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.
You don't think it would be wise to let the private sector deal with this?
The private sector won't touch this. There's no profit. All the ZMapp treatments were given at no cost. And most of the people who need it couldn't pay for it anyway. Ergo, no profit.
Because Ebola is a blood-borne pathogen (meaning it's transmitted by contact with infected body fluids). The suits are worn not because Ebola is a particularly contagious disease (it's not) - but because if you're infected, the consequences are dire.
And the good sense of wearing hazmat suits around Ebola patients and things that might have their body fluids on them in no way supports the FALSE belief that Ebola can be transmitted via mosquitoes.
I want to see what happens when a case is handled correctly from the very beginning. Duncan's treatment was delayed 48 hours, which undoubtedly harmed his chance of survival.
The delay did not "undoubtedly" harm his chance of survival. All that would have been done from the time between his first visit to the hospital and the time he developed more severe symptoms would be to treat his fever and then start treating them as they happened. All that early identification of cases does is to limit exposure to others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Globe199
Well, that's not exactly true. He would have received at least 48 additional hours of supportive care. They would have given him the experiment drug 48 hours earlier.
The experimental drug required FDA approval for use. It was not even released to give to Mr. Duncan until Oct. 6, and that was after his doctors asked for permission. The drug he received is being developed to treat entirely different diseases, not Ebola.
Quote:
Futhermore, ZMapp does look effective. If only we could produce it faster. In my opinion, that's a job for the US government since the drug companies won't do it.
The government does not have any facilities for producing drugs. all it can do is provide funding. The drug companies are doing it. That's why ZMapp exists. Funding has been limited. Ebola until now has been a problem confined to Africa. How much responsibility should the US have for paying to develop treatment for diseases Americans do not get?
Quote:
Originally Posted by katygirl68
I'm not one to go for these types of theories, but I cannot help but think the drug companies are willing to let Ebola come here so they can make their vaccine and get paid for it. Of course, some people are going to have to die in the process, but oh well.
Good grief. Drug companies have no control over whether Ebola comes here or not.
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.
