloves. She covered her head in a bag too, like a turban.</h1>
<p>Despite that she was also extremely lucky that nothing got on her eyes.</p>
<p>I am always leery of gofundme, when I dont know the person personally, since you have no proof the money ever makes it to the person. However, I will make a small donation in this instance!</p>
<p>I read in a news article that the idea is being considered of having a designated ebola treatment hospital in each state. This would seem to be a safer and more efficient approach than every hospital dealing w ebola treatment with ad hoc protocol.</p>
<p>I’m thinking the hospital will eat this. Worker’s comp also comes into play. But while she’s in the hospital she can’t work, through no fault of her own.</p>
<p>What about the next person (and hopefully not the next after that)?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The authorities at the press conference pretty much guaranteed further “victims.” My stomach is literally aching right now.</p>