# Ebola infected doctors being brought back to the States



## Tyler (Aug 2, 2014)

What do you think of all of this? My question is that while all of the media is trying to say its "not that infectious, only coming from strict bodily fluids," then why are doctors in full hazmat suits getting sick? I could just be speaking out of my butt here but what about the virus also eventually becoming airborne as a possibility if it mutated?


----------



## asher (Aug 2, 2014)

I imagine that even with all the proper precautions as a doctor working out there, eventually it might fail because of how freaking vigilant about it you need to be, and their quarantine measures are much less developed. We dont know if they picked it up in a hospital or outside, do we?


----------



## SD83 (Aug 2, 2014)

If it does, we're pretty much ....ed anyway. 
My guess would be that the doctors don't wear their suits 24/7, and have contact to other people. You've got 2-21 days from infection to first symptoms, and maybe you're already infectious in that time. Many people try to hide their symptoms because they're afraid. Those doctors didn't get sick experimenting with a virus in laboratories, they are in the middle of an epidemic, sometimes in the poorest areas of already poor countries, that's not exactly ideal conditions. 
If the virus mutates, it will spread. If it doesn't, I see no problem with those doctors taken back home (not only to the States, there was a debate about one being brought to Germany, I don't know if that's going to happen or not. I'm certainly not afraid). The conditions here are much better, both for the patient and the doctors.


----------



## asher (Aug 2, 2014)

And we are much much better for maintaining quarantines.

I expect it will be fine, but yeah, there's the voice in my head going "Doesn't anyone at the CDC watch movies?!"


----------



## Dog Boy (Aug 2, 2014)

SD83 said:


> You've got 2-21 days from infection to first symptoms, and maybe you're already infectious in that time.


 
Not infectious without symptoms. Third paragraph down.

CDC Telebriefing on Ebola outbreak in West Africa | Transcript | CDC Newsroom | CDC


----------



## SD83 (Aug 2, 2014)

Thanks, didn't know that. Still, there are enough opportunities for the doctors in Africa. I got a ton of respect for them for still going there and trying to help.


----------



## Lance Thrustgood (Aug 3, 2014)

What I'm wondering is who exactly has the authority to bring someone back into the United States with this extremely deadly contagious disease? In other words, who exactly signed off on this? 

Sorry but this is the plot for like buttloads of movies.


----------



## Tyler (Aug 3, 2014)

Im no conspiracy theorist, but if it was planned then i could see it being one way for population control. But thats a whole different story


----------



## spilla (Aug 3, 2014)

Tyler said:


> Im no conspiracy theorist, but if it was planned then i could see it being one way for population control. But thats a whole different story




Where is Jessica Hyde?


----------



## Explorer (Aug 3, 2014)

Years ago when I was working on the NIH campus in Bethesda, a friend who is an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins told me that a primate lab, with enclosures for infected and healthy monkeys facing away from each other but with open space between them, had a healthy primate become infected. 

She let me spit out rapidfire questions for about a minute before she told me that they had found the method of transmission, and it wasn't airborne. She laughed about my reaction, and told me that she had the exact same reaction when someone had first called her... and that's why she called me. *grrrrrr...*

It's scary how rumors and fear are keeping people away from help. People go to hospitals and don't come back, so others think that doing to a hospital will kill you. They want to take your recently deceased loved ones and burn them or dispose of them in a way which doesn't love them and wash them as the family members should, so more infections from the bodies. Health care workers are threatened and attacked by suspicious villagers. It's a mess.


----------



## DocBach (Aug 4, 2014)

Ebola Case Suspected at Mt Sinai Hospital in New York City - TIME

suspected case of Ebola in NY, not confirmed


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Aug 4, 2014)

Burn them all at the stake!!!! This is witchcraft!!!!


----------



## asher (Aug 4, 2014)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Burn them all at the stake!!!! This is witchcraft!!!!


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Aug 4, 2014)

^^^ I'm surprised at least one old republican hasn't said that .


----------



## wat (Aug 6, 2014)

Everyone at work is coughing violently


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 6, 2014)

wat said:


> Everyone at work is coughing violently




There is an upper respiratory thing going around like crazy, actually. I picked it up driving from FL to PA and passed it on to my girlfriend and her mom. My girlfriend started coughing so bad I had to take her to the ER. We're all fine now.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 6, 2014)

Over the past few years, we've had people show up with terrible coughs. We have a policy of making them go home, because otherwise it's unfair to those who are healthy and who might have to use sick leave *and* vacation if they don't have sick, and all because of unnecessary exposure. Just like that joke.

What's worse than half your employees calling out sick?

Half your employees showing up at work sick.


----------



## groverj3 (Aug 7, 2014)

DocBach said:


> Ebola Case Suspected at Mt Sinai Hospital in New York City - TIME
> 
> suspected case of Ebola in NY, not confirmed



Confirmed to not be Ebola.

The panic over this is not warranted. Ebola needs VERY unsanitary conditions to spread. It cannot be spread easily person to person like influenza. It requires direct contact with blood or other bodily fluids and the virus itself is pretty fragile outside a host.


----------



## Promit (Aug 7, 2014)

Patient Zero Kicking Back In 38C With Episode Of


----------



## Mike (Aug 7, 2014)

I still call bs on it not being airborne. Here's an older transmission study they did back in 2012: From Pigs to Monkeys, Ebola Goes Airborne | HealthMap

Numbers keep changing, but last I read it was like 932 people infected in West Africa. I understand living conditions are nothing like most of the US (with the exception of Detroit maybe) But these people aren't all boinking, sharing needles, doing blood oaths, and spitting in each others mouths (yeah that was gross I'm sorry)

These people may live in poor conditions, but they're not stupid. If someone is showing signs of this disease then people are avoiding contact with them, yet the infection is still spreading. I really think they need to do more research into the transmission part of it. Perhaps droplets expelled when one coughs, or even microscopic matter related to fecal material is helping spread this.

Or I'm just an ignorant idiot.


----------



## broj15 (Aug 7, 2014)

Explorer said:


> Years ago when I was working on the NIH campus in Bethesda, a friend who is an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins told me that a primate lab, with enclosures for infected and healthy monkeys facing away from each other but with open space between them, had a healthy primate become infected.
> 
> She let me spit out rapidfire questions for about a minute before she told me that they had found the method of transmission, and it wasn't airborne. She laughed about my reaction, and told me that she had the exact same reaction when someone had first called her... and that's why she called me. *grrrrrr...*
> 
> It's scary how rumors and fear are keeping people away from help. People go to hospitals and don't come back, so others think that doing to a hospital will kill you. They want to take your recently deceased loved ones and burn them or dispose of them in a way which doesn't love them and wash them as the family members should, so more infections from the bodies. Health care workers are threatened and attacked by suspicious villagers. It's a mess.



She was probably talking about the lab that was the main subject of the book "The Hot Zone"&#8230; which honestly scared the shit out of me. Ebola is nothing to fvck with


----------



## flint757 (Aug 7, 2014)

Mike said:


> I still call bs on it not being airborne. Here's an older transmission study they did back in 2012: From Pigs to Monkeys, Ebola Goes Airborne | HealthMap
> 
> Numbers keep changing, but last I read it was like 932 people infected in West Africa. I understand living conditions are nothing like most of the US (with the exception of Detroit maybe) But these people aren't all boinking, sharing needles, doing blood oaths, and spitting in each others mouths (yeah that was gross I'm sorry)
> 
> ...



To my very limited knowledge I imagine it transfers when people are caring for the ill and during burial rituals.


----------



## asher (Aug 7, 2014)

Since I believe it can be transmitted through nearly any bodily fluid... I believe that includes sweat.

Yeah.


----------



## groverj3 (Aug 8, 2014)

asher said:


> Since I believe it can be transmitted through nearly any bodily fluid... I believe that includes sweat.
> 
> Yeah.



I'm not sure about that, but mere contact with sweat I doubt would be enough. I'd think you'd need to ingest it, get it in a cut, something like that. It takes a surprisingly high number of viral particles to actually get someone infected with anything. Ebola virus is not terribly infectious, though it is incredibly deadly. At least that's what I've heard/read, and what I remember from an immunology class I took a few years back (in-between discovering craft breweries in the area ).

I'm not an expert in epidemiology/virology by any means though.


----------



## groverj3 (Aug 8, 2014)

It is not transmittable through coughing or sneezing, just FYI! At least that's the current state of knowledge regarding its transmission.


----------



## DocBach (Aug 8, 2014)

*http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/h5n1/2014/08/first-mexican-ebola-case-confirmed.html*


----------



## SD83 (Aug 8, 2014)

Aaaaand it's gone.
H5N1: Mexico: Ebola report is false


----------



## DocBach (Aug 8, 2014)

damn, he took it down before I could link the republican congressmen demanding the border be closed because of ebola and a working gif of the president of madagascar shutting down everything.


----------



## asher (Aug 8, 2014)

I&#8217;m the head nurse at Emory. This is why we wanted to bring the Ebola patients to the U.S. - The Washington Post


----------



## wankerness (Aug 8, 2014)

Sorry about the profanity, I don't have photoshop on here  I thought it was funny and accurate.


----------



## ElRay (Aug 8, 2014)

And the religious mythology-is-real nuts are at it already:

Christian Radio Host: Ebola Could Cure America&#8217;s Atheism Problem​
Basically ignoring the fact that every infected U.S. citizen is a Christian Missionary. I guess they're not "True Christians" in Rick Wiles' mind.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 9, 2014)

Wait... the Christians are being struck down to teach someone a lesson... and it's a lesson to everyone else?

How could that possibly be a message to non-Christians in any way except, "Stay away from Christians!"?


----------



## Noxon (Aug 9, 2014)

Nothing like watching god smite his own followers... That shit is quality entertainment!


----------



## SD83 (Aug 9, 2014)

Noxon said:


> Nothing like watching god smite his own followers... That shit is quality entertainment!



They'll find a way to believe that God is just testing the strength of their believe. Especially the Jewish/Christian/Islamic God seems to have a sick sense of humor, making sure his followers are worthy of eternal paradies by making them suffer. You'll most likely find the strongest religious belief in those who suffer the most...
As someone who's grown up in a (very) moderate christian family, I do not understand why those kind of people can call themselves Christians. You can not preach hate in the name of Jesus. Against no one. Ever.
Again, the people who go there to help are, to me, heroes. They did not obey any "order" from a superior to go there. It's entirely their choice, they know there is a good chance of dying, and they also know that their names will not be remembered by any outside their family. As far as I know, there is no Memorial Day for them. A shame, kind of.
(I hope that still makes sense when I wake up. Otherwise I'll try to avoid writing this late  )


----------



## asher (Aug 12, 2014)

metalgary said:


> are we learning a lesson here..



and what is that supposed to be?


----------



## crg123 (Aug 12, 2014)

ElRay said:


> And the religious mythology-is-real nuts are at it already:
> 
> Christian Radio Host: Ebola Could Cure America&#8217;s Atheism Problem​



Hahaha a quote from the nutbag


> You better make sure you have the *Blood of JESUS* on you. You better make sure you've been marked!



Hope he doesn't have ebola.... too far? Nope haha.


----------



## DocBach (Aug 12, 2014)

metalgary said:


> are we learning a lesson here..



That understanding of nutrition, sanitary conditions, and universal precautions in health care is the number one prevention of outbreaks of diseases?

Wash your hands! Eat fruits and vegetables!


----------



## wheresthefbomb (Aug 12, 2014)

a nice plague could do this world some good


----------



## Explorer (Aug 12, 2014)

Don't worry.

Mom's gonna fix it all soon.

Mom's comin' 'round to put it back the way it oughta be.


----------



## SD83 (Oct 1, 2014)

Kinda necrobump, but this might be kinda relevant:
CDC confirms first diagnosed case of Ebola virus in U.S. - CBS News
Unlikely that it will spread there, but if I try to imagine a case confirmed in my hometown, that would feel weird...
I'm rather suprised there is no major outbreak in cities like Lagos or in India, that would probably not end well.


----------



## asher (Oct 1, 2014)

SD83 said:


> Kinda necrobump, but this might be kinda relevant:
> CDC confirms first diagnosed case of Ebola virus in U.S. - CBS News
> Unlikely that it will spread there, but if I try to imagine a case confirmed in my hometown, that would feel weird...
> I'm rather suprised there is no major outbreak in cities like Lagos or in India, that would probably not end well.



Well... that's because they actually managed to contain it. And maintained a 60% cure rate!

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/01/h...ears-to-be-over.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

And the story of a survivor of said outbreak, who was one of the first medical staff responding to the guy who flew out:

Dr. Ada Igonoh: How Patrick Sawyer gave me Ebola&#8230; and how I survived | TheCable


----------



## SD83 (Oct 1, 2014)

Hadn't heard of that, that's rather good news, and a bit unexpected.


----------



## Vhyle (Oct 4, 2014)

And now the US military (myself included) are being sent to Africa to help curb the spread of Ebola in west Africa. I got word of it not too long ago, and now we've been ramping up to head out the door soon.


----------



## asher (Oct 4, 2014)

Best of luck. Stay safe.


----------



## tacotiklah (Oct 4, 2014)

I'm not at all concerned about this. Ebola just doesn't have the means to spread rapidly. I highly doubt it is even airborne. My sympathies do go out to those afflicted with it (it's a pretty nasty disease with an affinity for the liver and kidneys), but there's all kinds of needless fearmongering being driven by this. 
They did this crap with "teh turrurists goan git u" from 9/11 all the way up to at least 2003 (though one could argue they kept doing it for far longer than that). It's just a means to distract people from shit that's going on in the world. 

Stay safe out there Kyle!


----------



## Choop (Oct 6, 2014)

1st case of contracting Ebola outside of Africa - CNN.com

Maybe any unnecessary travel to Africa should just stop for a while. That might be good.


----------



## asher (Oct 8, 2014)

Thomas Duncan, the man with it in Dallas, has died.

BBC News - US Ebola patient Thomas Duncan dies


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 8, 2014)

5 Reasons America Can Calm the F#@% Down About Ebola | Cracked.com


----------



## Grindspine (Oct 8, 2014)

60% cure rate (40% death) vs the naturally occurring 10-60% recovery? This "cure" might not be statistically significant.


----------



## Grindspine (Oct 8, 2014)

Why do two white Americans get the Ebola serum while hundreds of Africans die? - The Washington Post

Screw the people getting Zmapp. I feel sorry for the mice giving up their antibodies (without consent).


----------



## mr_rainmaker (Oct 9, 2014)




----------



## wat (Oct 9, 2014)

Imagine if it was 2005 and the first US Ebola case had been someone who, upon arriving back in the states, immediately went to the sight of hurricane katrina and began helping out there? How fukking scary is that? 

The prospect this something like this could happen in the same time and place as a natural disaster. We'd be so fukked.


----------



## wankerness (Oct 9, 2014)




----------



## Choop (Oct 9, 2014)

Obviously the panic is bigger than the actual threat, but I still feel like anybody who goes to Africa right now where it could wait are just being irresponsible. If a person were to get infected and return, they could start showing symptoms but not make it to the doctor before having potentially coughed and touched door knobs or practically anything else, and boom: it's spread to anybody who came into contact with their saliva. It isn't highly contagious due to the nature of how it's transmitted, but it's highly infectious.

How Ebola Can Still Be Very Infectious (Without Being Very Contagious)

Again, I'm not saying it's as bad as the news wants you to think, but stuff like that (example that I quickly made up) could easily happen, especially here where people will go out and about even when they're sick.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 9, 2014)

Shutting down airports isn't a rational response considering the statistical likelihood of an 'outbreak' and the major financial problems an idea like that would cause.


----------



## Choop (Oct 9, 2014)

flint757 said:


> Shutting down airports isn't a rational response considering the statistical likelihood of an 'outbreak' and the major financial problems an idea like that would cause.



I didn't say anything about shutting down airports. Maybe closer examination of people who have traveled from Africa would be good though.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 9, 2014)

Yeah that probably wouldn't be a bad idea. You have to get shots to even go there so it definitely isn't unreasonable.


----------



## asher (Oct 9, 2014)

It's somewhat amazing but also interesting that nobody on Duncan's plane got sick.


----------



## Choop (Oct 9, 2014)

He would have to have been exhibiting symptoms for it to have been contagious at that time. He apparently started having symptoms about five days after returning to the US, at least that's when he went to the hospital.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 11, 2014)

wankerness said:


>


 
This is obviously satire; first, you CAN get Ebola from food -- tainted bushmeat from infected animals is one of the vectors of contracting the disease.

Secondly, there are several well documented cases of Beast War Transformers being afflicted by ebola strains (Reston I believe). The CDC is in active cover-up mode trying to make you think you're safe if you're a transformer, and thats simply not the truth.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 12, 2014)

Breaking: Health care worker at Dallas' Presbyterian Hospital tests positive for Ebola | Dallas Morning News

Jokes aside, a health worker from the hospital that treated Thomas Duncan just reported positive for ebola on the news.


----------



## wheresthefbomb (Oct 12, 2014)

oh my god you guys it's the ebolaz

it's gonna kill us all! kiss your asses goodbye


----------



## MemphisHawk (Oct 15, 2014)

and now a second worker at the hospital tests positive.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 15, 2014)

Meanwhile, in Korea...







How one bar in Korea tried to prevent Ebola by banning &#8216;Africans&#8217; | Chase the Dot


----------



## JoshuaVonFlash (Oct 15, 2014)

10 Reasons The Ebola Crisis Isn't The End Of The World - Listverse


----------



## DocBach (Oct 15, 2014)

MemphisHawk said:


> and now a second worker at the hospital tests positive.



And she decided that the fever she caught before flying on Frontier Airlines was probably from the food she ate the night prior, couldn't be from the knee deep in bloody diarrhea she was dealing with when she cared for Mr. Duncan.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 15, 2014)

When it comes to Ebola, the disease isn't the problem it's monumentally stupid and/or ignorant people. In Africa it's spreading because of fear, ignorance and poor living conditions. In the states it is spreading (albeit a turtle in the infectious disease spreading race) because of pure stupidity. 

She waited two days to get checked out fully knowing she had been around someone who had Ebola and came in to contact with other people in the process. Dumb.

Breaching protocol and doing something you shouldn't where the CDC isn't aware they need to be on alert for said individual to get disease. Dumb.


For your average Joe this still means nothing though. Unless you are a health worker in Dallas or around a health worker who just flew in from Africa you're not in any danger of contracting Ebola. That's where all the facebook crap about 'we need to do something', 'shutdown the airports', etc. are really grinding my gears. They have apparently seen the movie Outbreak one too many times and are just completely unaware of the everyday risks they already take and that Ebola isn't really one of them for your typical individual. You're more likely to get lyme disease, meningitis, the flu, pneumonia, hell even AIDS (and numerous other potentially lethal illnesses) before you're likely to get Ebola and we go on living our lives just fine with those risks being present. Meningitis, the flu and pneumonia are actually easier to get as they don't even require direct contact. Lyme disease only requires you be an outdoorsy person and AIDS is contracted in about the same sense as Ebola (bodily fluids) yet people aren't in a panic over that and there are a lot more HIV positive folks out there than people positive for Ebola. Someone can even be HIV positive for years before knowing they have it making it that much more likely for someone else to get it, but people are in a panic over this BS.

That being said, if you work in the hospital that has an Ebola patient in it, and especially if you were one of the health workers to do services for the Ebola patient, you are absolutely at risk and should take precautions. If you feel sick after working a long shift around a highly dangerous disease you go to the ....ing doctor. Dumb.

The only precaution that needs to be taken is proper screening of people coming in and out of that hospital, especially of people who come into contact with an Ebola patient. The only people who have contracted the disease at this point are people who have been knee deep in it thus far. There's still zero reason to panic. People love panicking though. 


On another note, Duncan told the hospital he had been to Africa, but did he tell them he had been in contact with Ebola patients or was he not aware that he was?


----------



## Choop (Oct 15, 2014)

Apparently Duncan had helped a bleeding woman in Africa who he believed to have been having a miscarriage prior to his return, and she tested positive for Ebola after he had already left. I dunno if he actually didn't at all suspect the possibility of that woman having Ebola, but I think I would have at least been open to that idea given the situation in Africa...whatever.

I hope US hospitals learn from what happened in Dallas quickly. By now nurses in the US should all understand the risks of infection even if they haven't received proper training to handle an Ebola patient.


----------



## Grief (Oct 15, 2014)

Choop said:


> I hope US hospitals learn from what happened in Dallas quickly. By now nurses in the US should all understand the risks of infection even if they haven't received proper training to handle an Ebola patient.



I think its the bio containment facilities these patients require, not hospitals. 

A local story:

Ebola cases shouldn't be treated in N.J., nurses group says | NJ.com


----------



## Dog Boy (Oct 15, 2014)

DocBach said:


> And she decided that the fever she caught before flying on Frontier Airlines was probably from the food she ate the night prior, couldn't be from the knee deep in bloody diarrhea she was dealing with when she cared for Mr. Duncan.


 
This woman was hired as a Health Professional.


----------



## tacotiklah (Oct 15, 2014)

You know what would be nice? If people actually read up on the disease and what the risks of transmission are before they do the whole chicken little, sky is falling thing. It just makes them look like a stampeding herd, devoid of any rationality.

There's a google search engine available for a reason. Henry Mayo and WebMD are great ways to learn more about a disease.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 15, 2014)

^Speaking of that...

_*Fox News *_had the biggest voice of reason I've seen so far in the media, relating to Ebola. Although, to be fair, it was Shep Smith. He's probably the most progressive and level-headed anchor I've seen on any of the "big" 24-hour news channels, although I will admit I rarely watch them so I don't know of anyone else. 

Shepard Smith: 'Do Not Listen To The Hysterical Voices' In The Media About Ebola


----------



## crg123 (Oct 15, 2014)

^ Wow. I really wish there was more people like that on the news (I also share your shock its from Fox ). I mean it's kind of sad it is that I'm shocked a reporter is actually doing his job and trying to calm people down rather than create panic to get ratings. He did a great job of cutting through the bullshit for people. Hopefully they listen to him. Its dangerous when the media causes so much distrust in doctors and government agencies during serious matters. He's right that at this point its the boy who cried wolf. Eventually people will just think "oh its just media hype" when there is a serious matter.

Its crazy their idiocy actually tanked the stock market like that. They need to learn that creating panic like this is unhealthy.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 15, 2014)

They know, they just don't care. It's all about the Benjamins to them and the collateral damage they cause means nothing. Major news networks are only bringing us down.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 16, 2014)

If you aren't shitting your pants over this whole ebola business










maybe you don't have ebola


----------



## ZeroTolerance94 (Oct 16, 2014)

I sneezed like three times at work today...

I must have Ebola.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

Seriously though.... the way that we're letting people who are suppose to be under observation go on cruises and go about their business like they don't have the disease is terrible practice; until they've gone 30 days at least post exposure they should be kept away from other people. We might not have a serious problem yet, but if we keep treating this disease that has a 70-90% mortality rate like the Benny Hill Show we easily could.

For those who want to compare it to AIDS -- it's a terrible, wrong comparison, you have to have sex with someone who has AIDS to contract it. You get virons from someone shedding a virus, and ebola virons are shed in violent manners, very frequently when the sick are most contagious. We've seen outbreaks in Africa burn itself out pretty quickly_, because it kills off entire villages that are isolated. _

We aren't isolated like that. Like our smart nurses show, even when we're sick and might be harboring this terrible disease, we have no problems travelling thousands of miles_, potentially shedding virons on whatever surface we touch while contagious. _

Touch a contaminated surface and eat something or rub your eyes or some small seemingly harmless gesture and guess what? You've exposed yourself to a disease in which experts say only 5-10 virons are necessary to kill you in an average of eight days. This is scary shit if it isn't handled right.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Oct 17, 2014)

Anyone remember how everyone freaked out about "Swine Flu" back in '08?... Yeah, same shit... Calm yo tits, America.

I'm starting to think that this "Ebola scale" and everyone being diagnosed at conspicuous times, in a conspicuous order, and then all being brought to the States DESPITE government saying "no we aren't allowing any people stricken with Ebola in our borders" is just a way of controlling the population out of fear.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> Anyone remember how everyone freaked out about "Swine Flu" back in '08?... Yeah, same shit... Calm yo tits, America.
> 
> I'm starting to think that this "Ebola scale" and everyone being diagnosed at conspicuous times, in a conspicuous order, and then all being brought to the States DESPITE government saying "no we aren't allowing any people stricken with Ebola in our borders" is just a way of controlling the population out of fear.


 
The difference between swine flu and ebola is swine flu was a hypothetical situation. You didn't have entire villages being eradicated from it like you do with Ebola Zaire. 

If you don't think that an unchecked ebola outbreak won't be terribly damaging to our way of life consider:

what happens when people really do have ebola and decide that the 21 day observation doesn't really apply to them?

what happens when hospitals close down because every patient with a fever is treated like an ebola patient and they go broke?

what happens when grocery stores don't have food because people are afraid to go to work?

what happens when the stock markets and futures take a dump because of fears of ebola on the economy? 


That's beyond the fact that ebola is an incredibly virulent disease with terrible survival rates which kills you in some of the most horrific ways imaginable... 

...It's hardly a different strain of chest cough like swine flu is. We have new strains of the flu that we can adapt to pretty easily as our bodies have similar proteins from the other seasonal flu's we've had. 

Not many of us have had exposure to hemmoragic fevers and developed similar resistances.


----------



## Tyler (Oct 17, 2014)

A friend who is overseas that is head of the heath departments over there was asking if everything was going alright over here, surprised that we said everything seems fine. He was almost shocked because of the fact he said the death toll was estimated to be around a million by January in the US.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 17, 2014)

Lol. There haven't even been ten thousand deaths _in Africa_ so far, let alone a million. Call me skeptical that anyone who knows anything about the situation would actually suspect the toll would reach a million in the US in less than three months. That'd be quite the jump from the whopping FOUR ebola deaths outside of Africa thus far.


----------



## mr_rainmaker (Oct 17, 2014)

yea kinda not happy some family members might be sent over...


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 17, 2014)

That's far from all they'll be doing over there.


----------



## asher (Oct 17, 2014)

You know, because it's either one or the other, and the National Guard's job to guard that border, not to mention the questionable at best assumption that the border must be vigorously guarded in the first place...


----------



## tedtan (Oct 17, 2014)

tacotiklah said:


> It just makes them look like a stampeding herd, devoid of any rationality.



It's not just the appearance of heard mentality. Many people actually function that way in real life (far too many).


----------



## Randy (Oct 17, 2014)

mr_rainmaker said:


> yea kinda not happy some family members might be sent over...



Inflammatory much?

That's very different than the view of the border I'm familiar with:


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Oct 17, 2014)

Mexican immigrants looking for jobs aren't as dangerous as a virus that more or less liquifies your insides in a matter of days. I'm glad they're using our military for something that will hopefully keep us safer.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

mr_rainmaker said:


> yea kinda not happy some family members might be sent over...



3,000 National Guardsman is a lot if they're all coming from one state. That's the equivalent of a Brigade Combat Team, which most states have their ARNG organized in, leaving that state with less man power to mobilize in the event of an emergency/disaster. 

Likely, any deploying reserve/NG component soldiers will be of very specific military occupational specialties composing smaller units from around the country, many of which who are experts in their trade due to performing their jobs in civilian life while not in uniform. 

National guard troops not deploying overseas could probably be mobilized here at home to build similar facilities to place people in temporary isolation to prevent incidents like exposed healthcare workers with positive diagnosis of ebola from flying across the country to try on dresses while symptomatic for three hours before flying back, possibly exposing thousands, from occuring.

That said, the argument for closing the border is the same as closing off air travel -- the fear is if someone brought ebola to a densely populated urban center with poor sanitation conditions like Mexico City, it could spread rampantly. Believing better medical care or sanctuary from ebola to be the United States, potentially infected carriers of the disease might try crossing an unsecure area of the border and bring more instances of the disease into the US.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 17, 2014)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> That's far from all they'll be doing over there.



Even if that was the only reason, the disease is dangerous and containment sites have been overrun by thieves and family members trying to get their family back from quarantines. It is definitely needed. That being said, that is definitely not the only reason they are there and those two scenarios really aren't relevant to each other or equatable.


----------



## Randy (Oct 17, 2014)

DocBach said:


> That said, the argument for closing the border is the same as closing off air travel -- the fear is if someone brought ebola to a densely populated urban center with poor sanitation conditions like Mexico City, it could spread rampantly. Believing better medical care or sanctuary from ebola to be the United States, potentially infected carriers of the disease might try crossing an unsecure area of the border and bring more instances of the disease into the US.



While I agree, if the border crossing is anything like the version I posted, that's a bit of exercise for a person with rapidly liquifying insides; especially the long trek through the desert dodging coyotes (both the animal type and the people type) and ducking drug cartel patrols. Barring a 'Cabin Fever' type Alex Jones wet-dream scenario, I don't see much risk there.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

Randy said:


> While I agree, if the border crossing is anything like the version I posted, that's a bit of exercise for a person with rapidly liquifying insides; especially the long trek through the desert dodging coyotes (both the animal type and the people type) and ducking drug cartel patrols. Barring a 'Cabin Fever' type Alex Jones wet-dream scenario, I don't see much risk there.



Crossing the border at most points is pretty physically demanding; much more so when you're, you know, literally crapping out the endometrial layer of your insides.


----------



## tedtan (Oct 17, 2014)

Adam Of Angels said:


> Mexican immigrants looking for jobs aren't as dangerous as a virus that more or less liquifies your insides in a matter of days.



This isn't directed to you specifically Adam, it's general commentary on your quote above.

At the risk of stating the obvious, most Mexican immigrants (legal and otherwise) are normal people looking for a better life. Sure a few members of gangs and drug cartel get through, too, some of whom are dangerous, but they're the minority. Most are good people. And the funny thing is, even the most conservative republicans who talk the talk about illegal immigrants don't tend to walk the walk. In fact, most have them on their payroll as nannies, maids, chefs, landscapers, contractors to repair their houses, etc. Hell, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it were determined that 20% of the people in the greater Houston area are illegal Mexican immigrants (that's in addition to the ~35% of people in the greater Houston area who are either direct Mexican immigrants themselves or have a Mexican heritage).

The only issue I have is that there should be some means of allowing them legal access to the country via specific work type visas (separate from the H1B visas). This would not only make things safer and easier for them (not having to sneak into the country illegally), but would also provide a means for them to pay taxes and have health care coverage so they are contributing to the costs of the services they use rather than getting a free ride. And to stay on topic (like that ever happens around here ), they could be tested for contagious diseases like Ebola as part of this process.


----------



## Tyler (Oct 17, 2014)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Lol. There haven't even been ten thousand deaths _in Africa_ so far, let alone a million. Call me skeptical that anyone who knows anything about the situation would actually suspect the toll would reach a million in the US in less than three months. That'd be quite the jump from the whopping FOUR ebola deaths outside of Africa thus far.



Exactly what I was thinking. Honestly I dont even think there will be even 500 by then, or months after that.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Oct 17, 2014)

Tyler said:


> Exactly what I was thinking. Honestly I dont even think there will be even 500 by then, or months after that.




Realistically, if there has been 100 ebola casualties in the US by January, we will have witnessed surprising, unlikely, and catastrophic failures on the part of the medical community. I know it's frightening, specifically because of how awful Ebola really is, but it's just not a casually contracted disease.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

Adam Of Angels said:


> Realistically, if there has been 100 ebola casualties in the US by January, we will have witnessed surprising, unlikely, and catastrophic failures on the part of the medical community. I know it's frightening, specifically because of how awful Ebola really is, but it's just not a casually contracted disease.



It isn't casually spread in the most early stages, however it has a great way of infecting people treating it. Unless we have some kind of rapid response team specifically trained and equipped to handle flare ups and contain them before people can decide to go on a cruise or take a flight across the country, first responders who lack the proper PPE are a great way for people, especially health care workers, to become afraid.

Every single person I work with (I am a licensed practical nurse going to school to become an RN) and go to school with has said they would drop everything and get the hell out of dodge if their job had an ebola case. Its a disease that loves to infect caregivers and health care workers. We don't have any PPE rated for the level 4 work Ebola guidelines describe. 

What happens when nobody wants to come to work because they're scared?

While the actual disease itself is pretty scary, and yes, hard to catch for the most part unless you are in proximity to someone in the later stages of the disease (which to be honest is pretty quick after the onset of symptoms, if someone is vomiting, bleeding, or crapping they're shedding thousands of viruses everywhere and highly contagious), the potential effects beyond physical symptoms to our economy and society shouldn't be scoffed at.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 17, 2014)

It's been 22 days (9/26 he went to the hospital for the first time) since Duncan was reported to have symptoms, and only two days before the incubation window is over and those who are being monitored are off of being monitored. 

I don't know about you guys, but it seems like anyone he could have transmitted to has been just about cleared, with a small chance of something happeneing within 48 hours. 

That's a good thing. 

Now it's on these nurses. They tested positive on 10/12 and 10/14, so lets see what happens between now and the first week in November.



DocBach said:


> It isn't casually spread in the most early stages, however it has a great way of infecting people treating it. Unless we have some kind of rapid response team specifically trained and equipped to handle flare ups and contain them before people can decide to go on a cruise or take a flight across the country, first responders who lack the proper PPE are a great way for people, especially health care workers, to become afraid.
> 
> Every single person I work with (I am a licensed practical nurse going to school to become an RN) and go to school with has said they would drop everything and get the hell out of dodge if their job had an ebola case. Its a disease that loves to infect caregivers and health care workers. We don't have any PPE rated for the level 4 work Ebola guidelines describe.
> 
> ...


 
Don't take this the wrong way, but isn't the chance of infection from a patient something that healthcare workers sign up for? If not Ebola specifically but any one of a number of pretty terrible illnesses. 

I'm a HazMat first responder. Even with full level A PPE there's never a promise that I'll be totally safe, but I do it any way because I want to make sure my coworkers are safe, its part of the job description. Fire fighters and police deal with the same thing. Bunker gear and bullet proof vests offer protection, but not enough to defeat all risk.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> It's been 22 days (9/26 he went to the hospital for the first time) since Duncan was reported to have symptoms, and only two days before the incubation window is over and those who are being monitored are off of being monitored.
> 
> I don't know about you guys, but it seems like anyone he could have transmitted to has been just about cleared, with a small chance of something happeneing within 48 hours.
> 
> ...



Yep, initial case is more or less burned out, but has successfully infected the 2 other victims, which places his case in line with the infection rate the WHO says the virus has. The problems really start to arise if the two he infected go on to infect two, so on and so forth unless we have a decisive response.

I'm thinking of this first case as sort of our Pearl Harbor -- we were caught off guard by the normalcy bias thinking that it hasn't happened here, so it can't happen here (even though we know the outbreak has been going on for almost a year like the Japanese campaigns in Manchuria prior to Pearl Harbor) and now we've got to scramble to get our act together to kick this things ass. 

The problem, is unlike WWII, we're incredibly sensitive to political correctness. Anybody who had contact with Duncan should have been placed in watched isolation for 30 days. Now we're trying to find potentially hundreds of people who sat near Ambola on her plane, so we can tell them to stay put while they nod, say sure, then decide their bored so they'll go on a cruise or whatever -- that vomiting episode they had last night was probably just Del Taco, after all.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Don't take this the wrong way, but isn't the chance of infection from a patient something that healthcare workers sign up for? If not Ebola specifically but any one of a number of pretty terrible illnesses.
> 
> I'm a HazMat first responder. Even with full level A PPE there's never a promise that I'll be totally safe, but I do it any way because I want to make sure my coworkers are safe, its part of the job description. Fire fighters and police deal with the same thing. Bunker gear and bullet proof vests offer protection, but not enough to defeat all risk.



No, most health care workers aren't in the job field to deal with ebola, they go into the field because it pays well. They aren't contracted, required or pressed into service -- if ebola hits town many are likely to find a job as a walmart greeter a lot more appealing than being on the front lines of a virulent outbreak.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 17, 2014)

DocBach said:


> Yep, initial case is more or less burned out, but has successfully infected the 2 other victims, which places his case in line with the infection rate the WHO says the virus has. The problems really start to arise if the two he infected go on to infect two, so on and so forth unless we have a decisive response.
> 
> I'm thinking of this first case as sort of our Pearl Harbor -- we were caught off guard by the normalcy bias thinking that it hasn't happened here, so it can't happen here (even though we know the outbreak has been going on for almost a year like the Japanese campaigns in Manchuria prior to Pearl Harbor) and now we've got to scramble to get our act together to kick this things ass.
> 
> The problem, is unlike WWII, we're incredibly sensitive to political correctness. Anybody who had contact with Duncan should have been placed in watched isolation for 30 days. Now we're trying to find potentially hundreds of people who sat near Ambola on her plane, so we can tell them to stay put while they nod, say sure, then decide their bored so they'll go on a cruise or whatever -- that vomiting episode they had last night was probably just Del Taco, after all.


 
I guess what I'm getting at is that even though Duncan was around a lot of people, heck he was sent home for two days before coming back to the hospital, that maybe this thing isn't as transmitable as some may think. 

I'm not saying we don't need to step up precautions, but maybe this isn't the doomsday that some are making it out to be. 

I mean, the two he infected had much more contact with him than most people have with others they don't casually know.



DocBach said:


> No, most health care workers aren't in the job field to deal with ebola, they go into the field because it pays well. They aren't contracted, required or pressed into service -- if ebola hits town many are likely to find a job as a walmart greeter a lot more appealing than being on the front lines of a virulent outbreak.


 
I'm not in the job field to die of NH3 exposure, cops aren't in the field to get shot, and firefighters aren't in the field to burn to death. I make beer, cops deal with tons of petty crime, and I've worked with more firefighters who have extricated large people who had fallen down than fight actual fires. 

I think this says a lot about health care workers if what you're saying is true. 

I'm a medical first responder too and I had to take several classes on the nasty stuff I can catch for people, did all the nurses sleep through those?


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Oct 17, 2014)

From what I understand (and this is only after reading about it way too much, not schooling or first hand lab studies), the virus is only present in saliva during late/severe stages of infection, and has pretty much almost never been detected in sweat, so the chances of widespread outbreak are extremely low. Not impossible, but it would actually be an odd set of circumstances that would lead to such a doomsday scenario. People dying of ebola (the ones who are very contagious) are usually not even capable of getting up on their feet and moving amongst people, so you would have to go to them to contract the disease, or come near some recently excreted bodily fluid that somebody else moved near you.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I guess what I'm getting at is that even though Duncan was around a lot of people, heck he was sent home for two days before coming back to the hospital, that maybe this thing isn't as transmitable as some may think.
> 
> I'm not saying we don't need to step up precautions, but maybe this isn't the doomsday that some are making it out to be.
> 
> I mean, the two he infected had much more contact with him than most people have with others they don't casually know.



It all depends on how well we manage it. A lot of people in survival mode will lie about their symptoms, or be in plain denial about the severity of their situation, might decide that going to the hospital is crazy since there isn't any way they could have that disease. One thing that they found out is ebola does live outside of a host for a substantial period of time. Like any other virus, touching something someone has shed viron on and then touching something like your eye or food could transmit the virus to a new host.

I'm not saying everyone needs to go out and buy a level 4 biohazard suit or live in the deep woods for six months until an all clear signal is given, but it is prudent to not brush this off and recognize it as potentially being a crisis for our system which could affect our way of life in many adverse ways.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I'm not in the job field to die of NH3 exposure, cops aren't in the field to get shot, and firefighters aren't in the field to burn to death. I make beer, cops deal with tons of petty crime, and I've worked with more firefighters who have extricated large people who had fallen down than fight actual fires.
> 
> I think this says a lot about health care workers if what you're saying is true.
> 
> I'm a medical first responder too and I had to take several classes on the nasty stuff I can catch for people, did all the nurses sleep through those?



I would say there's probably a large difference in outlook and willingness to place oneself into danger between the kind of person who becomes a firefighter and the kind of person who becomes a nurse, yes.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 17, 2014)

DocBach said:


> I would say there's probably a large difference in outlook and willingness to place oneself into danger between the kind of person who becomes a firefighter and the kind of person who becomes a nurse, yes.


 
I don't know, I guess I was just really naive to think that someone who chooses to be around the sick, diseased, and possibly dangerous were more altruistic.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 17, 2014)

Altruism aside, people in the health care community are scared for their lives, and are scared they might bring this terrible disease home to their families, to their children. 

If you look at how ebola is transmitted, and its history of disproportionately decimating the population of the health care workers trying to fight it, I wouldn't say that it's completely unjustified. 

That's one of the reasons why this needs to be handled by the "we're not ....ing around" crew from specifically trained groups able to handle this sort of thing like USAMRIID or the CDC... Your average first line health care worker is not trained, equipped or motivated to be on the front lines of a fight with a lethal pandemic, especially one with such terrible symptomatic effects -- ebola is _scary_. 

If it's not handled properly from the top and promptly controlled, you will see mass walk-offs which will affect our ability to care for diseases and conditions way beyond ebola.


----------



## Choop (Oct 17, 2014)

Really guys, I don't think anybody here is saying it is as bad or is going to get as bad as the crazy, sensationalist news is trying to convince everyone. However DocBach is just being realistic. If more nurses were to become infected while treating new Ebola patients the situation would become a lot more scary for the general health care worker, and no one could have expected to have to deal with a horrible virus like Ebola in the US prior to the situation in Africa, if even then. 

People really shouldn't belittle the situation just because the news is being crazy over it. It's still serious, and I don't think anybody should act casually about it just because the likelihood of becoming infected for the average person is incredibly low. Do I think it's going to break out all over the US? No, not even close, but that doesn't automatically mean I think it should be treated like a joke.


----------



## mr_rainmaker (Oct 17, 2014)

Randy said:


> Inflammatory much?




Wow really???? 
projecting a bit maybe? 

I was a construction supervisior for about 15 years,I might know QUITE a few....


----------



## DocBach (Oct 18, 2014)

Choop said:


> If more nurses were to become infected while treating new Ebola patients the situation would become a lot more scary for the general health care worker, and no one could have expected to have to deal with a horrible virus like Ebola in the US prior to the situation in Africa, if even then.


 
For reference, you can check out the discussions on allnurses.com to gain a little insight into the situation from the perspective of the nursing community. Yes, there are a lot of nurses who would be bound to help people regardless of condition or disease, just like there has been caregivers to aid in every other plague or pandemic we've had throughout history. 

However, with how the first outbreak was handled here, and widely televised, a lot of care givers are very apprehensive towards their facility's ability to handle a case of ebola, and more importantly, now distrust their facility's ability to keep them safe from contracting it and potentially spreading the disease to their family and kids.


----------



## Vhyle (Oct 18, 2014)

We've been constantly briefed on Ebola and how the current pandemic came to be, very recently, since we're headed to the source very soon.

Just in case anyone is questioning it - yes, of course it's that serious. Long story short; Ebola fukks you up pretty royally. But the biggest reason why it came to be such a big deal in Liberia is because of their lack of knowledge and capabilities to really do much about it. They're very family oriented, so as their children and relatives are dying of Ebola in their homes, they're cradling them, bathing them and caring for them, with absolutely no manners of protecting themselves. And when they die, they cleanse their body on their own terms... again, with no protection. Also, a lot of people there still utilize their healing methods they've been using for centuries (shamans, alternative medicines, etc) but of course on a scientific level, that stuff doesn't work. 

And of course, they have overcrowded their existing medical facilities exponentially, because this stuff is spreading like wildfire because of the reasons I said above (and a few others). This is where we step in.

Here, in the States, it's still just as contagious, deadly and frightening as it is over there. The only difference is, we have the resources, facilities and personnel on hand to learn about it, adapt to it and learn exactly what we need to do to contain and treat it. It COULD become a huge pandemic in the States, if everyone just played completely ignorant to it and treated it like it's no big deal. But the game is different over here. The media hysteria about it is annoying, sure, but you can't deny it is an eye opener to a lot of people who didn't even know what the hell Ebola was until last week. Those are the ones you need to worry about the most.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 18, 2014)

Are you one of the lucky ones from Ft Campbell going over to Liberia?

From what I'm hearing there's been some pretty bad stuff happening lately -- according to this link World losing ground against Ebola as infections expected to soar - Channel NewsAsia, health care workers went on strike and people ended up escaping containment. We haven't seen an update recently from Liberia on cases, and from other websites I'm reading a lot of people are speculating its because of a collapse of the medical infastructure there.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> Yep, initial case is more or less burned out, but has successfully infected the 2 other victims, which places his case in line with the infection rate the WHO says the virus has. The problems really start to arise if the two he infected go on to infect two, so on and so forth unless we have a decisive response.
> 
> I'm thinking of this first case as sort of our Pearl Harbor -- we were caught off guard by the normalcy bias thinking that it hasn't happened here, so it can't happen here (even though we know the outbreak has been going on for almost a year like the Japanese campaigns in Manchuria prior to Pearl Harbor) and now we've got to scramble to get our act together to kick this things ass.
> 
> The problem, is unlike WWII, we're incredibly sensitive to political correctness. Anybody who had contact with Duncan should have been placed in watched isolation for 30 days. Now we're trying to find potentially hundreds of people who sat near Ambola on her plane, so we can tell them to stay put while they nod, say sure, then decide their bored so they'll go on a cruise or whatever -- that vomiting episode they had last night was probably just Del Taco, after all.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but does it really matter who sat next to them? So long as they didn't hold sweaty hands, share needles, play with each others waste, or spit in each others mouths, you're not going to get Ebola just because someone near you has it. The two people who got it didn't sit next to the guy on a plane. They handled his body/bodily fluids.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 18, 2014)

Chokey Chicken said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but does it really matter who sat next to them? So long as they didn't hold sweaty hands, share needles, play with each others waste, or spit in each others mouths, you're not going to get Ebola just because someone near you has it. The two people who got it didn't sit next to the guy on a plane. They handled his body/bodily fluids.


 
So the thing about viruses, is that they're really, really small and you can't see them. And the thing about the ebola virus, is that it loves to wreak absolute havoc on the cells that form blood vessels -- this means small movements that usually don't cause bleeding in healthy patients can easily cause hemorrhaging in an ebola striken one. The news is reporting that the nurse may have been more symptomatic on the plane then originally reported.

So say she went to the bathroom after cleaning up some of that famous bloody stool and didn't wash her hands effectively or maybe wiped her nose or whatever and some of her mucous had blood from those weakened blood vessels carrying the infection. If she wasn't careful, touching something with her hands means she potentially spread it on that surface, and since virons are so small, you'd never be the wiser to see it. 

They know that ebola can live outside of the body on surfaces for a pretty substantial period of time, and they know that as few as 5 viron can cause an infection that kills, so someone who gets unlucky and touches a surface contaminated by the theoretic infectious material on her hands could get the disease if they also practice poor hand hygeine (not washing frequently, touching face, mouth, eyes, etc). 

Is it hard to transmit? Yes. Impossible? No, it is very possible without having to gargle bloody ebola diarrhea if the right conditions occur.


----------



## Vhyle (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> Are you one of the lucky ones from Ft Campbell going over to Liberia?
> 
> From what I'm hearing there's been some pretty bad stuff happening lately -- according to this link World losing ground against Ebola as infections expected to soar - Channel NewsAsia, health care workers went on strike and people ended up escaping containment. We haven't seen an update recently from Liberia on cases, and from other websites I'm reading a lot of people are speculating its because of a collapse of the medical infastructure there.



Yep. I'm one of the "lucky" ones.

And yes, I totally forgot to mention about the patients escaping clinics and such, as well as attacks on the clinics. Something else to look forward to.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> didn't wash her hands effectively or maybe wiped her nose or whatever



Alright, I concede that I was silly to think healthcare workers would be okay putting themselves at some risk for the greater good, but now you're telling me they can't even wash their hands? 

I give up. 

Those African shamans are starting to look pretty good.


----------



## Vhyle (Oct 18, 2014)

Commenting on that article DocBach just posted...

People getting bitten by patients? How common is that? That's the first I've heard of that happening.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 18, 2014)

Pandemic is still a stretch. In the past at most it has killed roughly ~300 at a time (usually much less). This time it has invaded a few more countries and as such has gone up to like ~1500. That's a lot and certainly a lot more than usual, but the way this disease spreads it will likely never reach the numbers people are throwing out there to scare people. The virus's ability to kill is exactly what makes it such an easy virus to defeat. It typically kills its victim in 10 days and the last of those days aren't spent walking through time square. I nor anyone else has claimed the disease itself isn't dangerous or that you'd want to catch it. The mortality rate for the virus is really high, however, the mortality rate is usually quite a bit lower in western nations when it has spread that far in the past (so 90% is a bit disingenuous in that regard). We should be prepared, but there isn't much reason for people in the west to be panicking the amount they are. Even if there was good reason to panic, panicking is always a bad thing in time of crisis anyhow. When the uninformed get whipped up into a frenzy you get chaos. People clogging up phone lines, riots, people avoiding the doctors, etc. which would only cause a virus to spread even easier under the right circumstances. 

Also, I'm sorry, but a nurse/doctor who chooses to do nothing when they are needed most isn't even a nurse/doctor I want for my physical checkup. That's pretty much equatable to a fire fighter deciding 'that fire's a little too big, I'm going home'. It's pathetic. Getting sick is a part of the job. If you weren't willing to face that risk head on you should have never taken it. The necessity of the position isn't the only reason it pays well. Risky jobs pay well because they have risk. Maybe the position should pay less so people who actually give a shit could take the job instead. I know being an EMT doesn't pay particularly well, but I'll be damned if I've ever heard or met one who didn't do their job to the best of their ability under pretty much all circumstances.

I'm definitely glad we're sending people over to maintain the situation in Africa though. We need to slow down the virus where it all started otherwise this is just going to be rinse and repeat. Containment without some muscle is hard to do when you have thieves and scared family willing to do whatever they feel they need to even though it puts their lives and the lives of everyone around them in danger.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 18, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Alright, I concede that I was silly to think healthcare workers would be okay putting themselves at some risk for the greater good, but now you're telling me they can't even wash their hands?
> 
> I give up.
> 
> Those African shamans are starting to look pretty good.



Lol yeah guess I'm just being paranoid. Miss amber has shown us that she's a very responsible person and there's Zero chance she might have spread an illness by shedding virus. Because hand washing even if done correctly is always 100% effective at killing bad bugs and no nurse has poor hygiene off the job. Literally zero chance of any door knobs or dresses she tried on being contaminated, which is exactly why your not seeing any guys in space suits chemically decontaminate them or burn them.

And I was also exaggerating about nurses walking off the job. Everyone I talk to said that since Ebola is nearly impossible to catch because health workers have perfect hand hygiene, they have no problems working with one of the most deadly viruses mankind has ever seen.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> Lol yeah guess I'm just being paranoid. Miss amber has shown us that she's a very responsible person and there's Zero chance she might have spread an illness by shedding virus. Because hand washing even if done correctly is always 100% effective at killing bad bugs and no nurse has poor hygiene off the job. Literally zero chance of any door knobs or dresses she tried on being contaminated, which is exactly why your not seeing any guys in space suits chemically decontaminate them or burn them.
> 
> And I was also exaggerating about nurses walking off the job. Everyone I talk to said that since Ebola is nearly impossible to catch because health workers have perfect hand hygiene, they have no problems working with one of the most deadly viruses mankind has ever seen.



Oh don't be such a goob, I was obviously joking...... while taking a shot at these poor poor healthcare workers who see fit to not practice what they preach and obviously care much more about their own convenience than the entire point to their job, which is to help the sick and to prevent others from getting sick. 

According to the numbers, you are being paranoid, as are any healthcare workers who are flipping their shit at the moment, bar the 70 something who dealt directly with Duncan, they can probably stand to be a bit nervous.

That's still not as bad as in Liberia where they went on strike, _freaking strike_, for two days. Not for better conditions, not to elicit international attention for aid, but for _hazard pay_. 

Ebola sucks, and I bet it is scary for healthcare workers. Though, this is what they signed up for. If they didn't want to deal with the sick, they went into the wrong field. 

The median salary for nurses in the US was about $65k (in 2012), while firefighters have a median salary of about $45k (in 2011). Yep, folks are definitely doing it for the money.

I know it's terrible to think lesser of a group based on the opinions and information of one, yourself who seems to be knowledgeable about the industry, but I can't say I have a very positive outlook in regards to healthcare workers in the US after this conversation.


----------



## SD83 (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> That's one of the reasons why this needs to be handled by the "we're not ....ing around" crew from specifically trained groups able to handle this sort of thing like USAMRIID or the CDC... Your average first line health care worker is not trained, equipped or motivated to be on the front lines of a fight with a lethal pandemic, especially one with such terrible symptomatic effects -- ebola is _scary_.



That's pretty much how it would be handled over here (in theory). 3 or 5 hospitals around the country who have parts that can be hermetically sealed, personnel that is specially trained on a regular basis for exactly that kind of stuff etc. The average nurse/doctor is not exactly perfectly prepared for patients with ebola and I can totally understand if they don't feel like they can handle that situation. The difference between firefighters/policemen and nurses in that case, I would say, is that a burning building is always a burning building, a bullet fired at you is always a bullet fired at you, but the contagious diseases you normally have to deal with, I guess, are stuff like the flu, diahrea or maybe AIDS. Which are either not really that dangerous for an otherwise healthy person or not nearly as contagious. Imagine a policeman coming form some small village where the worst crime in the last decade was two drunk pensioners getting into a fight over the size of their hedge and you suddenly find yourself in Ciudad Juarez. 

I doubt that it will become a devastating pandemic as, in theory, it's rather easy to isolate. But then again, to my understanding of logic, AIDS should be even more simple to stop and look how well that worked... (yes I know that you don't have to have obvious symptoms to be contagious if you have AIDS, unlike ebola, but even then..)


----------



## flint757 (Oct 18, 2014)

There isn't a way to contain HIV at all, especially not anymore now that a lot of people all over the world have it. You can test negative for years before testing positive even if you had it all along (varies case-to-case). Considering it just destroys your immune system there isn't anything unique to identify to properly isolate people and since it actually isn't that contagious, if the host is careful, it borders on inhumane to do so; especially since you don't die in a month from contracting HIV. So in summation, no AIDS would not have been easy to contain or control. It kills slowly and hides in plain sight. Ebola, on the other hand, kills rapidly and makes itself known before even being contagious. The only thing similar about the two is that you get them through contact.


----------



## SD83 (Oct 18, 2014)

flint757 said:


> There isn't a way to contain HIV at all, especially not anymore now that a lot of people all over the world have it. You can test negative for years before testing positive even if you had it all along (varies case-to-case). Considering it just destroys your immune system there isn't anything unique to identify to properly isolate people and since it actually isn't that contagious, if the host is careful, it borders on inhumane to do so; especially since you don't die in a month from contracting HIV. So in summation, no AIDS would not have been easy to contain or control. It kills slowly and hides in plain sight. Ebola, on the other hand, kills rapidly and makes itself known before even being contagious. The only thing similar about the two is that you get them through contact.



That is something I didn't know about those tests not being reliable. I guess that weakens my point a good bit... still, if I'm not mistaken, it's not like it's that contagious. As far as I know, you could easily life with an infected person, eat from the same plate, go to the same toilet, with little risk of infection. But yeah, if you can't really on the tests, that still ruins my argument... damn you  No, seriously, thanks for the info


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 18, 2014)

SD83 said:


> a burning building is always a burning building



That's completely, profoundly wrong. No two fires, even of similar buildings with a similar source are identical. 

When I did my HM/FR training it was with the Fire Department. After certification I did some ride-alongs. 

Also, of all the ride-alongs I did, over the course of six months, only two were actual, live fires. 




> a bullet fired at you is always a bullet fired at you



Once again, I think you're basing that off of a lack of first hand experience. 

I know the media makes the US look like the Wild West, but really most cities and towns are incredibly safe. 

That said, all it takes is one violent, crazy person to ruin lives and unfortunately most of time no one sees it coming. 

Being a firefighter or police officer comes with risks, much like all jobs. I work in manufacturing and at any moment something terrible can happen and someone's life will be irreparably changed. Here's the thing though, we're informed of those risks and have decided that in light of them we do our jobs. We just make beer though, so lives are very rarely on the line. Healthcare workers sign up to work with the sick and dying, and often the sick and dying are sick and dying of something that can be transmitted, that's why cleanliness and PPE are so important day to day. The fact that healthcare workers wear PPE and go through training involving infection shows they know there is a risk. 

Look at it this way, when a firefighter shows up at a call to help an obese, elderly man who has fallen down, the risk is super low. When a cop gets a call to erect a barricade for a parade, there's once again super low risk. When a nurse is treating a baby's ear infection, just as above, the risk is super low. 

Now, when those calls are on the other end of the spectrum, the risk increases. It's all the same. One shouldn't go into a field expecting every day to be like a walk in the park, you have to consider the worst possible scenario. IF you can live with it, continue, if not, maybe do something else.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 18, 2014)

flint757 said:


> Pandemic is still a stretch. In the past at most it has killed roughly ~300 at a time (usually much less). This time it has invaded a few more countries and as such has gone up to like ~1500. That's a lot and certainly a lot more than usual, but the way this disease spreads it will likely never reach the numbers people are throwing out there to scare people. The virus's ability to kill is exactly what makes it such an easy virus to defeat. It typically kills its victim in 10 days and the last of those days aren't spent walking through time square. I nor anyone else has claimed the disease itself isn't dangerous or that you'd want to catch it. The mortality rate for the virus is really high, however, the mortality rate is usually quite a bit lower in western nations when it has spread that far in the past (so 90% is a bit disingenuous in that regard). We should be prepared, but there isn't much reason for people in the west to be panicking the amount they are. Even if there was good reason to panic, panicking is always a bad thing in time of crisis anyhow. When the uninformed get whipped up into a frenzy you get chaos. People clogging up phone lines, riots, people avoiding the doctors, etc. which would only cause a virus to spread even easier under the right circumstances.
> 
> Also, I'm sorry, but a nurse/doctor who chooses to do nothing when they are needed most isn't even a nurse/doctor I want for my physical checkup. That's pretty much equatable to a fire fighter deciding 'that fire's a little too big, I'm going home'. It's pathetic. Getting sick is a part of the job. If you weren't willing to face that risk head on you should have never taken it. The necessity of the position isn't the only reason it pays well. Risky jobs pay well because they have risk. Maybe the position should pay less so people who actually give a shit could take the job instead. I know being an EMT doesn't pay particularly well, but I'll be damned if I've ever heard or met one who didn't do their job to the best of their ability under pretty much all circumstances.



You might want to recheck your numbers. So far, in Liberia, there's been around 9,000 reported cases, 6000 lab confirmed cases, and 4500 deaths. Of course, how accurate these numbers are with the less than stellar efficiency or accountability of the Liberian government and health care system in its current state, those numbers could be missing a lot of people. The epi curve projected by the WHO and CDC is about 1000 new infections a week, which increases every week.

The government of Liberia recently has failed to update their numbers of cases to WHO, but has asked for 80,000 body bags (Ebola outbreak: Liberia has shortage of body bags - CNN.com). 

However, you are correct in your idea on how to defeat ebola. The best way for ebola outbreaks to be contained in the past was absolute containment of the infected area (it usually was confined to remote locations or a single hospital where patient zero infected people), and unfortunately those people exposed were quarantined until the virus burned itself out, usually killing the people in close proximity. The difference with this instance, is now you see ebola outside of remote villages and inside more densely packed urban centers, and more recently, internationally. 

This is making it much more difficult to contain the outbreak, especially when the behavior of the populace is that ebola is a lie, or by perpetrating acts of anger when patients realize the treatment they are getting is purely palliative and they decide to bite, urinate, or accost their caregivers by other means.

For the US, no this is not the time to panic. It is the time however to definitely be on our A game and try to control it. 

As for health care workers -- again, I'm not saying everyone would walk off (though the general consensus is without a space suit like the CDC director had on when he toured Presby, they wouldn't be willing to work with a pt with ebola). But to put it in perspective, my facility had an outbreak of norovirus earlier this year. Norovirus has a very similar route of transmission of ebola. With the PPE that we had, and incredible amounts of hand hygiene, we still had 70% of our workers ended up getting sick over the month we were dealing with cases. We had a couple of people use their banked sick days to avoid having to come to work and potentially get sick or have to do work they thought was below them, because when you weren't dealing with patient care you were helping the cleaning crews bleach everything (we had MD's scrubbing hallways).

Now, if this had been ebola, the majority of our staff would have been dead. Beyond the question of who is left to take care of the other sick people and patients without ebola, imagine what the cost to the facility would be in insurance and litigation from families? This is a huge issue a lot of people are overlooking when they're thinking of ebola. Beyond the terrible effects it has on our human body, it has the potential to be just as harmful to our health care system and by extension way of life in general if the right people don't get this thing in check.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> But to put it in perspective, my facility had an outbreak of norovirus earlier this year. Norovirus has a very similar route of transmission of ebola. With the PPE that we had, and incredible amounts of hand hygiene, we still had 70% of our workers ended up getting sick over the month we were dealing with cases. We had a couple of people use their banked sick days to avoid having to come to work because when you weren't dealing with patient care you were helping the cleaning crews bleach everything (we had MD's scrubbing hallways).



Norovirus is far more transmittable than Ebola. Norovirus can be transmitted by food and drink and can also be transmitted before symptoms occur. 

Like I said, look at what has already happened. Only two nurses seem to have been infected by the index, and that was with what was reported to be very lax safety protocol and improper PPE. 

I'm not saying the risk isn't there. It is. We just need level heads and a plan, not panic. We also really don't need folks using up sick days.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 18, 2014)

Ebola can be passed through contaminated food, hence the warnings in Africa to not eat bushmeat. Early ebola symptoms mimic common flu symptoms, and the patient is contagious at that time -- if we look at the only two people infected, we see that its exactly the infection rate projected by the epi curve put out by the CDC. 

However, you are correct -- we need level heads and plan, and perhaps some less politically correct actions or politically motivated actions -- this isn't the time for the left and right to bicker or place blame and play their usual games. People under observation need to be observed, not allowed to fly across the country or go on cruises, until we're sure the cases have all burned out.


----------



## flint757 (Oct 18, 2014)

DocBach said:


> You might want to recheck your numbers. So far, in Liberia, there's been around 9,000 reported cases, 6000 lab confirmed cases, and 4500 deaths. Of course, how accurate these numbers are with the less than stellar efficiency or accountability of the Liberian government and health care system in its current state, those numbers could be missing a lot of people. The epi curve projected by the WHO and CDC is about 1000 new infections a week, which increases every week.
> 
> The government of Liberia recently has failed to update their numbers of cases to WHO, but has asked for 80,000 body bags (Ebola outbreak: Liberia has shortage of body bags - CNN.com).
> 
> ...



Ahhh yeah. Looks like my number was pre-August. I'm traveling so I'm having to make due with my phone for research. Admittedly not the best tool for the job. 

It's definitely the worst it has ever been and if you lived in Africa you should be VERY concerned. If we don't put the lid back on Pandora's box the rest of the world should also be concerned, at that time. 

I'm not upset that people are concerned, I'm upset by the sheer stupidity of the way everyone is panicking over this. Here in Texas we've had someone setup a hoax about a family getting infected in some small town broadcasted by major news as though it were true. A guy in prison down in Galveston (nowhere near Dallas) had the flu and the news was saying potential Ebola outbreak. It's getting ridiculous and people here are so ill informed on how the disease is transmitted or even what the symptoms are that if this were to turn really serious here in the states you'd have 2 potential scenarios: people are less worried than they should be because they cried wolf one too many times for ratings or people get whipped up into a frenzy. If people go nuts, warranted or not, it's a major problem. We need rational thinking and calm behavior to manage major outbreaks, not chaos. If healthcare workers were to walk out on their job then they put the final nail in the coffin for everyone. If no one treats the illness the result is the same as if they tried and failed. Success only happens through action.


----------



## SD83 (Oct 19, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Now, when those calls are on the other end of the spectrum, the risk increases. It's all the same. One shouldn't go into a field expecting every day to be like a walk in the park, you have to consider the worst possible scenario. IF you can live with it, continue, if not, maybe do something else.



(Almost) none of that is news to me, and I didn't forget about it either (and I rather thought German policemen to be honest, but you're still right about the media + wild west stuff). I still think that there is a huge difference. Maybe it only seems like that to me because I'm not part of any of those three fields. I considered police, but decided to do something different. But when I look at it, that one really crazy high risk fire is something that happens. Not often, but a handfull or more firefighters die every year doing their job. When I think of firefighters, I see a dangerous job. Policemen get shot at. Not everyone, and some may never have to draw their gun in 40 years of service, but some do. So, when I think of policemen, I see a dangerous job. The risk as a nurse might be much bigger than I use(d?) to think, but looking around me, most people tend to forget 99% of the time that things like Ebola exist, while life constantly reminds us that fires, accidents & crime happen. Thus, I find it totally understandable when the average nurse never thought that "getting yourself killed" was part of their job description.
If an oil well is on fire, you don't send the local fire department. If you have half a dozen heavily armed criminals that have taken the vice president hostage, you don't send the local police to solve the problem, and in the same way, if possible, things like Ebola shouldn't be handled by people who normally handle patients with broken legs or pneumonia but by specially trained experts. As far as I can think, that would be better for all parties involved, so it should be done whenever possible. Given the mortality rate & how infectious it is, one should minimize the riks wherever possible.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Oct 20, 2014)

SD83 said:


> most people tend to forget 99% of the time that things like Ebola exist,


 
Which is fine, but ignorance of lack of rememberance does not make a risk go away. There are tons of terrible, terrible diseases out there and there's no way of knowing when one will rear it's ugly head. 



> while life constantly reminds us that fires, accidents & crime happen. Thus, I find it totally understandable when the average nurse never thought that "getting yourself killed" was part of their job description.


 
I refuse to believe that anyone who gets into nursing is never informed of the risk. As of now, the risk of Ebola showing up at any hospital outside of West Africa is incredibly low, it's still there though. 



> If an oil well is on fire, you don't send the local fire department.If you have half a dozen heavily armed criminals that have taken the vice president hostage, you don't send the local police to solve the problem, and in the same way, if possible, things like Ebola shouldn't be handled by people who normally handle patients with broken legs or pneumonia but by specially trained experts. As far as I can think, that would be better for all parties involved, so it should be done whenever possible. Given the mortality rate & how infectious it is, one should minimize the riks wherever possible.


 
Depends on the scenario. Someone has to be the front line, the first to respond. In a perfect world on the best trained and equipped would be the first on the scene, but that's just not how things work. 

When large fires happen, it's race to the scene for all levels of service. If a single tank truck shows up, they'll have to see what they can do before the big guns get there, just as a nurse or doctor will have to come in contact with a patient before an Ebola diagnosis is made. 

I'm not saying it's up to every single low-level nurse and doctor to deal with this problem, far from it, what I'm saying is they need to be the front line. We don't have enough specialists to post them at every hospital from coast to coast. I wish we did, but we don't. 

If they, the front line, crumbles all the specialists in the world won't make a lick of difference. We've already seen what happens when they walk away.


----------



## DocBach (Oct 21, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I refuse to believe that anyone who gets into nursing is never informed of the risk. As of now, the risk of Ebola showing up at any hospital outside of West Africa is incredibly low, it's still there though.
> 
> Depends on the scenario. Someone has to be the front line, the first to respond. In a perfect world on the best trained and equipped would be the first on the scene, but that's just not how things work.



It's not the idea of being uninformed -- the problem is some nurses, informed of the risk, when they are forced to deal with that risk in real life, decide the risk isn't worth the job. Again, the kind of people who deal with first response, rescue type jobs is different than the type of people I work with in nursing. Most are middle-aged older women (most with children) who are compassionate, but not really willing to be the shock troops in the front line against a virulent, highly-fatal disease. 

Good news is so far none of the people who were in proximity to the first case have shown positive for ebola, so the patient zero's only directly infected two others that we know of. This initial case was a pretty good kick in the balls to our medical system that the possibility of ebola coming here is a reality, and that new protocols, especially when dealing with PPE needed to be developed that hopefully mitigate the risk of future cases spreading further.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Oct 23, 2014)

Interesting: Cuba is sending doctors and nurses to Africa to help combat Ebola, but only under an agreement stating that they won't be allowed to return to Cuba if they contract Ebola. Not for treatment, not to die, not even to be buried if they die in Africa. They just can't come back, period.

Thoughts on that? Think your respective countries could get away with that? Would you go help under conditions like that?

Source: El virus del ébola: Cuba acuerda con sus médicos que no serán repatriados si se contagian | Internacional | EL PAÍS

Yeah, it's in Spanish. Sorry. There might be an English story about it somewhere out there .


----------



## Murdstone (Oct 23, 2014)

My hospital has been prepping for the last week or two if by chance there is a spread to NYC, and looks like there's a first case now. Hopefully the dude pulls through.


----------



## neurosis (Oct 24, 2014)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Interesting: Cuba is sending doctors and nurses to Africa to help combat Ebola, but only under an agreement stating that they won't be allowed to return to Cuba if they contract Ebola. Not for treatment, not to die, not even to be buried if they die in Africa. They just can't come back, period.
> 
> Thoughts on that? Think your respective countries could get away with that? Would you go help under conditions like that?
> 
> ...



Just read it. They are sending them in agreement with the WHO and in cooperation with Washington. 

Also, the protocol establishes that in case of infection, those lending help be first received and attended in the facilities that have been properly equipped for this purpose locally. I was watching the German news on ZDF yesterday and they were explaining the procedure as well. While they haven't signed an agreement (or it hasn't been publicized) the personnel will be treated locally were all the measures are being deployed and only after a period of attention be sent back home. 

I don't think any country wants to risk another hick-up in the style of Madrid or Dallas.


----------



## neurosis (Oct 24, 2014)

neurosis said:


> Just read it. They are sending them in agreement with the WHO and in cooperation with Washington.
> 
> Also, the protocol establishes that in case of infection, those lending help be first received and attended in the facilities that have been properly equipped for this purpose locally. I was watching the German news on ZDF yesterday and they were explaining the procedure as well. While they haven't signed an agreement (or it hasn't been publicized) the personnel will be treated locally were all the measures are being deployed and only after a period of attention be sent back home.
> 
> I don't think any country wants to risk another hick-up in the style of Madrid or Dallas.



Ok. Awesome, nevermind. Just watched the news as of today. On ZDF (same channel) they are now saying that the WHO is still struggling to get enough international support to deal with this stuff in the affected regions. They also coined the term "Ebola Paradox" explaining that there is still not enough help locally, where so many people have already died and other's are being infected while the West and the EU have way better conditions set in place for prevention and treatment. 

So now I don't really know what to think as usual. Confusing news are well... confusing.

In different news, in Spain the government is debating wether the surviving infected in Madrid deserves a medal of merit, something like a Royal Cross, for her invaluable service to protecting the health of the nation... or something like that (they actually haven't agreed on how to describe this yet), which has set half the country in rage considering at first they pretty much wanted her gone.


----------

