Second Ebola patient

Parent Cafe
1501

<p>

</p>

<p>I am not talking about the nation; I am talking about the individual. </p>

<p>The 40 days I am talking about is the quarantine time within which the risk of person acquiring the disease and becoming infectious to others approaches zero. The individual then can be deemed Ebola-free and not at risk of becoming symptomatic and infecting others.</p>

<p>That determination is due to the fact the profile risk of acquiring (developing) the disease approaches zero at Day 40.</p>

<p>Not sure what is the issue with this. The 40 days for the individual has understood for some time.</p>

1502

<p>I’m only on page 97, but I have to say that the phrase “an abundance of caution” is rapidly becoming one of my very, very least favorites.</p>

1503

<p>

</a></p>

<p>It should be noted that there are top doctors who do not fully agree with the 21 days cost-benfefit analysis and think 21 days is still outside a safe probability window of being able to acquire the disease and become infectious to others. </p>

<p>EDIT: And the reason some doctors and scientists do not agree with the 21 days is the genetic makeup of the strain responsible for the current outbreak is still unknown and the virus is changing faster than data can be collected. </p>

1504

<p>Tatin, great idea about Ebola survivors becoming paid care workers.</p>

<p>Also, what about paying survivors to contribute plasma, just as Dr. Brantly is doing (for free – he’s a first-worlder)? </p>

1505

<p>Consolation, I’ve gotten allergic to that phrase too! Even worse is “an over abundance of caution.” Why not just say " as a precaution." 8-| </p>

1506

<p>They are talking about having ebola survivors help care for the children of ebola victims who otherwise have no one willing to care for them. That sounds like an excellent plan and can be very important and helpful. If they can provide medical care, that would be a plus, but those who just want to be helpful but don’t want to be involved in medical care could at least help with providing care and affection for the children.</p>

1507

<p>scholarme, why not just say “as a panic measure.”</p>

1508

<p>I’ve not heard of the phrase “panic measure.” Panic buying, panic attacks, panic at the disco … </p>

1509

<p>

</p>

<p>Good point. How infectious is Ebola at this point? Is the usual precaution handling meat not sufficient?</p>

1510

<p>OK, “out of an abundance of panic” then. Or how about “We’ve read the scary ill-informed headlines, and even though we’re a university, we haven’t bothered to find out the facts, so we’re rejecting a speaker who is no threat to anyone. Besides, panicky parents have been reading the same scary ill-informed headlines and are burning up our phones.” </p>

<p>BTW, Syracuse could take a note from the President of IIRC Yale, who when faced with a “possible Ebola exposure” situation last week, chose facts and calm.</p>

1511

<p>Why would testing the cruise passenger who get sick be a “panic measure”? It’s a procedure that should be followed, is it not?</p>

1512

<p>Igloo, that passenger was tested. That comes under the first principle of containment: Quick diagnosis. The test came back negative. </p>

<p>So that would mean that no passenger on that ship was ever exposed, and there is no need to quarantine any of them. Right? Or are we now getting into degrees of separation – i.e., even though the passenger is negative for Ebola, he/she handled Duncan’s blood, so let’s quarantine all the passengers just in case somehow the virus jumped over him/her and onto the other pax?</p>

1513

<p>It’s getting weary talking to people wanting to pick a fight. Wasn’t it today the test came back? And the passenger was free to go. What’s the issue? That she was tested? She should have been tested because she threw up not as a panic measure.</p>

1514

<p>

</p>

<p>Bay, If I recall correctly, Duncan was carrying his landlord’s pregnant and dying 19 yr old daughter before her death. On the last day, she was convulsing. They couldn’t get an ambulance so rode to the clinic in a cab. The ebola ward was full so they sent her back home, and he helped carry her inside. She died at 3 am. How could he have claimed he thought she had malaria if they sent her home because the ebola ward was full. Assuming that is correct, how could he claim he “didn’t know” she had ebola? <a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/world/africa/ebola-victim-texas-thomas-eric-duncan.html?action=click&contentCollection=U.S.&module=RelatedCoverage&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article&_r=0”>http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/world/africa/ebola-victim-texas-thomas-eric-duncan.html?action=click&contentCollection=U.S.&module=RelatedCoverage&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article&_r=0&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

1515

<p>I agree, jym, its just very odd how Duncan did not seem to be forthcoming about his background, but at the same time seemed to be anxious about his condition. And now of course, his family is claiming he did not get proper treatment. It seems to me that if he had walked into the ER the first time and told the registrar, the nurse and the doctor that he came from Liberia where he was caring for Ebola friends and suspects he contracted it, things would have been handled differently.</p>

1516

<p>

Where has it been reported anywhere that this virus is genetically mutating- no less “faster than the data can be collected”? What is this- more unnecessary panic engendering?? Sure looks like it. How about instead we talk about the experimental vaccine Canada is sending down to the US? <a href=“Canada will send experimental Ebola vaccine to WHO”>http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/18/canada-will-send-ebola/17503785/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

</p>

1517

<p>Igloo, you keep stating as fact that the cruise ship passenger “threw up.” I have been reading the news on my phone and every article I have read says that she has been consistently asymptomatic.</p>

1518

<p>“It should be noted that there are top doctors who do not fully agree with the 21 days cost-benfefit analysis and think 21 days is still outside a safe probability window of being able to acquire the disease and become infectious to others.”</p>

<p>I’m not sure where you are seeing “top doctors”. One PLoS article by one Drexel researcher? He is not even a medical doctor or epidemiologist. Please! He does have a PhD, but that does not make him a doctor!</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~haascn/”>http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~haascn/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Ph.D. (Environmental Engineering in Civil Engineering), University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, 1978</p>

1519

<p>

Them’s fightin’ words, BB!</p>

1520

<p>I thought that asymptomatic people will test negative, regardless of whether or not they are infected. If the passenger was asymptomatic, there was no point in testing. </p>