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.
It is what it was: a disease of impoverished people and those who treat them. The US has little to be concerned over. Back to ISIS!
Hmm, once upon a time AIDS was called a disease of gay men and was subsequently ignored as a result. I think it would be prudent to not repeat the failures of our past and nip this in the bud right away with all the resources available to do so. To me, this should include limiting visas from those affected countries, working in those countries to help eradicate this latest epidemic and ensuring our health care workers have both the training and necessary equipment to deal with any potential cases. We seem to be falling woefully short on several of those areas.
it is about time they considered it.
many have been saying this for quite a while already.
I am surprised they just thought of this.
antibodies are only produced by our own bodies effective against the virus
as a result
why not use the peoples blood that are now immune? the so to speak.
many online have already expressed this some doctors as well
especially now since Dr Brantly did it you know it is suppose to help
but his blood still contains the virus it is just that his blood is now immune to the virus itself for now
NBC is way late to the party. That was done when the first guy with Ebola was treated in Nebraska.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
Duncans's girl friend and others who were quarantined in his contaminated apartment will be released today free of Ebola. It goes to underscore and bold the CDC contention that Ebola is simply not that contagious. It is, primarily, a disease of caregivers.
Duncan's girlfriend and the others in his apartment are an anecdote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
It is what it was: a disease of impoverished people and those who treat them. The US has little to be concerned over. Back to ISIS!
NBC is way late to the party. That was done when the first guy with Ebola was treated in Nebraska.
Duncan's girlfriend and the others in his apartment are an anecdote.
I wouldn't be so blase.
Is that the smart, prudent move on her part & officials responsibilities to the general public?
No.
Why is there even an argument about it.
In light of this just coming to the US this is a foolhardy selfish act. Should not we err on the side of caution & responsibility when it comes to Ebola here?
Duncans's girl friend and others who were quarantined in his contaminated apartment will be released today free of Ebola. It goes to underscore and bold the CDC contention that Ebola is simply not that contagious. It is, primarily, a disease of caregivers.
She should have no problem returning to her apartment that was disinfected in the beginning.
Back from the "front lines" in the ER, I can tell you nobody is laughing. Every person is screened, carefully, for travel and history of symptoms. Our ears normally up are way up for anything out of the ordinary. Everybody watches the patient carefully when the ambulance gurney hits the door and they come into the ER. It is a little tenser a ratcheting up of eyes on the patient. On transfers the other hospital asks the same questions and then confirms the answers.
Most of us are just careful taking histories We have protocols to immediately contain. Rooms ready, hazmat ready, phone numbers on speed dial to the chief and the phone tree. It is more fatiguing body and mind. It's taxing. If someone vomiting comes into the ER you can bet nobody is rushing in until we know, for sure that they are not at risk for this killer virus....until we know for sure.
Is that the smart, prudent move on her part & officials responsibilities to the general public?
No.
Why is there even an argument about it.
In light of this just coming to the US this is a foolhardy selfish act. Should not we err on the side of caution & responsibility when it comes to Ebola here?
I will say in this woman's defense, she probably had the cruise lined up for months. She felt she was low risk. She was a supervisor. I just heard them reiterate on TV, Ebola is contracted by direct contact with bodily fluids. At the most, she may have handled some blood in a tube, wearing gloves, using the "universal precautions" that are taken for every blood specimen. (I seriously doubt she drew the blood herself.)
Is that the smart, prudent move on her part & officials responsibilities to the general public?
No.
Why is there even an argument about it.
In light of this just coming to the US this is a foolhardy selfish act. Should not we err on the side of caution & responsibility when it comes to Ebola here?
I think a lot of people are confusing the side of caution with irrational panic.
I will say in this woman's defense, she probably had the cruise lined up for months. She felt she was low risk. She was a supervisor. I just heard them reiterate on TV, Ebola is contracted by direct contact with bodily fluids. At the most, she may have handled some blood in a tube, wearing gloves, using the "universal precautions" that are taken for every blood specimen. (I seriously doubt she drew the blood herself.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
I think a lot of people are confusing the side of caution with irrational panic.
Being one that "was there" and involved it is simple common sense to be cautious (which is not panic).
The two that have not sure have caused businesses and their employer a lot of unnecessary grief and expense.
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.