Ebola

I haven't heard anything about the procedures used at Texas Presbyterian that inspires even the tiniest confidence. On the other hand, nobody got infected at Emory in Atlanta or during transport during the handling of two separate cases.I'm more than willing to accept the conclusion that Atlantans are more competent than Texans. For now I think it is reasonable to suspect a breach in security measures.http://www.weather.com/...urse-tests-positive-ebola-20141012

quote:

---

Dr. Tom Frieden, head of the CDC, said the diagnosis showed that there was a breach of safety protocol and that all of the health care workers who treated Duncan are now thought to have been exposed.

​

Several other hospitals have treated Ebola patients without workers contracting the disease, including Emory Hospital in Atlanta, Forbes reports.

---

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Do you have any particular suspicion about how the virus might be transmitted? In my mind the variables would be 1) during which phases the virus could be transmitted? 2) can it be transmitted without direct contact from a sick person?There is no need to suspect anything with respect to item 1 because we know that the nurse treated a sick person.

I'm not sure we've been told anything different than what you describe.

I'm quite sure you are incorrect. Given the high fatality rate, if Ebola were to mutate to the point where the virus could be transferred via air, we would have no hope of stopping the spread of Ebola before half of us (everyone in the world) were dead.On the other hand, if Ebola was spread only through sharing needles and having unprotected sex with a symptomatic patient, the viruses high fatality rate would result in the virus becoming self defeating.It is in fact the combination of relatively easy transmission and high fatality rate that make Ebola so dangerous. If it became possible to catch Ebola from an asymptomatic patient, that would present a substantial additional danger.

I gave some examples of what would be easy and hard transmissions. I don't see how you can dismiss a remark about 'relative' ease of transmission by citing an absolute number.Regarding an r0 of 2.0. Not all that comforting:Flu Transmission

quote:

---

Some analyses report that influenza typically has a transmission rate of about 10. But others suggest that flu is not as highly transmissible in a community setting as has been imagined. The R0 for the 1918 pandemic was estimated to be only 1.8 in one study, while the 1918 pandemic strain's R0 was estimated at around 2 by another estimate.

---

duplicateEdited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Huh? I wonder why those Africans wouldn't hunt the same kind of animals that are indigenous to the American midwest?

I hear ya bro. Screw flying in a bunch of soldiers, doctors, and other health workers. Let's just blow up the Suez Canal, isolate Africa from everywhere else, and let them give Ebola to each other. I'm sure we can keep Ebola to just the one continent forever if we do the right thing.

Sorry. sfs covered everything.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Cannot moms pass antibodies to their unborn children? I know that other posters seem to be talking about some kind of inheritance, but that would be some kind of Lamarckian nonsense.

removedEdited by NoNukes, : i was wrong

As has been pointed out, people all of the world eat something other than domesticated animals. I don't need to wonder why people without access to domesticated animals don't eat domesticated animals.

Double gloving provides protection during the exposure even (while working with patients). At removal time, the idea is to remove the gloves without transferring any contamination to the skin.The interior side of the interior glove can be assumed to be uncontaminated. If your de-gloving procedure involves contacting that only that surface of a glove with your bare hand, you should be able to remove that second glove without contaminating either hand, by stick your thumb under that glove and turning the glove inside out as you remove it. The procedure would require a high level of care. The potential for error seems extremely high. You might even put on a clean, loose fitting glove on your bare hand before removing that second glove.Using some kind of glove puller for the interior gloves does seem to be a safer option.

I suppose so. My experience is with radioactive contamination suits. Our innermost gloves were just plain cotton.