Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is a scientific paper out saying this Ebola strain is mutating at the same rate as seasonal flu. Unless you have some credential as a specialist in infectious disease, statements like that are just unsubstantiated speculation with no basis.
There is a scientific paper that says that Ebola, once you die, will turn you into a walking dead zombie and your first impulse is to eat your family. Unless you have some credential as a specialist in the undead, statements like yours are just unsubstantiated speculation with no basis
Well some hospitals are thinking of whether or not to even treat Ebola patients...and our beloved insurance companies are now having Ebola care stricken from new policies...can always count on the insurance companies...can't we? Now we pay double the premium (some of us) for new policies that will not treat the new age AIDS. Here we go again.....
Private healthcare insurance policies typically exclude offshore medical evacuation. Reportedly some UK and US commercial insurers will quote business travel/accident policies with or without evacuation and Ebola treatment.
Both CDC and the Canadian equivalent strongly recommend employees and volunteers considering going to the affected countries make sure their sponsoring organizations/employers cover international medical evacuation and Ebola a "know before you go", sort of thing.
All but one state requires employers to maintain Worker's Comp insurance and each state would have to strike Ebola. That's not going to happen. Workers Comp does not cover volunteers.
the person had not come in contact with a recently sick person. . .therefore the health questionnaire wouldn't of mattered.
for a person who worked in a lab with a specimen? I don't really care about Cruise ship procedure. The problem is there was NO reason that I can see. . .for the procedure to be executed.
Once again, why should she communicate or let people know? who cares. She was a lab worker with a specimen.
blah blah blah - your making stuff up. 1) she had a lab specimen 2) there was no evidence ever presented at exposure 3) by the time this #@! happened she was at the end of the 20 day threshold. Meaning the chance was on the tail end of impossible she had it
so i'm sticking with these people, everyone involved, smoke and mirrors IDIOTS
The lab tech boarded her cruise on 10/12 in the midst of the hyperbole. It wasn't a week ago that those susceptible to fear mongering seemed to believe this thing was spinning out of control and an Ebola pandemic was right around the corner. Given the politicization of Ebola and the over the top media fear mongering, the " abundance of caution" thing quickly prevailed.
As the rolling 21 day periods of exposure expired and no one, (with the exception of the 2 nurses) out of hundreds- thousands who shared 3 flights with Duncan, 2 airport layovers, lived with Duncan for 8 days or had any contact with Duncan or his bodily fluids became sick, the hyperbole quickly lost traction.
The pendulum usually swings to extremes before it centers.
Note that in my link Dr. Jahrling (who is referred to in your link) says: “The likelihood (of mutation) is remote squared.” Indeed, it is noted that this Ebola does not seem to mutate 'very quickly' (which I admit is vague).
Well some hospitals are thinking of whether or not to even treat Ebola patients...and our beloved insurance companies are now having Ebola care stricken from new policies...can always count on the insurance companies...can't we? Now we pay double the premium (some of us) for new policies that will not treat the new age AIDS. Here we go again.....
The insurance plans for which coverage is being changed are policies that cover such things as event cancellations and hospitals for which operation is disrupted by Ebola admissions - such as devoting an entire 24 bed ICU to Mr. Duncan.
It is property insurance and business insurance, not health insurance. Hospitals will see an effect on their business insurance premiums. The effect on the rest of us will be indirect, as hospital costs are reflected in patient charges.
Health insurance companies would find a hard time trying to exclude Ebola. That will not fly any better than trying to exclude coverage for influenza - which costs them a whole lot more than Ebola ever will.
The price of trip cancellation insurance might increase, too, based on the decisions of the company with which the lab worker sailed.
It is for the best that not all hospitals try to treat Ebola now. The US is going to see so few cases that equipping every small hospital to do that does not make sense financially. However, even smaller hospitals need to be able to safely isolate a suspected Ebola patient, stabilize him, and arrange transfer to a facility that is capable of treating him.
Last edited by suzy_q2010; 10-23-2014 at 01:32 PM..
Reason: Oops! Duplicated another poster's source!
There is a scientific paper out saying this Ebola strain is mutating at the same rate as seasonal flu. Unless you have some credential as a specialist in infectious disease, statements like that are just unsubstantiated speculation with no basis.
This is from the premier Ebola genetic research team:
"Some of the genetic variation detected in these studies may affect the primers (starting points for DNA synthesis) used in PCR-based diagnostic tests, emphasizing the importance of genomic surveillance and the need for vigilance."
"The team's catalog of 395 mutations (over 340 that distinguish the current outbreak from previous ones, and over 50 within the West African outbreak) may serve as a starting point for other research groups. 'We've uncovered more than 300 genetic clues about what sets this outbreak apart from previous outbreaks,' said Stephen Gire, a research scientist in the Sabeti lab at the Broad Institute and Harvard. 'Although we don't know whether these differences are related to the severity of the current outbreak, by sharing these data with the research community, we hope to speed up our understanding of this epidemic and support global efforts to contain it.' "
Therefore the most pressing concerns with mutations is that they might affect the tests used to identify Ebola in patients and that they might be related to making patients sicker.
In addition, mutations that affect the part of the virus for which a vaccine is targeted might make the vaccine ineffective.
The thing to remember is that all viruses mutate all the time. Mutations are just typographical errors during replication of the genetic code of the virus. Almost half of mutations do nothing at all to alter the function of the organism.
The more times the virus is allowed to replicate, the more opportunities there are for it to mutate. Therefore the sooner the outbreak in Africa is controlled, the better.
Just a thought. When an outbreak is controlled, such as in Nigeria with patient zero Sawyer and what appears to be soon here in the USA with patient zero Duncan, all the mutant forms of the original virus introduced by patient zero disappear. They are gone forever.
Note that in my link Dr. Jahrling (who is referred to in your link) says: “The likelihood (of mutation) is remote squared.” Indeed, it is noted that this Ebola does not seem to mutate 'very quickly' (which I admit is vague).
I stand on the side in all of this "we really don't know". Long shots usually don't come in but sometimes they do. Man has trouble enough predicting the weather with any kind of accuracy let alone how a virus will/won't mutate and into what.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.