Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 08:23 PM Sep 2014

Stay Calm and Carry On: Why it’s nearly impossible for Ebola to spread in the US

Well, it finally happened: The US just got its first case of Ebola. Health officials have confirmed that a man recently admitted to a Dallas hospital has come down with the deadly virus, which has already killed more than 3,000 people in West Africa. The patient was admitted based on both symptoms and “travel history“—presumably he had been in West Africa—and is now being held in “strict isolation,” say officials.

Below are excerpts from an earlier Quartz piece on a New York patient suspected of carrying the Ebola virus that explore why Americans would do well not to panic:

If your Twitter feed is anything like mine, news that Ebola might have turned up in Manhattan is freaking out a lot of Americans. “Helpful” bits of commentary include as that it’s “deadly uncurable,” has a 90% fatality rate, and causes “a hemorrhagic fever that eventually leads to a complete bleed-out.” Today’s news merely amplifies the anxiety that’s been building since word got out that two Americans infected with Ebola have been moved to US hospitals for treatment.

There are plenty of people who should be protecting themselves against Ebola’s spread—and they live in West Africa. Those of us who are in the US should feel comforted by the following:

- Ebola’s not airborne. It can only be spread through bodily fluids. The virus spreads when blood, semen, urine, vomit, feces, or other bodily fluids of an infected person come into contact with someone else’s mucus membranes.

- And it’s not just any infected person—it’s a symptomatic infected person. People can only catch ebola from someone actually exhibiting symptoms. Those include vomiting, diarrhea, and, in some cases, hemorrhaging of mucus membranes, such as nose, nail beds and eyes—in other words, pretty hard to miss.



More: http://qz.com/273972/stay-calm-and-carry-on-why-its-nearly-impossible-for-ebola-to-spread-in-the-us/
139 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Stay Calm and Carry On: Why it’s nearly impossible for Ebola to spread in the US (Original Post) Turborama Sep 2014 OP
I've already wrapped plastic sheeting around my head and secured it with duct tape NightWatcher Sep 2014 #1
! Adsos Letter Sep 2014 #3
Orange duct tape is best. A HERETIC I AM Sep 2014 #37
Also, we should all be sure to mix ammonia and bleach to wash everything Jamastiene Oct 2014 #127
Just Incase.... Sparhawk60 Oct 2014 #133
Yeah, it is an old DU meme. Jamastiene Oct 2014 #137
Smart thinking. Jamastiene Oct 2014 #126
That is an excellent article, and I must say the photo made me LOL! CaliforniaPeggy Sep 2014 #2
You're most welcome, Peggy. Turborama Sep 2014 #9
This quote from the article sums it up. Algernon Moncrieff Sep 2014 #4
A good article from The Independent along a similar vein, so to speak... Turborama Sep 2014 #7
'Ebola is morbid escapism, a way to flirt with the inevitability of our own demise' is correct. freshwest Sep 2014 #57
Seriously. nt ancianita Oct 2014 #61
Do you have a link? Blue_Roses Oct 2014 #131
The quote is from the article in the OP Algernon Moncrieff Oct 2014 #138
thanks... Blue_Roses Oct 2014 #139
Scoff if you want to customerserviceguy Sep 2014 #5
I think things are a little bit different then you and I had feared Bonx Sep 2014 #8
Quarantine Africa? Really? Hugabear Sep 2014 #11
And as we identify which parts are safe customerserviceguy Oct 2014 #84
How would you go about quarantining Africa? And why quarantine 1 continent? uppityperson Sep 2014 #13
Nobody know what is going to happen with Ebola yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #40
Are you just ranting at me or have you any interest in answering those questions I posed? uppityperson Sep 2014 #42
Just ranting yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #46
OK. Honestly I am more concerned about the more easily transmissible influenza uppityperson Sep 2014 #48
Faith in what government scientists customerserviceguy Oct 2014 #85
'Faith in scientists and other experts is at an all time low' - you can thank the GOP for that Hugabear Oct 2014 #92
It's a sad day when a DUer is calling them *government* scientists and putting scare quotes muriel_volestrangler Oct 2014 #119
Personally, I'm not scared customerserviceguy Oct 2014 #123
You're the one calling for the quarantine of the whole of Africa muriel_volestrangler Oct 2014 #129
Ok, then a part of Africa, whatever customerserviceguy Oct 2014 #132
what is the explanation of how the Dallas guy got it? forthemiddle Oct 2014 #109
He got it in Liberia and was asymptomatic, not actively sick, when he flew. Why imagine he'd lie? uppityperson Oct 2014 #112
Meh. Ebola is just dramatic. Flu is deadly. Barack_America Sep 2014 #19
That's not the way the media sees it customerserviceguy Oct 2014 #86
You are wrong. Read more. Nt Logical Oct 2014 #73
I hope I am customerserviceguy Oct 2014 #87
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Sep 2014 #6
This message was self-deleted by its author Turborama Sep 2014 #10
Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #12
OMG!!! WRAP YOUR FACE WITH PLASTIC NOW!!!!!!!11111 uppityperson Sep 2014 #14
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #15
All we need to know to know what you, doctor, knows, is what we learned in middle school? uppityperson Sep 2014 #17
Link tothose "MAINSTREAM PROJECTIONS" and where Canada says it is airborne are needed. uppityperson Sep 2014 #20
Here is a link to an article about the Canadian research showing it may be airborne. pnwmom Sep 2014 #30
That is not what airborne means. Not droplets. uppityperson Sep 2014 #39
That 1st article is OP worthy, thanks for sharing. Here's the graphic you mentioned.... Turborama Oct 2014 #89
Thank you for posting that uppityperson Oct 2014 #97
Thank you, The Paper Bear, for your participation in the conversation. pnwmom Sep 2014 #23
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #35
Same thing happened with HIV yeoman6987 Sep 2014 #43
I don't believe a physician wouldn't know the difference between droplet... Barack_America Sep 2014 #31
You are making a false distinction. Moisture droplets can be transmitted through the air. pnwmom Sep 2014 #36
Why don't you check the author and date of the publication I linked. Barack_America Sep 2014 #41
Not all actual MD's are as sanguine as you are. pnwmom Sep 2014 #45
Rather like influenza. nt uppityperson Sep 2014 #52
Remember that hysteria sells. Barack_America Oct 2014 #60
The danger is that by convincing Americans we don't have to worry, pnwmom Oct 2014 #76
So...where can I buy a hazmat suit? Texasgal Sep 2014 #16
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #21
You do know that the African cases have been mostly small villages, not large cities? uppityperson Sep 2014 #26
He's a Doctor... progressoid Sep 2014 #34
1 deleted post said make sure and use condoms. Not sure how or why you'd manage that witha uppityperson Sep 2014 #44
Plastic wrap and duct tape, with tuna and powdered milk under the bed. uppityperson Sep 2014 #24
Yes and no. Technically, it is not airborne.... JaneyVee Sep 2014 #22
It is dangerous and unhelpful to post such stupid shit. morningfog Sep 2014 #25
Yup. Agschmid Sep 2014 #33
Shhhhhhh...... DeadLetterOffice Oct 2014 #110
The little but significant part that got left out: pnwmom Sep 2014 #18
Are we as worried about AIDS becoming airborne? Turborama Sep 2014 #27
AIDS doesn't kill within weeks, and we have treatments that have greatly improved pnwmom Sep 2014 #29
You completely missed my point. n/t Turborama Sep 2014 #32
As we also do with Ebola. Barack_America Sep 2014 #49
Look at this comparison... Turborama Oct 2014 #130
Maybe swine flu or something like that? uppityperson Sep 2014 #28
with up to 90% mortality, it can't get much more virulent magical thyme Sep 2014 #50
So can influenza. eom uppityperson Sep 2014 #51
pathogens generally mutate to become more compatible with the host magical thyme Oct 2014 #99
We are lucky, living in an area where there is ok medical carevs keeping the very sick uppityperson Oct 2014 #106
it is heartbreaking. nt magical thyme Oct 2014 #107
The first symptom is a moderate fever of 101.5 or higher. That is extremely easy to miss magical thyme Sep 2014 #38
. Barack_America Sep 2014 #53
unless you're wearing scrubs, pants don't protect you if a patient pees on you magical thyme Sep 2014 #55
Your scrubs must be better than ours. Barack_America Oct 2014 #58
they're too cheap here to provide scrubs. My personal scrubs are new magical thyme Oct 2014 #62
Ambulance was in circulation for 2 more days after transporting him to the hospital. LisaL Oct 2014 #64
I read that they did disinfect the ambulance, hopefully after he was transferred in it. magical thyme Oct 2014 #67
One would hope, but obviously since they removed it from circulation, they are concerned LisaL Oct 2014 #68
No. They removed it due to public misconceptions and fear. Barack_America Oct 2014 #71
Drivers who drove him are in quarantine. LisaL Oct 2014 #72
Okay, go ahead and be freaked out if you want. Barack_America Oct 2014 #75
Not likely. Ambulances are cleaned after all runs. Barack_America Oct 2014 #69
Why did they remove it from circulation after Ebola was confirmed? LisaL Oct 2014 #70
EMS Crew Exposed to Ebola Victim Tests Negative blogslut Oct 2014 #102
I hadn't heard that. Barack_America Oct 2014 #66
I'm leaning toward believing the patient lied magical thyme Oct 2014 #74
Why would he lie if he came to get treatment? LisaL Oct 2014 #77
people don't always behave rationally, especially if they're in denial magical thyme Oct 2014 #88
But if he thought he had malaria, he would have told them about his travel history, considering LisaL Oct 2014 #90
so he may have thought it was something else. It may also have been language barrier magical thyme Oct 2014 #93
He was already ill on the 26th. He went to get treatment but instead of being admitted, he was send LisaL Oct 2014 #63
"There is no risk of transmission during the incubation period... Turborama Sep 2014 #54
I didn't say there was risk of transmission during incubation, nor did I say there is airborne. magical thyme Sep 2014 #56
Actually, the information I shared with you was from the World Health Organization (WHO) Turborama Oct 2014 #59
Humans are not infectious until they develop symptoms. First symptoms are the sudden onset of fever magical thyme Oct 2014 #65
The WHO also say, "only low risk of transmission in the early phase of symptomatic patients" Turborama Oct 2014 #79
Low doesn't mean no. LisaL Oct 2014 #81
Correct. n/t Turborama Oct 2014 #82
"Don't worry your pretty little head about that nasty ebola virus!" FourScore Sep 2014 #47
+1 MadrasT Oct 2014 #121
It doesn't matter what you say, if people want to freak out, they will Marrah_G Oct 2014 #78
True, and same here. n/t Turborama Oct 2014 #80
An FYI: Q&As on Transmission From the CDC Turborama Oct 2014 #83
Looks like it's already spreading. LisaL Oct 2014 #91
It says nothing about a second person showing symptoms. morningfog Oct 2014 #94
That's my own conclusion. LisaL Oct 2014 #95
They are probably watching as this person may have been exposed and they want to nip the spread uppityperson Oct 2014 #98
They are monitoring all of the contacts of the first patient. LisaL Oct 2014 #100
Because he's probably already showing symptoms Adsos Letter Oct 2014 #101
That's what I am saying. LisaL Oct 2014 #103
Yes, I was agreeing with you on that point. Adsos Letter Oct 2014 #108
Because they were physically closer and more likely exposed. Maybe they had sex, or uppityperson Oct 2014 #104
Hi, home on regular computer so can more easily write. IF he were showing symptoms, he'd be in uppityperson Oct 2014 #113
Certainly wouldn't hurt to take as many precautions as possible. AverageJoe90 Oct 2014 #125
"WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!! AHHH!!! ... Story at ten." chrisa Oct 2014 #96
All the experts I've heard say ebola is a problem we'll be dealing with for a long time. Like flu librechik Oct 2014 #105
What? That sounds like B.S. to me, because I've never once heard that. AverageJoe90 Oct 2014 #124
sorry, i can't help it if you don't know something. n/t librechik Oct 2014 #134
Why don't you try to offer some sources, then? nt AverageJoe90 Oct 2014 #135
... librechik Oct 2014 #136
If they get a vaccine that works and can ramp up production, then no. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #128
Riiiiiiight. No one was on the plane, no one was in the ER. nt valerief Oct 2014 #111
This person was not contagious while on the plane. In the ER however, they were. uppityperson Oct 2014 #114
Who else was on the plane sneezing? Maybe someone who's dead now. valerief Oct 2014 #115
I didn't go to the ER and don't think I have ebola. uppityperson Oct 2014 #116
Cute valerief Oct 2014 #117
asking for clarification is "cute"? wtf? uppityperson Oct 2014 #118
Cultural differences are also a part of it. MohRokTah Oct 2014 #120
Above all, keep shopping! nt Zorra Oct 2014 #122

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
1. I've already wrapped plastic sheeting around my head and secured it with duct tape
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 08:25 PM
Sep 2014

getting drowsy........

 

Sparhawk60

(359 posts)
133. Just Incase....
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 07:42 AM
Oct 2014

I know the mix ammonia and bleach poster was being sarcastic.....but just in case some one is thinking it may be a good idea:

http://chemistry.about.com/od/toxicchemicals/a/Mixing-Bleach-And-Ammonia.htm.

/TL;DR version, it will kill you.
// this has been a public service announcement
/// Paid for by the slashie foundation of America

Jamastiene

(38,187 posts)
137. Yeah, it is an old DU meme.
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 06:13 PM
Oct 2014

I'm guessing there might actually be people who don't know that or know what happens if you mix those. Good PSA. Thanks.

Algernon Moncrieff

(5,790 posts)
4. This quote from the article sums it up.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 08:41 PM
Sep 2014
Scott Z. Burns, who wrote the screenplay for Contagion, notes that Americans tend to freak out about “the monster we can see”—in this case, that would mean the gruesome images of Ebola victims bleeding from their faces—while ignoring more familiar but no less deadly risks. He has a point; thanks to the anti-vaccine movement, measles cases in the US have surged nearly fourfold since last year.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
7. A good article from The Independent along a similar vein, so to speak...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:01 PM
Sep 2014
There is perhaps no other disease that captivates the imagination quite like Ebola. It's served up as pure pop-culture nightmare fuel, from Richard Preston's The Hot Zone, the 1994 non-fiction thriller that chronicled the early days of Ebola, to the fictionalised monkey-hosted virus in 1995's Outbreak. Even The Walking Dead's zombies are of the infectious variety, bleeding from their dead eyes in between bites of human flesh. It's hard to imagine something worse than a virus that leaves people to die in the decaying wreckage of their own cytokine storm, bodies that leak with blood and death, commandeered and turned into Ebola replication machines.

No disrespect, of course, to death by starvation. Or cancer. Or measles.

Part of the horror of Ebola is that it shatters the idea of a "good death". You can't deny mortality when death is on display in this way: bodies disintegrating, the sounds and smells of hot, sick blood and feces and bile erupting and oozing from a not-yet corpse. There will be no one to cradle the deceased, no comments about how they "look so peaceful", like they're "just sleeping". There will not be a burial; there will be a disposal.

=snip=


Perhaps our obsession with the horrors of Ebola says more about us than anything else. That it kills so rarely, and, for many of us, so far away makes it more nightmarish to contemplate. Absolutely horrific, sure, and yet, could you really argue that stage IV metastatic cancer is any less gruesome? Fearing Ebola is morbid escapism, a way to flirt with the inevitability of our own demise, to ponder the frailty of our own ineffectual meat sacks. Ebola is our macabre fantasy not because it's likely, but because it isn't. To many in the West, Ebola matters not because of what it does and how it kills; it matters because of what it represents.

Full article: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/ebola-epidemic-plagued-by-fear-9636462.html

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
5. Scoff if you want to
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 09:11 PM
Sep 2014

but unless we quarantine Africa, it's going to spread to the Western world. But we're not psychologically able to take the measures that people used to in the past to stop the spread of contagious diseases.

Chances are, it's going to come to NYC, and will make its way through some of the population here. Oh, eventually, they'll shut the barn door, but only after the horse has left.

Hugabear

(10,340 posts)
11. Quarantine Africa? Really?
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:30 PM
Sep 2014

You do realize that only a very small portion of Africa is affected by this outbreak.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
84. And as we identify which parts are safe
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 07:15 AM
Oct 2014

we can loosen things up. But I wouldn't do that until after the election.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
13. How would you go about quarantining Africa? And why quarantine 1 continent?
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:39 PM
Sep 2014

Or do you mean no flights from anywhere in Africa to the usa?


Why not just say no one can come in to the usa until the outbreak is over since people can travel from, say, Egypt to Canada and to the usa?

Do you know how large that continent is? Do you know the small amount of that huge continent that is having ebola outbreaks?


Do you understand how ebola is transmitted, or the issues the affected countries are having with isolating and treating those who have it or have been exposed?

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
40. Nobody know what is going to happen with Ebola
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:18 PM
Sep 2014

First it was reported that it in Africa and no chance of making it to the United States.

It made it to the United States but don't worry as no one will have it.

We have it but don't worry because the chances of getting it is impossible to get.

Ok. Sure. They have been wrong every step of the way so far.

I guess Good Luck will be heard in our not to distant future.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
42. Are you just ranting at me or have you any interest in answering those questions I posed?
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:20 PM
Sep 2014

If just ranting, have fun. But I had hoped a reply would address at least a tiny part of what I posted.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
46. Just ranting
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:25 PM
Sep 2014

I posted to you because you seem very dismissive on the dangers of this being in the US.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
48. OK. Honestly I am more concerned about the more easily transmissible influenza
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:33 PM
Sep 2014

The only thing that concerns me is, putting on my tinfoil cap, is someone getting a large amount of blood from that person and injecting others. Or like has happened in Africa, hiding sick people at home and infecting the household.

Being passed by a sneeze, or on the handle of my shopping cart? Of that I am dismissive. Those who have died in Africa distrust doctors, hospitals, keep their sick at hime, caring for the without any sort of even gloves, until they die and the caregivers are i fected and sick. Repeat, repeat, repeat. It is not spreading through casual contact of the sort feared but close contact with infectd bodlly fluids.

And yes, I have worked plenty of isolation rooms during my nursing career, including putting a person in isolation outside protocol after a middle of the ght admission with weird symptoms. Active TB was diagnosed the next day and rather than being inteluble, I had the thanks of my hospital administration.

I am also dismissive of someone claiming to be a doctor who is clueless about hazmat suits having SCBA or even face masks but advises using condoms and avoiding large cities.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
85. Faith in what government scientists
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 07:17 AM
Oct 2014

and other 'experts' say is at an all time low. It may be neccessary to have somewhat of an overreaction in the next five weeks to get through the election.

I'm really worrried about the news media turning this thing into the October surprise. Look what they managed to do with a few beheadings of people who wandered into harm's way.

Hugabear

(10,340 posts)
92. 'Faith in scientists and other experts is at an all time low' - you can thank the GOP for that
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:04 AM
Oct 2014

The GOP and conspiracy loons like Alex Jones have been pretty successful in turning lots of people against science.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,306 posts)
119. It's a sad day when a DUer is calling them *government* scientists and putting scare quotes
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:41 PM
Oct 2014

around experts. And 'scare' has never been more appropriate than in your case - you are trying desperately to make everyone else as scared as you seem to be.

Get a grip. Stop talking like someone who expects the Rapture any moment. And remember that 'government' is a positive word on DU, and in civilised society in general.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
123. Personally, I'm not scared
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:50 PM
Oct 2014

And I work in a job where I have contact with people who may well have come here from Africa. What I worry about is the optics of this situation, in a nation that reacts badly before it acts intelligently.

We've got five weeks before the election, and a news media that lives by "if it bleeds, it leads". I'm not worried a bit about the folks who are paying attention, I will admit that I'm a bit freaked out about the people who are so incredibly clueless that they are swing voters, and make up their minds about who to vote for based solely upon which party scares them the least. I wish they just didn't vote, but the very fact that our elections go one way or the other every few years means that they are excercising a franchise that they don't truly understand, and our nation hangs in the balance.

I'm sorry that my use of punctuation marks to try to describe their irrational feelings offends you, but they are meant to convey the ignorance of the folks who decide pretty much every election in this country.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,306 posts)
129. You're the one calling for the quarantine of the whole of Africa
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 04:11 AM
Oct 2014

and saying Ebola is going to 'make its way through some of the population' of New York City. And, for some reason, tying it to the elections. You sounds very frightened to me, with that reaction. What do you think the optics of isolating a whole continent are, until the US has had some mid-term elections? I think it screams "oh my gods, we're the only country in the world that counts, and all Africans look the same to us, and our elections are more important than the economy and society of any country in Africa".

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
132. Ok, then a part of Africa, whatever
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 07:18 AM
Oct 2014

It's just that the news media is going to whip up hysteria over this, and the soccer moms are going to react to it. I saw a lot of buzz about Ebola yesterday, if any more people turn up infected in this country, it's going to be non-stop from now till Election Day.

Perhaps you think the vast majority of people are going to be rational about this, I don't have such expectations. And I do expect this disease to spread, just like it has done in Africa.

forthemiddle

(1,379 posts)
109. what is the explanation of how the Dallas guy got it?
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:03 PM
Oct 2014

Not panicking yet, but has it been explained on where this guy came in contact with the disease?
If its not "easy" to get, then he must have lied to get in this country? and to airline security?

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
112. He got it in Liberia and was asymptomatic, not actively sick, when he flew. Why imagine he'd lie?
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 01:55 PM
Oct 2014

Airline security does not ban people from traveling from Liberia.

All viruses take time to have the infected person show symptoms. If someone has a cold and sneezes on you, it takes a while for you to show symptoms, right? You don't immediately get a sore throat and start sneezing. Same thing with ebola. There is an incubation period, during which, for ebola, you are not contagious. Meaning people around you will not catch the virus since it is not being excreted by your body.

Once you start showing symptoms, for ebola, then you are putting out the virus in bodily fluids.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
86. That's not the way the media sees it
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 07:21 AM
Oct 2014

If you have more cases of Ebola in this country, either from new travellers or from this traveller having infected others during the days he was contageous, you'll see hysteria coming from every corner of the three 24/7 news networks. It will eventually bleed over on to the news sites that everybody accesses on their computers and smartphones.

The President needs to take radical steps to reassure irrational people for the next five weeks. Whoever the mushy middle fears the least is who wins their votes.

customerserviceguy

(25,183 posts)
87. I hope I am
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 07:22 AM
Oct 2014

But the potential for the Rethugs to exploit this is enormous. Maybe they'll be clumsy at it, and everyone will see this, but they're masters at vending fear and ignorance.

Response to Turborama (Original post)

Response to 1000words (Reply #6)

Response to Turborama (Original post)

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
14. OMG!!! WRAP YOUR FACE WITH PLASTIC NOW!!!!!!!11111
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:41 PM
Sep 2014

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Response to uppityperson (Reply #14)

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
17. All we need to know to know what you, doctor, knows, is what we learned in middle school?
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:49 PM
Sep 2014

Well, that certainly gives me confidence in your credentials.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
30. Here is a link to an article about the Canadian research showing it may be airborne.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:02 PM
Sep 2014
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-20341423

Now, researchers from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the country's Public Health Agency have shown that pigs infected with this form of Ebola can pass the disease on to macaques without any direct contact between the species.

In their experiments, the pigs carrying the virus were housed in pens with the monkeys in close proximity but separated by a wire barrier. After eight days, some of the macaques were showing clinical signs typical of ebola and were euthanised.

One possibility is that the monkeys became infected by inhaling large aerosol droplets produced from the respiratory tracts of the pigs.

One of the scientists involved is Dr Gary Kobinger from the National Microbiology Laboratory at the Public Health Agency of Canada. He told BBC News this was the most likely route of the infection.

"What we suspect is happening is large droplets - they can stay in the air, but not long, they don't go far," he explained.

SNIP

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
39. That is not what airborne means. Not droplets.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:17 PM
Sep 2014
http://virologydownunder.blogspot.com/2014/08/ebola-virus-may-be-spread-by-droplets.html
This blog has a good explanation with diagram. Sorry but I can't copy it as am on slow low memory device.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease
Down a ways, look for (28) which goes to this link, saying not between macaquas or people.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3498927/

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
97. Thank you for posting that
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:19 AM
Oct 2014

y dumb pad has less memory than I do and it maks doing more than typing difficult. The graphic makes it easily seen. Id you haven't posted the link as an op, I'll do so in a couple hours when on regular computer.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
23. Thank you, The Paper Bear, for your participation in the conversation.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:55 PM
Sep 2014

I don't know why some people are so eager to minimize the danger.

Response to pnwmom (Reply #23)

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
43. Same thing happened with HIV
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:21 PM
Sep 2014

The parallel is extraordinary. Don't worry folks nothing to see here. Ostrich move on the count of 3. (Head in the ground)

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
31. I don't believe a physician wouldn't know the difference between droplet...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:02 PM
Sep 2014

..and true airborne transmission. I've never heard any discussion of any Ebola species other than Reston able to do anything approaching airborne transmission.

Fortunately, Ebola Zaire is transmitted by neither.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/airborne-transmission-ebola-unlikely-monkey-study-shows

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
36. You are making a false distinction. Moisture droplets can be transmitted through the air.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:07 PM
Sep 2014

The question is how long they remain in the air. But if someone is sneezed on, they could become infected.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-20341423

Now, researchers from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the country's Public Health Agency have shown that pigs infected with this form of Ebola can pass the disease on to macaques without any direct contact between the species.

In their experiments, the pigs carrying the virus were housed in pens with the monkeys in close proximity but separated by a wire barrier. After eight days, some of the macaques were showing clinical signs typical of ebola and were euthanised.

One possibility is that the monkeys became infected by inhaling large aerosol droplets produced from the respiratory tracts of the pigs.

One of the scientists involved is Dr Gary Kobinger from the National Microbiology Laboratory at the Public Health Agency of Canada. He told BBC News this was the most likely route of the infection.

"What we suspect is happening is large droplets - they can stay in the air, but not long, they don't go far," he explained.

SNIP

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
41. Why don't you check the author and date of the publication I linked.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:19 PM
Sep 2014

Hint: same guy, two months ago,

As an actual MD, I am fully familiar with the distinction between airborne and droplet transmission.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
45. Not all actual MD's are as sanguine as you are.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:24 PM
Sep 2014

The concern is that viruses can mutate.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/12/health/ebola-airborne/

CNN) -- Today, the Ebola virus spreads only through direct contact with bodily fluids, such as blood and vomit. But some of the nation's top infectious disease experts worry that this deadly virus could mutate and be transmitted just by a cough or a sneeze.

"It's the single greatest concern I've ever had in my 40-year public health career," said Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. "I can't imagine anything in my career -- and this includes HIV -- that would be more devastating to the world than a respiratory transmissible Ebola virus."

Osterholm and other experts couldn't think of another virus that has made the transition from non-airborne to airborne in humans. They say the chances are relatively small that Ebola will make that jump. But as the virus spreads, they warned, the likelihood increases.

Every time a new person gets Ebola, the virus gets another chance to mutate and develop new capabilities. Osterholm calls it "genetic roulette."

SNIP

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
60. Remember that hysteria sells.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:10 AM
Oct 2014

How many vaccines and immune therapies are out there already showing promise for Ebola? How many for HIV?

As fast as Ebola mutates, it is also revealing those sequences it cannot mutate and still function. Look for those in a surface-expressed protein and voila, synthesize some peptides and generate some antibodies.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
76. The danger is that by convincing Americans we don't have to worry,
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:54 AM
Oct 2014

we won't do enough to stop the disease in Liberia and other parts of Africa.

Who cares about spending the money needed for research and foreign aid when there are so many other needs right here? That's the attitude many are already taking.

Response to Texasgal (Reply #16)

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
26. You do know that the African cases have been mostly small villages, not large cities?
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:57 PM
Sep 2014

Being a doctor and all, wtf? I guess you mmissed the part about self contained hazmat suits, with oxygen tanks, etc, SCBA.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
44. 1 deleted post said make sure and use condoms. Not sure how or why you'd manage that witha
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:21 PM
Sep 2014

hazmat suit on, but....??????

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
24. Plastic wrap and duct tape, with tuna and powdered milk under the bed.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:55 PM
Sep 2014

Don't forget the tuna and milk, those are IMPORTANT!

 

JaneyVee

(19,877 posts)
22. Yes and no. Technically, it is not airborne....
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:54 PM
Sep 2014

But yes, you can be infected with respiratory secretions. But airborne would mean it stood in the air suspended for some time.

DeadLetterOffice

(1,352 posts)
110. Shhhhhhh......
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:26 PM
Oct 2014

As I've said in other ebola threads... Stop making sense, you'll spoil the freak-out fest!

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
18. The little but significant part that got left out:
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:52 PM
Sep 2014

viruses evolve.

We don't know how contagious Ebola might be in the future. All we know is now.

And if we don't contain it now, in West Africa and everywhere else, we could be up against a much more virulent virus down the road.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
27. Are we as worried about AIDS becoming airborne?
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:58 PM
Sep 2014

Yes, viruses evolve.

We don't know how contagious AIDS might be in the future. All we know is now.

pnwmom

(108,976 posts)
29. AIDS doesn't kill within weeks, and we have treatments that have greatly improved
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:01 PM
Sep 2014

the prognosis.

There is no comparison.

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
49. As we also do with Ebola.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:34 PM
Sep 2014

It's called fluid and correction of coagulopathies.

How many people with HIV survive the disease with no treatment? How many for Ebola? The immune system can defeat Ebola, not so much with HIV.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
50. with up to 90% mortality, it can't get much more virulent
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:36 PM
Sep 2014

It can mutate to become more infectious and it can mutate to become less virulent. It can also mutate in such a way as to make current trial vaccines and treatments ineffective.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
99. pathogens generally mutate to become more compatible with the host
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:26 AM
Oct 2014

When they kill hosts too efficiently, they burn themselves out, as we've seen with ebola outbreaks in the past. The mutations that are effective over the long run are the ones that enable them to survive longer.

Influenza has a much, much longer history than ebola with its human hosts. When it kills, it is typically the immunocompromised patients that succomb (the well-known exception being the Spanish flu that caused cytokine storms, killing the healthiest and strongest). It already transmits quite easily.

It is the short history with Ebola that makes everything a great unknown.

Of course, the combination of high population concentration and easy, fast international travel also changes everything, for all of us.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
106. We are lucky, living in an area where there is ok medical carevs keeping the very sick
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:46 AM
Oct 2014

at home, taking care of them without precautions, getting ill ourselves, repeat repeat repeat. My heart breaks for all those affected.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
38. The first symptom is a moderate fever of 101.5 or higher. That is extremely easy to miss
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:16 PM
Sep 2014
"Those include vomiting, diarrhea, and, in some cases, hemorrhaging of mucus membranes, such as nose, nail beds and eyes—in other words, pretty hard to miss."
That's bullshit and a flat out lie. The vomiting and diarrhea come later in the disease, and hemorrhaging is toward the end.

The first symptom is *very* easy to miss, which is why health care workers in the epidemic areas check their temperatures repeatedly from morning until night. You can have a low grade fever and not even be aware of it.
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/symptoms/


"The virus spreads when blood, semen, urine, vomit, feces, or other bodily fluids of an infected person come into contact with someone else’s mucus membranes."

Incomplete and misleading. The fluids can also enter through broken skin. Note that at any given time, everybody has tiny scratches and even invisible to the naked eye "microcracks" in their skin.

Health care workers don't just wear gloves to protect patients. They wear gloves to protect themselves. That is why in epidemic areas they are wearing 2 and even 3 layers of gloves, as well as all the biohazard PPEs. To keep any body fluids from contacting any part of their skin.
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/transmission/index.html

"It isn’t curable, but people survive it. In fact, this outbreak has a 57% mortality rate—much lower than that oft-cited 90%."

This outbreak does NOT have a 57% mortality rate. WHO is quoted as stating the outbreak is greater than 70%. Again, flat out wrong.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1411100?query=featured_home&&

"That pig study doesn’t mean anything."
The pig study suggests that transmission can be by large droplet or fomite. The latter is especially important, if it remains viable on door handles, counters, and other surfaces.
http://healthmap.org/site/diseasedaily/article/pigs-monkeys-ebola-goes-airborne-112112

"Nearly every hospital in the US is equipped to treat Ebola patients and keep them in isolation."

Tell that to the people who were sitting in the waiting room on 9/26 when the Dallas patient was there. Every hospital does NOT have biohazard suit levels of protection. We do have ordinary PPEs, eg lab coats and gloves. Once we know a patient is at risk, we can add gowns, caps and masks. We don't have leg protection or goggles that I'm aware of. We do NOT have containment units such as the ones that Brantly, Writebol and others have been treated in.

I'm all for not panicking. But spreading misinformation and outright lies is not the way to prevent panic.

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
53. .
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:40 PM
Sep 2014


Found in all modern EDs. As for leg protection, they're called pants. We do also have disposable booties that extend to the knee.
 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
55. unless you're wearing scrubs, pants don't protect you if a patient pees on you
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:48 PM
Sep 2014

I watched a nurse run shrieking from a room in our ED when she caught a fainting patient, who proceeded to pee down her legs.

We don't have booties that extend to the knees at my hospital that I'm aware of. Just paper booties that cover your feet for the OR. I'm not aware of face shields at my hospital either. Just regular masks and TB masks. But I work in the lab, so may not be aware of all the equipment in the ED. And I'm in a tiny rural hospital, not a big, new one.

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
58. Your scrubs must be better than ours.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:05 AM
Oct 2014

Ours are so paper thin from repeatedly laundry you can basically see through them. I'd trust my pants more.

So here's the deal, 4 days into the illness, this person was probably pretty noticeably ill. Ill enough to get the attention of the triage nurse. This person should not have languished in the ED for long. They should've been taken to a bay pretty quickly. The very first person to interview this individual should have asked about travel. After the word "Liberia" was mentioned, the isolation and call to infectious disease would have been immediate. Identification and isolation of all contacts would begin.

So, really, we're looking at 3-4 at-risk contacts in the hospital if everyone did what they are supposed to do.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
62. they're too cheap here to provide scrubs. My personal scrubs are new
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:16 AM
Oct 2014

and tops only. Regular pants below, and they would saturate in an instant. Since we get a lot of international travelers in this area, I may invest in bottom scrubs too. Even though we don't get many people from Africa, I suppose it's just a matter of time before it's in Europe too.

The patient should have been questioned about travel on his 1st trip to the ED when he was 2 days into symptoms, instead of being given antibiotics and sent home. Or he was questioned and lied.

And knowing where he came from, he should have sought out treatment the minute he had a symptom, any symptom, and he should have told them straight out that he'd been exposed to Ebola.

4 days into symptoms, he was picked up in an ambulance with severe symptoms from what I've read, so wasn't in the waiting room at all. The ambulance personnel have all been quarantined and are being monitored, so they are down 3 ambulance people for 21 days. No mention of the doctors, nurses or other potentially exposed workers.

Somehow it doesn't surprise me that a dozen patients in various cities would be immediately isolated and end up negative, and then the 13th would be sent home with antibiotics and end up positive.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
64. Ambulance was in circulation for 2 more days after transporting him to the hospital.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:20 AM
Oct 2014

Only then it was removed from circulation. So whoever was transported by the ambulance during these 2 days is presumably at risk as well.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
67. I read that they did disinfect the ambulance, hopefully after he was transferred in it.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:23 AM
Oct 2014

but yeah, I would not want to have been in that ambulance after.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
68. One would hope, but obviously since they removed it from circulation, they are concerned
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:23 AM
Oct 2014

about it spreading disease. Which it could have for two days. Whatever disinfection they did after transporting him (or didn't do) obviously wasn't enough for Ebola, or it wouldn't have been removed from circulation after Ebola was confirmed.

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
71. No. They removed it due to public misconceptions and fear.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:27 AM
Oct 2014

And so their drivers wouldn't be continually hassled about which ambulance they were driving.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
72. Drivers who drove him are in quarantine.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:32 AM
Oct 2014

Ambulance has a caution tape around it. Seems kind of bizarre if there was no risk from it.

"Chopper 5 showed Dallas Fire-Rescue ambulance 37 parked away from all other vehicles at the training center in the 5000 block of Dolphin Road. The ambulance was wrapped in red caution tape and blocked in."
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/health/Dallas-Fire-Rescue-Crew-That-Transported-Ebola-Patient-Quarantined-Ambulance-Pulled-From-Service-277675341.html

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
75. Okay, go ahead and be freaked out if you want.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:47 AM
Oct 2014

Ever hear of the expression, "an abundance of caution"?

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
69. Not likely. Ambulances are cleaned after all runs.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:25 AM
Oct 2014

Ebola is destroyed by standard disinfectants, including chlorine bleach.

blogslut

(37,999 posts)
102. EMS Crew Exposed to Ebola Victim Tests Negative
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:42 AM
Oct 2014
DALLAS (AP) — Three members of the ambulance crew that transported a man diagnosed with Ebola to a Dallas hospital have tested negative for the virus and are restricted to their homes as health officials monitor their conditions.

Dallas city spokeswoman Sana Syed says the Dallas Fire-Rescue EMS crew was tested Tuesday night and sent home. They have not exhibited any symptoms of the virus.

Syed says the man transported to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday was vomiting when the ambulance arrived.

She says the ambulance crew is among 12 to 18 people health officials are monitoring because they were exposed to the man. Some are members of his family, but not all...


http://austin.twcnews.com/content/305205/ems-crew-exposed-to-ebola-victim-tests-negative/?ap=1&MP4

Barack_America

(28,876 posts)
66. I hadn't heard that.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:22 AM
Oct 2014

EVERY good history includes a travel history, especially if you're dealing with an infection. That was an inexcusable error. Of course, maybe the patient lied, as you stated.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
74. I'm leaning toward believing the patient lied
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:35 AM
Oct 2014

Since the possibilities seem limited:

1. Either he knew he had contact with sick people in Liberia and still ignored his symptoms for 2 days and then lied about his exposure, or

2. He hadn't knowingly contacted sick people in Liberia, and the patients lied to him about being sick,

3. OR He hadn't knowingly contacted sick people in Liberia, in which case it may be transmitted before patients are symptomatic.

I prefer to believe that he lied. It kind of beats him not being asked about exposure or alternative 3.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
88. people don't always behave rationally, especially if they're in denial
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 07:49 AM
Oct 2014

He wasn't feeling well, he went to the ER for help. The early symptoms are similar to malaria; he may have believed he had malaria and lied to keep from being quarantined.

2 diplomats who knew they were sick broke quarantine. The 1st, Patrick Sawyer, spread it to Nigeria. The 2nd spread it to Lagos, where he was treated in secret by a doctor. The doctor continued socializing even after he had symptoms, spreading it further. A nurse who knew she was exposed broke quarantine.

5 educated people who had should have known better violated quarantines and spread it around.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
90. But if he thought he had malaria, he would have told them about his travel history, considering
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 10:52 AM
Oct 2014

malaria is not prevalent in the US.
Hospital is investigating as to why they let him go the first time.
We don't know if he was asked about his travel history, if he told them about his travel history, etc.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
93. so he may have thought it was something else. It may also have been language barrier
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:06 AM
Oct 2014

As to the rest, exactly. They are investigating how he came to be released.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
63. He was already ill on the 26th. He went to get treatment but instead of being admitted, he was send
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:18 AM
Oct 2014

home. He got sicker and went to the hospital on the 28th. At that time he was admitted.
But for at least four days (his symptoms appeared on the 24th), he was infectious and not isolated.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
54. "There is no risk of transmission during the incubation period...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:43 PM
Sep 2014

... and only low risk of transmission in the early phase of symptomatic patients."

The incubation period of Ebola virus disease (EVD) varies from 2 to 21 days. Person-to-person transmission by means of direct contact with infected persons or their body fluids/secretions is considered the principal mode of transmission. In a household study, secondary transmission took place only if direct physical contact occurred. No transmission was reported without this direct contact. Airborne transmission has not been documented during previous EVD outbreaks."

The post incubation symptoms "include vomiting, diarrhea, and, in some cases, hemorrhaging of mucus membranes, such as nose, nail beds and eyes—in other words, pretty hard to miss."

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
56. I didn't say there was risk of transmission during incubation, nor did I say there is airborne.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:51 PM
Sep 2014

What I said is that the 1st symptom is a low fever, which is easily missed. You are considered symptomatic with a fever of 101.5 F per the CDC. That is why, for example, Dr. Brantly immediately isolated himself when he developed a fever.

But nice try at rewriting my post and countering CDC information with the same incomplete information provided by Qz, whoever that is.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
59. Actually, the information I shared with you was from the World Health Organization (WHO)
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:09 AM
Oct 2014

And the symptoms of someone who is contagious (as per the quote you took from the article and I reiterated) are very relevant in this context.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
65. Humans are not infectious until they develop symptoms. First symptoms are the sudden onset of fever
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:21 AM
Oct 2014

"Humans are not infectious until they develop symptoms. First symptoms are the sudden onset of fever, fatigue, muscle pain, headache and sore throat.'

That is directly from WHO.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

Again, the 1st symptom is sudden onset of fever. Again, that is why the health care workers in the epidemic constantly monitor their temperatures, and why Dr. Brantly isolated himself as soon as he saw an elevated temperature.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
79. The WHO also say, "only low risk of transmission in the early phase of symptomatic patients"
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 01:00 AM
Oct 2014
Summary of epidemiological facts and experience

The incubation period of Ebola virus disease (EVD) varies from 2 to 21 days. Person-to-person transmission by means of direct contact with infected persons or their body fluids/secretions is considered the principal mode of transmission. In a household study, secondary transmission took place only if direct physical contact occurred. No transmission was reported without this direct contact. Airborne transmission has not been documented during previous EVD outbreaks.

There is no risk of transmission during the incubation period and only low risk of transmission in the early phase of symptomatic patients. The risk of infection during transport of persons can be further reduced through use of infection control precautions (see paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3).

http://www.who.int/ith/updates/20140421/en/

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
81. Low doesn't mean no.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 01:06 AM
Oct 2014

Furthermore, this guy was highly symptomatic the second time he went to the hospital.
Somebody screwed up when they let him go first time he showed up for treatment.

FourScore

(9,704 posts)
47. "Don't worry your pretty little head about that nasty ebola virus!"
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:28 PM
Sep 2014

Meanwhile, the virus is spreading.

I don't think people need to panic, but let's be clear...This is NOT under control.

Marrah_G

(28,581 posts)
78. It doesn't matter what you say, if people want to freak out, they will
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 12:55 AM
Oct 2014

Your post is absolutely correct but I just don't think anyone inclined to believe the worst is going to have their minds changed by knowledge/facts.

I am far more concerned about respiratory and emerging influenza strains coming out of SE Asia.

Turborama

(22,109 posts)
83. An FYI: Q&As on Transmission From the CDC
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:33 AM
Oct 2014
What are body fluids?
Ebola has been detected in blood and many body fluids. Body fluids include saliva, mucus, vomit, feces, sweat, tears, breast milk, urine, and semen.

Can Ebola spread by coughing? By sneezing?
Unlike respiratory illnesses like measles or chickenpox, which can be transmitted by virus particles that remain suspended in the air after an infected person coughs or sneezes, Ebola is transmitted by direct contact with body fluids of a person who has symptoms of Ebola disease. Although coughing and sneezing are not common symptoms of Ebola, if a symptomatic patient with Ebola coughs or sneezes on someone, and saliva or mucus come into contact with that person’s eyes, nose or mouth, these fluids may transmit the disease.

What does “direct contact” mean?
Direct contact means that body fluids (blood, saliva, mucus, vomit, urine, or feces) from an infected person (alive or dead) have touched someone’s eyes, nose, or mouth or an open cut, wound, or abrasion.

How long does Ebola live outside the body?
Ebola is killed with hospital-grade disinfectants (such as household bleach). Ebola on dried on surfaces such as doorknobs and countertops can survive for several hours; however, virus in body fluids (such as blood) can survive up to several days at room temperature.

Are patients who recover from Ebola immune for life? Can they get it again - the same or a different strain?
Recovery from Ebola depends on good supportive clinical care and a patient’s immune response. Available evidence shows that people who recover from Ebola infection develop antibodies that last for at least 10 years, possibly longer.

We don’t know if people who recover are immune for life or if they can become infected with a different species of Ebola.

If someone survives Ebola, can he or she still spread the virus?
Once someone recovers from Ebola, they can no longer spread the virus. However, Ebola virus has been found in semen for up to 3 months. People who recover from Ebola are advised to abstain from sex or use condoms for 3 months.

Can Ebola be spread through mosquitos?
There is no evidence that mosquitos or other insects can transmit Ebola virus. Only mammals (for example, humans, bats, monkeys and apes) have shown the ability to spread and become infected with Ebola virus.

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/transmission/qas.html

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
91. Looks like it's already spreading.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 10:57 AM
Oct 2014

Sounds like this second person is already showing symptoms.

"DALLAS — Due to close contact with a patient diagnosed with the Ebola virus, a second person is under the close monitoring of health officials as a possible second patient, said the director of Dallas County's health department Wednesday morning in an interview with WFAA."


http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/01/thompson-dallas-county-ebola-patient-cases/16524303/

 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
94. It says nothing about a second person showing symptoms.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:11 AM
Oct 2014

Look, they should have caught this guy on the first visit, but they did catch him on the second. They have, or will very soon, identify all those who came into contact with him from the 24th through the 28th. Those people will be monitored and then quarantined immediately upon showing any symptoms.

The ones most likely to be infected are the ambulance workers and his family, who were in contact with him when he was showing severe symptoms.

Texas, and the US, will declare this contained by Nov. 10.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
95. That's my own conclusion.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:14 AM
Oct 2014

They are saying that person is a possible patient.
If this person was not already symptomatic, why would they be saying that? Specifically about this one person?
They are supposedly monitoring all people this first patient came in contact with.
Why would the be singling out a "possible second patient" if this second patient was not already symptomatic?

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
98. They are probably watching as this person may have been exposed and they want to nip the spread
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:23 AM
Oct 2014

in the bud, IN CASE he starts showing symptoms. Rather than letting a possibly exposed possibly infectd person decide whether or not to seek help IF they show symptoms, monitoring them seems a wise thing to do.

My guess is this person was closer, physically, to the already sick one and hence likely exposed and in the incubation period where the rest of the city probably were not exposed.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
100. They are monitoring all of the contacts of the first patient.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:35 AM
Oct 2014

Why would they be singling out this particular person as a second patient if this person was not already showing symptoms?
It's rather obvious they don't want to spread panic.
I don't see them talking about possible second patient unless that patient was already symptomatic (such as a fever).

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
103. That's what I am saying.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:42 AM
Oct 2014

I bet the second one is already symptomatic.
And so it's likely spreading.

Adsos Letter

(19,459 posts)
108. Yes, I was agreeing with you on that point.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:55 AM
Oct 2014

Although, until evidence shows otherwise, I tend to think if it has spread beyond the original patient in Dallas that it won't move beyond the group being monitored.

Hope I'm right.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
104. Because they were physically closer and more likely exposed. Maybe they had sex, or
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:44 AM
Oct 2014

this person helped cleanup after the sick one. Maybe the sick one had a nose bleed and this one cleaned up the blood. Or they vomitted, or had some other bodily fluid exposure. From the article, it sounds like they were very close, very probably exposed where other friends and family had only casual contact that was not xposure to bodily fluids.

it is simple. Closely monitor one who was exposed to bodily fluids so in case they got it, it will be caught quickly. People with casual exposure, living in the same house but not exposes to bodily fluids, keep an eye on them.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
113. Hi, home on regular computer so can more easily write. IF he were showing symptoms, he'd be in
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 01:59 PM
Oct 2014

isolation because at that point, being symptomatic, he'd be putting out the virus, contagious and others could catch it from him (I am using "him" for simplicity, not because it is male).

The more likely someone came into contact with the symptomatic, now hospitalized, patient's bodily fluids, the more closely they will monitor them as more likely they caught it.

As soon as any of them show symptoms, they will be put into isolation as then they will be contagious.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
125. Certainly wouldn't hurt to take as many precautions as possible.
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 12:45 AM
Oct 2014

I'm not convinced of any imminent American pandemic or anything truly insane like that, but I'm glad that the CDC's trying to keep up with this. But I do think more may be needed if things get worse, however.

librechik

(30,674 posts)
105. All the experts I've heard say ebola is a problem we'll be dealing with for a long time. Like flu
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 11:45 AM
Oct 2014

It's not going away now that' it's out of the jungle.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
124. What? That sounds like B.S. to me, because I've never once heard that.
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 12:43 AM
Oct 2014

Have you been reading Mercola or something?

Oh, and btw, influenza was never once exclusive to jungles, either.....just thought I'd point that out.

librechik

(30,674 posts)
136. ...
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 03:09 PM
Oct 2014

here's one-- pay special attention to the epidemic specialist lady from the CFR--she tells it like it is…
http://www.businessweek.com/videos/2014-10-02/ebola-crisis-dot-charlie-rose-10-02

unfortunately, they edited out the last 5 mins where everyone agreed it has to be admitted there will be more cases and more over time here. But it's already a long term public health issue, since it was identified about 40 years ago. And every hospital is prepared for the occasional dengue fever or even plague victim. Of course there are long term protocols already in place--we just have to remember to use them.

here's a general article--it includes links to the WHO study and the CDC study, both of which advise a long term strategy.
http://news.sciencemag.org/africa/2014/09/who-cdc-publish-grim-new-ebola-projections

I just don't understand your objection. Should we be less prepared? never mind, you're ignored. Average isn't good enough for me.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
128. If they get a vaccine that works and can ramp up production, then no.
Thu Oct 2, 2014, 02:04 AM
Oct 2014

That's the best hope I would think in the next year or so.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
114. This person was not contagious while on the plane. In the ER however, they were.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:01 PM
Oct 2014

Have you ever been exposed to a sick person, maybe someone with a cold, the flu, even measles? It takes a bit of time for the virus to build up, for you to not just become sick but to be putting out the virus, be contagious.

People in the ER, anyone who came in close contact with them AFTER they showed symptoms and became contagious, they need to be monitered for the next 3 weeks and IF any of them get sick, they will be placed in isolation until what they have is determined.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
115. Who else was on the plane sneezing? Maybe someone who's dead now.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:07 PM
Oct 2014

And who didn't go to the ER.

Whatever.

Viruses mutate, too. Who knows how well this can be contained or how quickly it will spread? It clearly wasn't contained in Dallas.

I think Congress needs to cut more Ebola-fighting funding and buy more guns instead, cuz, you know, Jesus and freedumb and 2nd amendment.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
116. I didn't go to the ER and don't think I have ebola.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:16 PM
Oct 2014

wtf?

Are you saying this person should have been prevented from flying, even though he wasn't contagious, because someone else sneezed and died? I do not understand what you are saying.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
118. asking for clarification is "cute"? wtf?
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:21 PM
Oct 2014

Are you saying this person should have been prevented from flying, even though he wasn't contagious, because someone else sneezed and died? I do not understand what you are saying.

 

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)
120. Cultural differences are also a part of it.
Wed Oct 1, 2014, 02:42 PM
Oct 2014

In West Africa, the cultural issues surrounding death are different. Family members must wash the body immediately after death according to custom.

That's one heck of a way to be exposed to body fluids.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Stay Calm and Carry On: W...