<p>For you, @zoosermom . . . one of my all time favorites! 
</p>
<p><a href=“The New York Times > Books > Image >”>http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/12/04/books/05chast1.html</a> </p>
<p>I’m very confused. Technically, I have read that they are NOT contagious when there are no symptoms, yet, they are scaring all the folks who went to the bridal shop, the neighbors, and the folks who flew on either flight of Amber by contacting all of them and tracing all of them. This shows to me that they don’t really believe there is NO risk and that they believe there MAY be SOME risk. I think this just scares and confuses people (it does confuse me). Supposedly, you need to come into contact with bodily fluids of infected people. No one has said that there were any bodily fluids in the bridal shop. There is some chance that there were bodily fluids on the airplane (perhaps in the bathroom if the patient and the passenger shared the same bathroom), but how were there bodily fluids going out of her apartment to neighbors? </p>
<p>The way this is being handled is very confusing and troubling to the people who are notified (some at 6am with a knock to their apartments) with inadequate info–just enough to alarm them without any info to reassure them. Who is coordinating this and deciding who should and should NOT be notified and what they should be told? </p>
<p>Ha! Saint fan that was priceless!</p>
<p>You know people had been asking for a good wedding thread so this bridal store angle might be just the universe answering that call. Before we know it TLC will have some kind of show.</p>
<p>Himom–Reality suggests that you cannot catch it from the shop or the plane or the person who knew the person or sat next to him…etc. but hysteria suggests that you better act like those things ARE possible, or be prepared for the backlash.</p>
<p>Note the date . . . 2006</p>
<p>I think it isn’t that you can’t catch it from more casual contact, but that the likelihood is very, very small. Reading about the initial spread of HIV, I think there is a similar dynamic in that every so often the unlikely happens. The WHO statement on transmission and incubation lists 42 days as the outlier. It almost never happens that far out, but not never, ever. So I think professionals have to work in such a way as to encompass the outliers. But individual people who haven’t been exposed to a symptomatic person don’t need to worry in any meaningful sense. People who have had casual contact should be mindful, but not really worried, and medical professionals treating end stage patients should act as if they are contagious until proven not to be. </p>
<p>HIMom,
From what I have read, for example: <a href=“http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-81653963/”>http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-81653963/</a>, not all Ebola carriers (13%) have a fever as a symptom. I assume that means they can be infectious without knowing it, and if they were to say, sneeze or leave some sort of liquid output on a surface somewhere, then the virus can potentially be transmitted. As I’m sure you know, I am not an expert in this area, just repeating what I have read.</p>
<p>Garland, I was thinking how weird it must be for these people, just going along living their lives, and then one day, they’re headline news around the world. Of course they’re probably not following the news just now. When they recover, though, (and i think they will) I wonder what they’ll think of their new fame. </p>
<p>zoosermom, that is awesome. I have always loved Roz Chast.</p>
<p>Just arrived home and did not have the time to go through the almost 200 posts since I’ve last looked at this. But I was able to talk to two individuals. One is a colleague in the DC area. She is from West Africa and went through a hospital drill for Ebola containment. She said that she was appalled and frightened by what was being taught! The ER drill was conducted by a respiratory technician, not a provider experienced in sterile techniques, and contained processes that would lead to contamination. They taught the employees to remove their gloves first before removing their gowns. They wore the non sterile gloves that did not fit snuggly around the sleeves and left gaps, instead of sterile orthopedic gloves that were both thick and fit tightly around the sleeves. They recommended against double gloving. All of our high infection risk surgeries and Doctors Without Borders guidelines call for double gloving. Also, taping of the gloves around the sleeves were not recommended. They did not recommend the buddy system which is a key feature of the DWB protocol. She did her best to inform them of the gaps in their protocol and she was finally told that she would not be part of the first responders. She left disgusted. This is but one hospital but a reason for me to be alarmed.</p>
<p>The second person is a critical care physician at one of the level 4 facilities that cared for the Americans infected with Ebola (have to maintain some anonymity). They’ve conducted samplings of surfaces in the patient’s room and could not find Ebola. They are concluding that the virus doesn’t survive very long after making contact on surfaces. They continue to test to determine a half life but so far testing is encouraging.</p>
<p>This is the disconnect that infuriates me when I see so many people frightened by the Ebola epidemic. How could this happen with all of the concerns we’ve demonstrated: <a href=“New U.N. Ebola Trust Fund Falls Far Short of Goal - The New York Times”>New U.N. Ebola Trust Fund Falls Far Short of Goal - The New York Times;
<p>Frugal Doctor–that’s very alarming on many fronts. Taking off gloves first and having ill-fitting, single-layer gloves doesn’t even make sense to me as a layperson! How very frustrating for the West Africa doctor–very frightening indeed! How can the correct info be taught if the person teaching is misinformed and refuses to be corrected or listen to other points of view that make more sense! Wow! Am glad that ebola isn’t more contagious or we’d have a major pandemic underway already!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Look at post #1029. scholarme posted that they now think the nurse was already showing symptoms as early as on Friday before she left for Cleveland. So everyone she contacted since Friiday has to be checked. That includes the bridal shop and the first flight.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, we know why. Until recently those being affected by Ebola were far away and “other.” People in this country haven’t valued funding research into vaccines for infectious diseases or other public-health initiatives. </p>
<p>“People in this country haven’t valued funding research into vaccines for infectious diseases or other public-health initiatives.”</p>
<p>Especially when those vaccines are targeted to prevent diseases predominantly affecting the poor in third-world countries. </p>
<p>I was taught to change gloves every 30 minutes.</p>
<p>How would she (nurse 2) pass ebola if she wasn’t shedding the virus via bodily fluids–no vomit, no sneezing, no coughing, etc.? I get that it makes sense to be safe, but I thought there had to be some bodily fluids? Have not read that she was shedding any until after she checked herself into the hospital.</p>
<p>Maybe she cried when she tried on bridal gowns. </p>
<p>^good one! Or she could have sneezed. Hay fever season. If she discharged any body fluid, she was infectious in theory.</p>