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.
I don't feel as though I have to hunt for the video of the press conference and verify what I heard with my own ears to prove I am not lying. Very insulting, btw. I don't know why you keep asking me for a link - if you don't believe me, you can google it yourself (or not). Whatever the case, I do wish you'd stop acting as though you are the final authority on Ebola.
I do not think it is too much to ask to be able to hear or read what you feel is so misleading. Sorry you feel insulted. I cannot find it. I tried.
Agreed. Two doctors, three nurses, two lab techs, 1 x-ray tech and two evs workers. The lady who brings food should leave it outside the room. Also, those workers deserve hazard pay .
I suspect they'll eventually need to offer hazard pay to find staff willing to treat ebola patients.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Each of those machines required experts trained in them. And with 24/7 care you had multiple shifts.
They can still reduce the numbers with careful scheduling. There are twelve hour shifts. That would be two per 24 hours. Even if they do regular 8 hour shifts and keep it at 3 per 24 hours, there are other ways to reduce numbers. Don't allow vacations or days off during the treatment of an ebola patient so no other workers need to be exposed. That's not unreasonable since ebola patients don't live long or recover within a few weeks. Give them an extended paid vacation after the patient dies or recovers.
Choose another team to work on the next ebola patient while the first team goes through the 21 day monitoring. That way they can easily identify which patient transmitted ebola to staff. Don't give me crap about there are a limited number of staff at hospitals. Dallas has more than one hospital. There is a way to do this right if they bother to try.
And in your vast experience, how many? Sorry to be snarky, but Duncan had multi-system organ failure, and was spewing fluids from every orifice non-stop for 10 days, ie, lots of work.
I'd rather you be snarky than use the word snarky. I hate that word. The only place I hear/read it is on CD.
The CDC says to limit the number of workers exposed to the patient. I'm sure there are some unnecessary additional workers due to scheduling.
Maybe it's time to consider regional exclusive Ebola Medical Facilities and quarantine centers.
That sounds like a good idea to me but it won't happen.
It would keep the Ebola patients isolated from the rest of the hospital patients, the staff would consist of very well trained workers who would know how to use the suits and would specialize in caring for Ebola patients. The people who are quarantined and being watched would not have to be taken to someone's home or put into a regular hospital--and if they tested positive for Ebola they would already be in an Ebola facility.
Turns out that in Duncan's case as well as the case of the Spanish nurse, neither got prompt help. The nurse went to her own doctor and was told to go home, she was fine. (Sound familiar?) A day or two later when she called an ambulance she had to wait five hours.
Maybe we should take a page from whatever they used to do for TB patients. I am old enough to remember that they were sent away somewhere to a place where they could get treatment and recuperate while not infecting other people.
I suspect they'll eventually need to offer hazard pay to find staff willing to treat ebola patients.
They can still reduce the numbers with careful scheduling. There are twelve hour shifts. That would be two per 24 hours. Even if they do regular 8 hour shifts and keep it at 3 per 24 hours, there are other ways to reduce numbers. Don't allow vacations or days off during the treatment of an ebola patient so no other workers need to be exposed. That's not unreasonable since ebola patients don't live long or recover within a few weeks. Give them an extended paid vacation after the patient dies or recovers.
Choose another team to work on the next ebola patient while the first team goes through the 21 day monitoring. That way they can easily identify which patient transmitted ebola to staff. Don't give me crap about there are a limited number of staff at hospitals. Dallas has more than one hospital. There is a way to do this right if they bother to try.
That sounds like a good idea to me but it won't happen.
Maybe we should take a page from whatever they used to do for TB patients. I am old enough to remember that they were sent away somewhere to a place where they could get treatment and recuperate while not infecting other people.
I suppose it might happen if it continues to spread. We did separate Polio patients in facilities years ago.
I would bet there are Govt plans for just the situation sitting on someone's shelf for the last 40 years.
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.
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.
