General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSecond Ebola Infected Nurse is Being Flown to Emory Today.
Just heard this on MSNBC. Good.
They are far better equipped to handle Ebola than Texas Health Presbyterian, but Emory can't be the only hospital we rely on.
No link yet.
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)cases that were negative.
I'm not panicking, but it would be helpful to know which ones are/aren't.
Response to RiffRandell (Original post)
ann--- This message was self-deleted by its author.
Baitball Blogger
(46,709 posts)People who are in contact of an Ebola patient within 21 days should probably not fly. Or, at least this information needs to be communicated.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)Response to In_The_Wind (Reply #13)
ann--- This message was self-deleted by its author.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)This may be the single most important -- and blatantly honest -- research report released by any official body since the beginning of the Ebola outbreak. The WHO's "Ebola situation assessment" report, found here, explains that only 95% of Ebola infections experience incubation within the widely-reported 21-day period. Here's the actual language from the report:
95% of confirmed cases have an incubation period in the range of 1 to 21 days; 98% have an incubation period that falls within the 1 to 42 day interval.
Unless the sentence structure is somehow misleading, this passage appears to indicate the following:
95% of Ebola incubations occur from 1 - 21 days
3% of Ebola incubations occur from 21 - 42 days
2% of Ebola incubations are not explained (why?)
If this interpretation of the WHO's statistics are correct, it would mean that:
1 in 20 Ebola infections may result in incubations lasting significantly longer than 21 days
The 21-day quarantine currently being enforced by the CDC is entirely insufficient to halt an outbreak
People who are released from observation or self-quarantine after 21 days may still become full-blown Ebola patients in the subsequent three weeks, even if they have shown no symptoms of infection during the first 21 days. (Yes, read that again...)
Any declaration that an outbreak is over requires 42 days with no new infections
840high
(17,196 posts)In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)I have always been a news junkie. Now, I tape the news and fast forward through stuff that doesn't interest me.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)You can look at that in several ways, a person could have multiple exposures and no one knows which one should be the reference to prepatency, or a person may not be able to be connected to a known exposure.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)It's certainly a matter of the requirements for counting days from an exposure, you have to have a known starting date.
If that isn't known, for any reason, that person is going to show up in the dataset as a prepatent period of unknown duration.
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)They had former SG Richard Carmona on saying pretty much that.
She may have been told, but now the CDC is going to make certain that anyone being monitored will not fly.
What a freaking mess.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)But apparently nobody is checking to see if Mr. Duncan's contacts are traveling all over the place?
Response to LisaL (Reply #10)
ann--- This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ms. Toad
(34,072 posts)because she decided to visit my county and everyone is freaking out.
City Lights
(25,171 posts)ecstatic
(32,704 posts)B2G
(9,766 posts)Presbyterian isn't prepared and isn't going to be able to staff for any more patients.
Get Pham out of there while you're at it.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)KeepItReal
(7,769 posts)https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?dsrcid=1345377#rows:id=1
Check out Douglass Hawthorne, CEO of Texas Health Resources, Inc. (parent non-profit company for the hospital).
deutsey
(20,166 posts)http://www.democracynow.org/2014/10/15/as_second_dallas_nurse_diagnosed_with
LisaL
(44,973 posts)The genie is out of the bottle?
How many of those infected nurses are running around the country now?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)There are 74 checking their temps twice daily. No one, other than those now treating the two, are at risk of infection from these 76. No matter where they are around the country.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)How do you know what the other 74 are doing?
They could be running around all over the place, if this one was traveling commercial airline.
I have no confidence whatsoever other 74 stayed put.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)LisaL
(44,973 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)LisaL
(44,973 posts)Or am I confusing you with somebody else, equally clueless?
boston bean
(36,221 posts)for fear they have been infected.
I thought I saw that in the scroll on CNN.
Ms. Toad
(34,072 posts)Because she had helped care for Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan, and because another health worker who cared for Duncan had been diagnosed with Ebola, the worker was not allowed to travel on a commercial plane with other people, said Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The worker had a temperature of 99.5 Fahrenheit (37.5 Celsius) before she boarded her flight, he added.
Health care workers who had been exposed to Duncan were undergoing self-monitoring. They were allowed to travel but not on a commercial plane with other people, Frieden said.
Moving forward, the CDC will ensure that no one else in such a situation travels outside of a closed environment, he said.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/health/texas-ebola-outbreak/index.html
Fever = contagious.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)The hospital in Texas is quickly becoming a manual on how NOT to deal with an emerging deadly infectious pathogen.
But, I don't want people in charge to stick to beliefs that subsequently are clearly flawed.
Officials in positions of responsibility have to assess what contributed to bad outcomes and adapt to reduce preventable risks in light of what they learn.
adigal
(7,581 posts)I think we should stop all flights in and out of Texas. Maybe put a fence around it too. </snark on the fence part>
LisaL
(44,973 posts)Considering she flew from OH to TX.
And GA.
Since they are moving her there.
And who knows what other states, since these infected people are apparently free to travel where the please.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Why do you so desperately want to spread unfounded fear? There is no public outbreak.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)She already had fever on the plane. So she was already symptomatic.
"DALLAS -- There are now two Dallas nurses being treated for the Ebola virus, and News 8 has learned that the second patient flew on an airplane Monday with a low-grade fever of 99.5 degrees."
http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/15/second-dallas-hospital-worker-diagnosed-ebola/17290677/
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)Apparently, you couldn't fly if your temp was 100.4 or higher.
Now it's been lowered to 100.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)The she flew with a fever is mind boggling.
RiffRandell
(5,909 posts)I wonder if she told the person who took her temp?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You should really educate yourself on how the virus works.
Remember, there were people living in the same home with Duncan for 4 days while he had a fever. Not one of them have yet to show symptoms and it is unlikely any of them will.
It is not airborne and it is not easy to catch when caught early.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)LisaL
(44,973 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Ms. Toad
(34,072 posts)because of the means of transmission. But the nurse did have a low grade fever before she boarded the plane. Once you have a fever you are infectious.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/13/report-not-all-ebola-patients-will-display-a-fever/
LisaL
(44,973 posts)Let alone with a fever.
Ms. Toad
(34,072 posts)I'm just countering the person who insists that she was absolutely not contagious when she flew.
While the risk is extremely low, it is not non-zero. The risk is too serious to pretend there was NO risk. That rationale would encourage anyone who was on that flight, who starts running a low grade fever 18 days from now, to say it can't be ebola because there was NO risk of contagion.
While panic is not helpful, it is even more unhelpful for a person to ignore symptoms 18 days from now, or write it off as the flu, because they have been told (1) she had no symptoms and (2) she could not possibly have been infectious during the flight.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)Fever is a symptom. CDC knows that full well.
So she could very well have been contagious.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)amandabeech
(9,893 posts)across the street from NIH. The other possibilities here would be Walter Reed, Univ. of Maryland or Johns Hopkins up in Baltimore.
University of Nebraska has three patients, and I believe there's another in Montana that was originally set up for Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)especially when it comes to Ebola.
Seems there are only four hospitals in the US equipped to handle Ebola, the National Institutes of Health in Maryland, Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, the University of Nebraska Medical Center, and St. Patrick Hospital in Montana.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)UNKNOWN infectious diseases, the most dangerous kind.
The fallout from this clusterfuck could be huge, though. CDC needs to be picking several other top tier hospitals with infectious disease competence for extra training and special equipment. Because we're gonna need a bigger boat.
LisaL
(44,973 posts)It already is.
The woman who was supposed to have been monitored instead flew commercial airline to another state and back.
The day before she showed up in the hospital with fever.
Earth_First
(14,910 posts)Take in some cultural highlights, a sporting event or maybe a children's museum.
There's a plenty to do while visiting Atlanta!
Sounds like fun.
mfcorey1
(11,001 posts)Lurker Deluxe
(1,036 posts)And their website says they are flying nurses FROM Emery to Dallas to assist.
http://www.emoryhealthcare.org/
City Lights
(25,171 posts)Woodruff Health Sciences Center | Oct. 15, 2014
Emory University Hospital anticipates the transfer of a patient from Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas later today. The patient is the second of two health care workers infected while caring for a patient at the Dallas hospital.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Texas Health Resources specifically requested that the patient be transferred to Emory Healthcare.
The patient will be treated in the same isolation unit at Emory University Hospital in which three patients have already been treated. The first two patients were discharged in late August and a third patient is still being treated.
Emory is bound by patient confidentiality and has no additional information regarding this patient.
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2014/10/ehc_ebola_patient_from_texas_health_presbyterian/campus.html
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)I love that guy. He's freaking SUPERMAN!
LisaL
(44,973 posts)He wasn't for Mr. Duncan.