Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 05:54 AM Oct 2014

2nd health care worker tests positive for Ebola at Dallas hospital

(CNN) -- A second health care worker at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital who cared for Thomas Eric Duncan has tested positive for Ebola, the state's health department said Wednesday.

The worker reported a fever Tuesday and was immediately isolated, health department spokeswoman Carrie Williams said.

The preliminary Ebola test was done late Tuesday at the state public health laboratory in Austin, and the results came back around midnight. A second test will be conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
Mayor: 'Concerned' about Ebola spreading
Understanding Ebola protocols
Director: Nurse's infection 'unacceptable'

"Health officials have interviewed the latest patient to quickly identify any contacts or potential exposures, and those people will be monitored," the health department said. "The type of monitoring depends on the nature of their interactions and the potential they were exposed to the virus."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/health/texas-ebola-outbreak/index.html

99 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
2nd health care worker tests positive for Ebola at Dallas hospital (Original Post) MerryBlooms Oct 2014 OP
This is turning out to be more difficult to contain than they thought davidn3600 Oct 2014 #1
ABC, on its early news report, told of the Skidmore Oct 2014 #3
I heard that, and then on ABC just a bit ago, MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #5
Actually, Emory in Atlanta did it quite well, and that was only two months ago. n/t Dawgs Oct 2014 #45
Because it's one of four bisoafety level hospitals in the country. LisaL Oct 2014 #61
Exactly. n/t Dawgs Oct 2014 #64
I understand the first health worker took care of Duncan after he was admitted the second time notadmblnd Oct 2014 #65
Sending all the positive energy I can towards Dallas alfie Oct 2014 #2
Do you think home quarantine is safe containment? FarPoint Oct 2014 #4
I think at home quarintine is safe from a public health standpoint alfie Oct 2014 #8
I don't either TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #10
I'm in line with your train of thought. FarPoint Oct 2014 #26
ah, shit TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #6
But, hey, Duncan was black and poor, a write-off. MoonRiver Oct 2014 #9
or whether or not they're American TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #12
Wow, your mention of this is the first I've heard. notadmblnd Oct 2014 #67
I wonder if the hospital will still be standing after all the lawsuits are done. Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #28
The hospital, probably, it's administration and ownership? Maybe not. HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #53
I remember the first reports of Duncan cwydro Oct 2014 #47
Rick Perry may regret battling ObamaCare B Calm Oct 2014 #7
If the hospitals need money, lawmakers will have taxpayers part with theirs. HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #14
More SOCIALISM, oh my. . . B Calm Oct 2014 #16
Government, has always been an attractive profit center HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #17
So true! B Calm Oct 2014 #22
They should be given federal emergency money Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #30
Texas Tax Cuts = Poor training and service perdita9 Oct 2014 #11
As long as we are a profit based healthcare system, MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #13
But regular hospital don't HAVE what it takes to take care of a patient TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #23
Lassa fever has appeared in the US before. The Velveteen Ocelot Oct 2014 #57
And where was he treated? TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #66
He was seen initially at a hospital in Minnesota. The Velveteen Ocelot Oct 2014 #68
Actually, you are incorrect. MineralMan Oct 2014 #60
I have a very difficult time blaming the hospital TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #15
I have a hard time not blaming the hospital justiceischeap Oct 2014 #18
They first turned him away because he didn't have health insurance. . . Like you, B Calm Oct 2014 #19
Do you have a link for this? kiva Oct 2014 #88
Sure B Calm Oct 2014 #98
Some of these links make no reference to what happened kiva Oct 2014 #99
and no one until recently had imagined that Ebola would come here TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #34
The problem with this is justiceischeap Oct 2014 #36
And just as in West Africa the public needs to be informed TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #71
The hospital admin. is receiving critisism, rightfully so. MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #20
there's is a lot to criticize them for BUT TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #50
CDC this morning is 'Deeply concerned, especially since there is a 2nd caregiver who is now ill'. MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #54
They should have beend deeply concerned right after Mr. Duncan was diagnosed. LisaL Oct 2014 #56
Horrible situation for the nurses and staff. MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #63
The hospital was obviously completely unprepared. LisaL Oct 2014 #74
And this caregiver flew - oy!!! adigal Oct 2014 #87
I just read that. Ugh, mess is right. MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #90
Hospital is absolutely clueless. LisaL Oct 2014 #58
yes, they were clueless, and THAT is the problem TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #73
The hospital is far from blameless. LisaL Oct 2014 #75
that's the point, the CDC was assuring them that they were ready TorchTheWitch Oct 2014 #80
And who lets them get on planes after taking care of an Ebola patient??? adigal Oct 2014 #89
I have no problem blaming the hospital etherealtruth Oct 2014 #24
I dunno, expertise may not have always been the issue--waste stacked to the ceiling? HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #43
Wall off Texas. Let it burn itself out. God knows how many ISIS operatives are spreading it. Katashi_itto Oct 2014 #21
Must have been another "breech of protocol". Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #25
It appears the hospital had NO protocols in place whatsoever to deal with isolation ... etherealtruth Oct 2014 #27
The CDC reassured all that all precautions were being followed. boston bean Oct 2014 #29
+100% MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #31
The CDC credited the hospital with being knowledgable and competent in basic infection control etherealtruth Oct 2014 #33
The CDC said that all precautions were being followed. boston bean Oct 2014 #35
You're making the assumption that hospital admin told the truth justiceischeap Oct 2014 #37
I am making no assumption. The CDC said that all precautions were being followed and boston bean Oct 2014 #40
Exactly. Aerows Oct 2014 #93
the one thing I will agree with is that the CDC cannot trust hospitals ... etherealtruth Oct 2014 #39
The CDC dis assume that our health care system was completely capable of handling this. boston bean Oct 2014 #42
Exactly. LisaL Oct 2014 #59
I expect the hospital to cover up their failures procon Oct 2014 #38
That is it in a nutshell! n/t etherealtruth Oct 2014 #41
CDC are revising the precautions in light of what happened. boston bean Oct 2014 #44
Minimum standards are not always adequate procon Oct 2014 #51
Hospital workers were apparently trying to go a step up above guidelines. LisaL Oct 2014 #55
Dallas news conference on now MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #32
Can the CDC order the patient to be transferred to Ilsa Oct 2014 #46
They could have transferred him. LisaL Oct 2014 #52
Maybe the gubmint-hatin' Texas Republiclowns will wake up and Snarkoleptic Oct 2014 #48
drip, drip, drip heaven05 Oct 2014 #49
Too bad we can't have single payer. raouldukelives Oct 2014 #62
Bisosafety level 4 procedure in lab settings... marions ghost Oct 2014 #69
Not in the initial speciman MerryBlooms Oct 2014 #70
Right marions ghost Oct 2014 #72
"Underestimating this threat in general" Yes, and at every level,from training to adequate equipment suffragette Oct 2014 #76
The idea marions ghost Oct 2014 #97
It has to be how the protocols were used in the Texas hospital... Spazito Oct 2014 #77
These other people were treated at hospitals with biosafety level 4 containment units. LisaL Oct 2014 #79
The texas hospital screwed up from the very beginning... Spazito Oct 2014 #81
The protocols are inadequate. LisaL Oct 2014 #82
The protocols used were the same for years and were able to successfully contain... Spazito Oct 2014 #83
That's absolutely false. LisaL Oct 2014 #85
Yes, the CDC protocols have been used in Africa in the past... Spazito Oct 2014 #91
Doctors without borders use much more stringent PPEs than what CDC has in its guidelines. LisaL Oct 2014 #94
Your point does not negate the fact CDC protocols were used successfully in Africa in... Spazito Oct 2014 #95
A lot of health care professionals have been infected and died in Africa. LisaL Oct 2014 #96
Criminal negligence on the part of hospital administration kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #78
You said it was murder. What changed your mind? nt Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #84
Criminally negligent homicide is just another name for murder, no? kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #86
Actually, negligent homicide is not the same as murder, so, legally, no. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #92

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
3. ABC, on its early news report, told of the
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:18 AM
Oct 2014

way in which waste from the original patient was handled and it definitely sounded like there was not an adequate understanding of how to safely deal with this infectious agent.

MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
5. I heard that, and then on ABC just a bit ago,
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:32 AM
Oct 2014

nurses from Presby had been complaining about disposal of medical waste for some time before the ebola patient.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
61. Because it's one of four bisoafety level hospitals in the country.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:14 AM
Oct 2014

Specifically designed for highly infectious diseases. With people actually trained on how to do it safely.
Looking at the photos, the personnel certainly went above minimum requirements in CDC guidelines by being completely covered.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
65. I understand the first health worker took care of Duncan after he was admitted the second time
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:29 AM
Oct 2014

But I don't think we know if it was contracted during his admittance or during his stay. So far the EMT's that took him to hospital have not fallen ill, nor have those who were living with him. These health workers at the hospital I would imagine have had more intimate contact with his body fluids and they're being admitted before they begin spewing their body fluids.

I think that once hospitals bone up on their procedures and processes and take this threat seriously, new cases will disappear. Now, if these health care workers friends and families come down with it, I may become more concerned, but I still do not think it is time for everyone to freakout and panic.

alfie

(522 posts)
2. Sending all the positive energy I can towards Dallas
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:15 AM
Oct 2014

I hope they are telling all of Duncan's hospital contacts to stay home and avoid having visitors until they are past the 21 day point. And really hope they are all on paid medical leave.

FarPoint

(12,351 posts)
4. Do you think home quarantine is safe containment?
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:22 AM
Oct 2014

I don't.... Maybe I'm a control freak, but I thought all caregivers should of resided within the hospital in their own, sub quarantine housing.

alfie

(522 posts)
8. I think at home quarintine is safe from a public health standpoint
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:45 AM
Oct 2014

I for sure would not want to spend 21 days living in a hospital room eating hospital food. An asymptomatic person is not contagious. Contacts of ebola patients should stay away from other people, a fever can start suddenly, and if low grade the person might still feel fine.

A non-compliant person in quarantine might need to be supervised closely. If I had several people living with me, I would probably want to consider an alternative to staying at home. There are as many different issues as there are people under observation, I don't think there is any one size fits all for this situation.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
10. I don't either
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:06 AM
Oct 2014

Quarantining at home only adds more people to the list of those needing to be quarantined should any of them become infected. It is far too much of a risk for those people that live with a quarantined at home person. For example, Ms. Pham's boyfriend had to go into quarantine once she was found to be infected. Had she been quarantined by herself somewhere and monitored by someone in case she became ill her boyfriend would not have had to also end up being quarantined. And where is he quarantined? At home with other family members that should he become infected would also have to be quarantined? That's just dense as well as inconveniencing and unnecessarily frightening too many people.

I also don't like the idea of this voluntary quarantine since there have been a number of people who have broken their voluntary quarantine. Someone is either quarantined or they aren't.

FarPoint

(12,351 posts)
26. I'm in line with your train of thought.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:53 AM
Oct 2014

Just eliminate or narrow down potential exposure. ...Sequestration like the OJ jury....essentially.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
6. ah, shit
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:34 AM
Oct 2014

Considering the epic cluster-fuck of the hospital and the CDC's approval of allowing a patient with a biosafety level 4 virus to be cared for at any hospital not prepared to handle it as well as absenting themselves from monitoring and supervising (which is the CDC's area of responsibility) coupled with the horrific information from the anonymous workers at the hospital (which the hospital threatened to fire if they said anything the media!) it will be amazing if this person and Ms. Pham are the only ones.

I'm so utterly disgusted with the CDC. There was no reason on earth why a patient with a biosafety level 4 virus should be taken care of in a hospital not prepared for it with staff unprepared for it when there were plenty of beds at any of the four hospitals in the US that are capable of handling a patient with a biosafety level four virus and when all the infected Americans were handled at those hospitals.

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
9. But, hey, Duncan was black and poor, a write-off.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:52 AM
Oct 2014

Certainly not deserving of the best treatment.

Unfortunately the PTB forgot that ebola cares not how much insurance and/or assets one has.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
12. or whether or not they're American
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:17 AM
Oct 2014

I swear the CDC was playing a very dangerous experiment to try to "prove" that any hospital can safely care for an Ebola patient.

Btw, Mr. Duncan was not poor. He was quite middle class. If he was poor he never would have been able to get to this country in the first place.

Caregivers are the most at risk. The CDC believed their inadequate protective clothing protocol without disinfection and by untrained, unsupervised and unexperienced staff would be fine and not need to worry about being infected.

And thanks to the anonymous workers speaking out through the nurses' union we find out just how horrendous conditions were for workers. It's horrifying.



notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
67. Wow, your mention of this is the first I've heard.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:33 AM
Oct 2014

can you direct me to some links to the story?

nevermind. I found them

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
53. The hospital, probably, it's administration and ownership? Maybe not.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:05 AM
Oct 2014

Some for profit healthcare group will love to get a hospital building and its contents cheap.

 

cwydro

(51,308 posts)
47. I remember the first reports of Duncan
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:47 AM
Oct 2014

and Friedan talking with a reporter saying flatly, glibly, even smugly that in our great medical system that there was NO WAY the disease would spread.

He's whistling a different tune now.

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
7. Rick Perry may regret battling ObamaCare
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:36 AM
Oct 2014

Hospitals will end up having to pay ER bills for the poor if all hell breaks loose!

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
14. If the hospitals need money, lawmakers will have taxpayers part with theirs.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:23 AM
Oct 2014

Last edited Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:52 AM - Edit history (1)

The healthcare industry spends big on lobbying. I would think they'd exercise their leverage.

Which isn't to say the cost would be to Texas taxpayers alone.

I'd expect the lobby to be asking for access to federal emergency money

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
17. Government, has always been an attractive profit center
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:31 AM
Oct 2014

The privateers scream about government waste, but a staggering amount of that waste has aliases..."corporate profits", "quarterly earnings", "executive bonuses".

perdita9

(1,144 posts)
11. Texas Tax Cuts = Poor training and service
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:14 AM
Oct 2014

I heard the hospital is taking a huge financial hit over this debacle. It's well deserved.

MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
13. As long as we are a profit based healthcare system,
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:22 AM
Oct 2014

admins will always cut staff, cut training, equipment, etc... putting staff and patients at risk.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
23. But regular hospital don't HAVE what it takes to take care of a patient
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:42 AM
Oct 2014

with a biosafety level 4 virus to begin with. They don't ever deal with those patients so have no need to be prepared with equipment, protocol, experienced staff, etc. We only have 4 hospitals in the US designed to handle that kind of patient with a total of 19 beds between them.

Almost all biosafety level 4 viruses are hemorrhagic fevers such as Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, etc., and we've never had a hemorrhagic fever patient in the US before until this outbreak. All of them before were contained in Central Africa. Why SHOULD all hospitals have the necessary units and staff to begin with?

Those four hospitals were designed to handle biosafety level 4 infected patients, and it's a HELL of a lot more complicated than just having protective clothing. They have buildings separated from all the others for those patients, negative airflow, total containment, double airlock doors, decontamination units, disposal units, etc. Regular hospitals simply aren't BUILT to handle biosafety level 4 patients. Setting up a makeshift Ebola ward in the ICU is ridiculous. If the US had an outbreak where all the four hospitals had no room for any more patients, than yeah, we'd THEN be in a position to have to improvise at other hospitals though it would make far more sense to use an entire building rigged out as best that it could be to handle and outbreak or maybe even better, have the military set up special Ebola barracks.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,683 posts)
57. Lassa fever has appeared in the US before.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:09 AM
Oct 2014
http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/253926981.html Although it's not as deadly as Ebola it's also a viral hemorrhagic fever and nothing to mess with. This case was contained successfully.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
66. And where was he treated?
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:30 AM
Oct 2014

Bet my last dime it was at one of the four biosafety level 4 hospitals. It's what they're FOR.



The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,683 posts)
68. He was seen initially at a hospital in Minnesota.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:41 AM
Oct 2014

The University hospital is at least BSL-3 but they never said whether he was transferred to another hospital for treatment. So he may have been sent to a BSL-4 facility.

MineralMan

(146,288 posts)
60. Actually, you are incorrect.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:13 AM
Oct 2014

There have been both a Marburg case and a Lassa Fever case in the US before. Perhaps more that one of each. The Lassa Fever case was in Minneapolis earlier this year, and the Marburg case I know about was in a previous year. You an search for them on Google and read the news stories.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
15. I have a very difficult time blaming the hospital
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:23 AM
Oct 2014

Hospital administration there had to fly by the seat of their pants while not having any expertise in the care of a patient with a biosafety level 4 virus. Though why they were willing to accept him knowing that is odd unless the CDC convinced them that they could.

I am REALLY pissed off at them threatening to fire any worker that talks to the media about anything concerning what went on during Mr. Duncan's stay though.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
18. I have a hard time not blaming the hospital
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:33 AM
Oct 2014

When Mr. Duncan said he'd recently been to West Africa on his first visit, he should have been quarantined right then and there and quarantine protocols should have immediately been put in practice.

We've been hearing about this for months now and if anyone actually thought this would only be contained to the African continent, they need to get their heads out of their asses or the sand.

Hospitals have had plenty of time to research and get plans in place.

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
19. They first turned him away because he didn't have health insurance. . . Like you,
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:37 AM
Oct 2014

Last edited Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:08 AM - Edit history (1)

I blame the hospital!

kiva

(4,373 posts)
88. Do you have a link for this?
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 01:43 PM
Oct 2014

I had heard that during his first visit he was diagnosed with the flu and given meds.

 

B Calm

(28,762 posts)
98. Sure
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 06:22 PM
Oct 2014

Sheku Sheriff's Diary: Why was Thomas Eric Duncan Sent Home ...
http://segbwema.blogspot.com/2014/10/why-was-thomas-eric-duncan-sent-home-my.html
Why was Thomas Eric Duncan Sent Home from a Hospital in Texas? ... Duncan was just in the country and obviously did not have health insurance.
Thomas Eric Duncan’s family say he got bad healthcare ...
http://egbertowillies.com/2014/10/08/thomas-eric-duncans-poor-black-accent-healthcare/
Thomas Eric Duncan’s family say he got bad healthcare because he is a poor ... Texas Health Presbyterian treated ... he did not have insurance,” Josephus Weeks ...
What We Know About Thomas Eric Duncan, The First Ebola ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/06/thomas-eric-duncan-dallas-ebola-patient-us_n_5942150.html
... who identified himself as a brother of Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan, speaks about his brother, while holding a photo of him, Wednesday, ...
Thomas Eric Duncan Ebola Patient Dies Due To Racism - YouTube


Thomas Eric Duncan Ebola Patient Dies Due To Racism Thomas Eric Duncan Ebola Patient Dies Due To Racism Thomas Eric Duncan was the second Ebola patient ...
Thomas Eric Duncan: 6 ways his case differs from other U.S ...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/09/health/ebola-duncan-death-cause/index.html
How did several other Ebola patients treated in the United States survive while Thomas Eric Duncan ... have insurance, ... health authorities have ...
Did Thomas Eric Duncan Receive The Best Medical Care? | News One
http://newsone.com/3060587/did-thomas-eric-duncan-receive-the-best-medical-care-america-has-to-offer
Did Thomas Eric Duncan Receive The Best Medical Care America Has To Offer? Comments: | Leave A Comment. Oct 9, 2014. By NewsOne Now 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
Thomas Eric Duncan's nephew rips into Dallas hospital ...
http://article.wn.com/view/2014/10/15/Thomas_Eric_Duncans_nephew_rips_into_Dallas_hospital/
TEXAS EBOLA PATIENT THOMAS ERIC DUNCAN DIED (VIDEO): ... It's said that Thomas Eric Duncan did not have health insurance, but even with that, ...
Thomas Eric Duncan: From healthy to Ebola | Health - Home
http://www.news4jax.com/health/thomas-eric-duncan-from-healthy-to-ebola/28360418
Thomas Eric Duncan: From healthy to Ebola Who did he come in contact with after feeling sick? Author: By Greg Botelho CNN. Published On: Oct 01 2014 06:09:16 PM EDT ...
Thomas Eric Duncan: From healthy to Ebola | Health ...
http://www.channel3000.com/health/thomas-eric-duncan-from-healthy-to-ebola/28360418
Who is Thomas Eric Duncan? ... On a health screening questionnaire, Duncan answered "no" to questions about whether he had cared for a patient with the deadly virus
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ebola-patient-released-texas-hospital-telling-nurse-west/story?id=25894587

kiva

(4,373 posts)
99. Some of these links make no reference to what happened
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:26 PM
Oct 2014

during his first visit to the hospitals, but those that do confirm that he was treated...specifically, he was treated for the flu. So no, he was not turned away or not treated, he was treated for the wrong thing, which is very different from saying the hospital did not treat him because he didn't have insurance.

I am also furious that the hospital screwed up, but quoting his family saying that they think he was treated poorly because he was black and had an accent is not the same as saying he was not treated.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
34. and no one until recently had imagined that Ebola would come here
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:14 AM
Oct 2014

much less get out of West Africa.

It isn't about getting plans in place or the right protective clothing or decontamination equipment. They don't have the right STAFF with the training, experience, drilling, supervision, etc. nor the containment wards, disposal units, negative airflow and on and on. No one ever expected an outbreak here or even having a single patient here. Having plans has nothing to do with it. Even if they HAD the best plans they'd STILL be stymied by not having the appropriate staff and everything else.

Those plans would only be for an outbreak here anyway which is still not expected. EVERY Ebola patient should have been going to one of the four US hospitals that are designed and staffed with with the appropriate level of ability to care for them. An outbreak here shouldn't even be dealt with in regular hospitals since that just risks much more spread of the virus. Ebola patients shouldn't even be in the same BUILDING as other patients nor passing through regular corridors, using regular elevators and with experienced staff that only care for Ebola patients. Should the US end up with an outbreak that defies the ability for those four hospitals to care for them than the military should step in to build Ebola wards, the most qualified people training and drilling staff, etc.

Caring for Ebola patients is pretty basic since there's not much that can be done for them other than keeping them hydrated, cleaning them, giving them any medicine that may help or blood from a survivor, etc. It's the caring for them and being protected while also protecting others from becoming infected that's what is so vital. Possibly infected Ebola patients shouldn't even be going into ER's in hospitals or cared for in regular hospitals since the majority of people there are there for something else and unprotected be they patients, visitors or workers. In an outbreak that just spreads the risk of infection to other hospital staff, visitors and patients that don't have Ebola.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
36. The problem with this is
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:20 AM
Oct 2014

Whether people should be going to ERs or not, people are going to go to ERs because they expect the EXPERTS to know what to do, whether they are experts on infectious disease or not.

So hospitals need to have some sort of protocols in place even if it's isolating the patient until they can be moved and the healthcare workers need to know how to safely handle suspected cases.

In the Duncan case, they wanted to isolate him and were told no. That was an unnecessary risk to all in contact with him.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
71. And just as in West Africa the public needs to be informed
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:56 AM
Oct 2014

to not go to the ER's but have a toll-free number set up to report a possible case where they're first determined if the person IS a possible case and if so a special ambulance to pick them up and take them to an Ebola clinic. There's already potential with flu season coming on for people to flood ER's terrified they have Ebola and making a huge mess of the ER system at hospitals.

This is something else the CDC should be way out in front of.

As for Mr. Duncan not being isolated immediately, was that again the CDC telling the hospital that it wasn't necessary? The hospital higher-ups were just as ignorant and inexperienced as the workers caring for him while being assured by the CDC that everything was groovy if they just suited up in the woefully inadequate PPE that was the CDC's protocol, and the CDC failed to monitor or supervise what was happening.

The CDC is the go-to agency for protocol and while also supposed to be monitoring and supervising yet the CDC has dropped the ball continually erroneously believing that any hospital could successfully handle an Ebola case that is a biosafety level 4 virus but without protocol that is for that high of virus infected patient. As far as I'm concerned anymore the CDC is nothing but a bunch of inept bureaucrats poo-pooing the experts. The very idea that an Ebola patient can be successfully handled in a regular hospital with regular staff with CDC protocols much lower than the disease requires was lunacy from the start.

The CDC has been a colossal failure in Dallas every step of the way.



MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
20. The hospital admin. is receiving critisism, rightfully so.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:40 AM
Oct 2014

Duncan was left in a nonquarantined zone for several hours, and a nurse supervisor faced resistance from hospital authorities after demanding that Duncan be moved to an isolation unit, according to the union’s statement. Additionally, Duncan’s lab specimens were sent through the hospital’s tube system, potentially contaminating the system, the nurses said.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/dallas-nurses-hospital-sloppy-ebola-protocols-union/story?id=26205956

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
50. there's is a lot to criticize them for BUT
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:58 AM
Oct 2014

They're just as inexperienced and flying by the seat of their pants as the caregivers. Faulting the hospital for not having the appropriate knowledge or experience in the handling of an Ebola patient especially with no help from the CDC who was not monitoring or supervising anything that was happening which is part of the CDC's JOB and with the CDC convincing them there was no problem with the hospital caring for Mr. Duncan.

The hospital was getting their guidelines and direction from the CDC but without their HELP from them. They got a 43 some odd page powerpoint presentation from the CDC that they had staff watch believing in their ignorance that this was acceptable along with a protocol for PPE from the CDC that was woefully inadequate and didn't include disinfection. They were assured by the CDC that any nurse or doctor with no special training, drilling, practice, etc. was necessary. They didn't know what the hell they were doing, and the CDC pushed that it was all easy-peasy and nothing else was necessary. They didn't know that having so many people caring for an Ebola patient was a problem nor that having the staff caring for him also caring for other patients was a problem because the CDC dropped the ball on informing them of that as well, and didn't even see it as a problem anyway. They didn't know it was so high risk to put Mr. Duncan on a ventilator or have him doing kidney dialysis since once again the CDC didn't bother to tell them not to do stuff like that.

Most of the mess goes back to the CDC who is the agency relied on for what to do and what not to do and how to do it while monitoring ands supervising it all.

And for God's sake, if these too infected hospital workers are still being cared for in that same hospital then we are doomed to have an outbreak. Why the FUCK are they not being sent to one of the four hospitals that can care for them appropriately??? Sending in a special Ebola team is not good enough. They shouldn't be in that hospital at ALL when the four hospitals that can care for them appropriately in an appropriate environment has empty beds???


MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
54. CDC this morning is 'Deeply concerned, especially since there is a 2nd caregiver who is now ill'.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:06 AM
Oct 2014

I got the impression early on that the CDC was covering their asses-- they are much less cocky the last couple of days. They also admit they should have gone to Dallas earlier. Yeah, no shit Sherlock.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
56. They should have beend deeply concerned right after Mr. Duncan was diagnosed.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:08 AM
Oct 2014

And they should have shipped him out of there into biosafety level 4 hospital.
No, God only knows how many people are infected.

MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
63. Horrible situation for the nurses and staff.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:24 AM
Oct 2014

I heard on the radio a few minutes ago, a spokesperson from Loyola discussing the changes in protocols here locally. She mentioned they are searching for new venders for the proper equipment-- full bio hazard suits for one thing.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
74. The hospital was obviously completely unprepared.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:35 AM
Oct 2014

I have no idea why CDC would assume every hospital in the country was ready for Ebola, when obviously they were not.
The hospital was also assuring everyone they were ready, when they were clearly clueless.
As a result, two people were infected (and who knows how many more).
Hideous.

MerryBlooms

(11,769 posts)
90. I just read that. Ugh, mess is right.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 01:57 PM
Oct 2014

Frontier has the plane in an isolated area and CDC interviewing/contacting all 132 passengers.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
58. Hospital is absolutely clueless.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:10 AM
Oct 2014

They were claiming they were ready. Obviously nothing could be further from the truth.
Who sends over 70 people to take care of highly infectious patient, and then apparently allows those same people to take care of other patients?
All of this is making me sick.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
73. yes, they were clueless, and THAT is the problem
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:31 AM
Oct 2014

The CDC assured them that their hospital was appropriate, their staff appropriate, and all they had to do was have the caregivers follow the CDC's inadequate protocol. They were flying by the seat of their uninformed pants just as the caregivers were having no clue that it was a mess of failure from the start while the CDC wasn't monitoring or supervising what was happening. The hospital having no expertise in handling a patient with a biosafety level 4 virus nor that knowledge were just as newbie and trying to figure things out as they went along as the caregivers. As it's wrong to blame the caregivers for their in-expertise, it's also wrong for the hospital while it was being assured by the go-to agency - the CDC - that everything's groovy.

Of course the hospital was clueless, they don't HAVE the necessary expertise and have the CDC feeding them shit and assuring everything is fine and all they need do was have the caregivers suit up in the CDC's inadequate PPE protocol without supervision, total head to toe covering, disinfection, etc. The hospital knew no better than the caregivers and other workers did. The CDC didn't tell them they should only have a minimal number of people caring for the patient and those caregivers shouldn't be caring for other patients nor that Mr. Duncan shouldn't be getting dialysis or put on a ventilator and all the other disasters like putting specimens through the regular tube system. They were informed by the CDC that XYZ was all they needed to do, and being clueless of course they thought the CDC was right. All of it goes back to the inept CDC who should have known that this regular hospital was an inadequate environment with inadequate protocols and untrained, unsupervised staff from top to bottom that knew no better and got their direction from the CDC.

The hospital instead of telling the CDC to pound sand and send the infected workers to one of the four biosafety level 4 hospitals for treatment and still trying to care for them themselves can be squarely placed on the hospital. Even the CDC deciding after the fact that, DUH, they should have specialized caregiver teams sent in to care for them isn't good enough, and we don't even know if that's even happened since the CDC finally made that decision after their epic cluster-fuck.

From what's I've been reading the hospital is now royally pissed off, and they should be.The CDC used this hospital, the patients and the staff as human guinea pigs for no earthly reason other than to try to prove that any hospital with average workers can successfully handle an Ebola patient. Like you, it makes me absolutely sick.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
75. The hospital is far from blameless.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:39 AM
Oct 2014

They were assuring everyone they are ready, when they should have been screaming they were not.
What kind of genius sends 70 some people to take care of highly infectious patient? And then these same employees were taking care of other patients.
I know they have no experience with Ebola, but Ebola isn't the only infectious disease on the planet.
Surely they should have at least known some basics.
How many of their employees got infected? Did they infect other patients?
2 and counting. Tick tock, tick tock.

TorchTheWitch

(11,065 posts)
80. that's the point, the CDC was assuring them that they were ready
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 11:37 AM
Oct 2014

They had no way to know that they couldn't handle the case because they're equally as ignorant in biosafety level 4 patient treatment as the workers. They had to rely on the CDC, which is the CDC's job in informing, monitoring and supervision, and the CDC - THE nation's "experts" - assured them that everything was just dandy. Turns out the CDC is barking stupid and has no bloody idea what the hell they're doing EITHER.

The hospital deciding to still try to care for the two infected workers after the epic cluster-fuck is flat out head-meet-butt, and that's squarely on them. Their only possible saving grace is if they are only having the two cared for in their hospital with the expert treatment teams that the CDC in hindsight finally figured out was needed. Of course, that doesn't address why these workers are being taken care of in a makeshift Ebola ward in the ICU. There's no question whatsoever that they should be sent off to one of the four hospitals that are designed and equipped to handle such a case and by not doing that is nothing butt ass-covering attempt by the hospital and CDC.

OMG, this whole thing makes me so PISSED!

tick tock, tick tock is bloody right, and Frieden should be stung up by his toenails for this. I swear if I hear one single word anymore about how stellar the CDC is I'm going to blow an epic series of gaskets with bright red flaming bushels of hair.

etherealtruth

(22,165 posts)
24. I have no problem blaming the hospital
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:42 AM
Oct 2014

If the information in the complaints by the nurses is true http://www.aol.com/article/2014/10/15/dallas-nurses-cite-sloppy-conditions-in-ebola-care/20978279/?icid=maing-grid7|maing9|dl1|sec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D545879 the hospital had no sound protocols in place to contain any infectious disease

The nurses alleged that:

- Duncan was kept in a non-isolated area of the emergency department for several hours, potentially exposing up to seven other patients to Ebola;

- Patients who may have been exposed to Duncan were kept in isolation only for a day before being moved to areas where there were other patients;

- Nurses treating Duncan were also caring for other patients in the hospital;

- Preparation for Ebola at the hospital amounted to little more than an optional seminar for staff;

- In the face of constantly shifting guidelines, nurses were allowed to follow whichever ones they chose.

"There was no advance preparedness on what to do with the patient, there was no protocol, there was no system," Burger said.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
43. I dunno, expertise may not have always been the issue--waste stacked to the ceiling?
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:35 AM
Oct 2014

That suggests that the hospital also fell behind in problems related to volume rather lack of awareness.

The administrators didn't find a solution to timely waste removal, whether that was a matter of identifying and resolving access to autoclaves, pick-ups, incineration etc. that's all administrative support stuff.


 

Katashi_itto

(10,175 posts)
21. Wall off Texas. Let it burn itself out. God knows how many ISIS operatives are spreading it.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:41 AM
Oct 2014

We could always nuke it just to be sure.



GOP talking points always seem to backfire on them.

Crunchy Frog

(26,579 posts)
25. Must have been another "breech of protocol".
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:51 AM
Oct 2014

I hope people here will now admit that the much ballyhooed "protocol" is pretty well fucked.

I feel really bad for all of those health workers. They must be sweating bullets at this point. I know I would be.

etherealtruth

(22,165 posts)
27. It appears the hospital had NO protocols in place whatsoever to deal with isolation ...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:57 AM
Oct 2014

... and infectious disease.

They never initiated basic protocols laid out by the CDC ...

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
29. The CDC reassured all that all precautions were being followed.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 07:59 AM
Oct 2014

Obviously, that is NOT the case.

What a clusterfuck all the way around. If they (health officials) were trying to get the public to not trust them, they get an A+ on that front.

etherealtruth

(22,165 posts)
33. The CDC credited the hospital with being knowledgable and competent in basic infection control
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:14 AM
Oct 2014

I posted this in #24 above

If the information in the complaints by the nurses is true http://www.aol.com/article/2014/10/15/dallas-nurses-cite-sloppy-conditions-in-ebola-care/20978279/?icid=maing-grid7|maing9|dl1|sec3_lnk3%26pLid%3D545879 the hospital had no sound protocols in place to contain any infectious disease

The nurses alleged that:

- Duncan was kept in a non-isolated area of the emergency department for several hours, potentially exposing up to seven other patients to Ebola;

- Patients who may have been exposed to Duncan were kept in isolation only for a day before being moved to areas where there were other patients;

- Nurses treating Duncan were also caring for other patients in the hospital;

- Preparation for Ebola at the hospital amounted to little more than an optional seminar for staff;

- In the face of constantly shifting guidelines, nurses were allowed to follow whichever ones they chose.

"There was no advance preparedness on what to do with the patient, there was no protocol, there was no system," Burger said.


If what the nurse allege is true (I have no reason to doubt the nurses) .... the hospital failed at a very basic level.

Clearly the CDC did fail when they assumed that the hospital was capable of what amounts to infection control 101 .... I will agree that the way the hospital dealt with Mr. Duncan's first presentation at the ER .... should have raised red flags r/t this hospital.

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
35. The CDC said that all precautions were being followed.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:19 AM
Oct 2014

However they were not. They also dropped the ball.

They should not be making such statements and now because they were just saying something without really knowing, public trust is down the shitter.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
37. You're making the assumption that hospital admin told the truth
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:27 AM
Oct 2014

about their protocols. Do we know if the CDC saw these protocols first-hand?

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
40. I am making no assumption. The CDC said that all precautions were being followed and
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:31 AM
Oct 2014

that our health care system was completely capable of handling this with minimal risk of contamination to workers and others.

It was a talking point.

They should never had said such a thing, when it's obviously NOT the case.

etherealtruth

(22,165 posts)
39. the one thing I will agree with is that the CDC cannot trust hospitals ...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:30 AM
Oct 2014

... to follow basic isolation and infection control protocols .... they hopefully have learned that they are going to have to inspect hospitals instead of taking their word that they are following these procedures.

Now that more information is coming to light the hospital administration has acted incredibly negligently ... the CDC cannot assume competence

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
42. The CDC dis assume that our health care system was completely capable of handling this.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:33 AM
Oct 2014

EVERY SINGLE HOSPITAL can.

That was a bunch of bullshit from the first time they said it. And they breach the public trust, when they aren't following up on their words.

This is a complete clusterfuck.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
59. Exactly.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:12 AM
Oct 2014

It was a bunch of nonsense.
And how many people end up being infected?
That's the scary part.

procon

(15,805 posts)
38. I expect the hospital to cover up their failures
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:29 AM
Oct 2014

Look, they are viewed as a top notch, premier facility, which translates to big money revenue streams. They cannot afford to admit their programs and policies have proven to be ineffective. At the level of care they profess to be qualified to provide, isolation proceedures would have been part of their rating which allows them to charge higher fees due to the correspondingly higher training and skills requird to operate such a facilty.

That hospital failed to do that so they did not provide funding to properly equip, train and drill the staff, not just on ebla, but any other highly contagious disease that would require similar precautions. This is the nature of our for profit healthcare system where these corporate run hospitals are required by law to maximize their shareholders investment.

boston bean

(36,221 posts)
44. CDC are revising the precautions in light of what happened.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:35 AM
Oct 2014

No neck covering, no shoe covering, no hair covering. They allowed that. The hospital did follow that.

Sure they made some fuck ups, but the CDC after a KNOWN ebola said this hospital was following their precautions.

So, no, they aren't off the hook. It's a clusterfuck all the way around.

procon

(15,805 posts)
51. Minimum standards are not always adequate
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:03 AM
Oct 2014

Just like a computer game will state the bare bones minimum requirements to get their game lurching along on a 8 year old computer, they also have the recommended requirements to access all the bells and whistles. But any self respecting gamer won't be satisfied without the wow factor he can only achieve from his fully tricked out gaming rig

The same applies to hospital care... from the barely compliant to super care with no shortcuts. Recall how the first patient was escorted into the Nebraska hospital with everyone in full "spacesuits" compared to the piecemeal efforts the nursing staff in Texas have described what that hospital provided. Both facilities were compliant, but
you'll get an idea of how different hospitals respond by exceeding those minimum standards.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
55. Hospital workers were apparently trying to go a step up above guidelines.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:06 AM
Oct 2014

In a stupid way, as they would cover their neck with tape. But obviously guidelines are inadequate.

Ilsa

(61,695 posts)
46. Can the CDC order the patient to be transferred to
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:44 AM
Oct 2014

One of the Level 4 hospitals? Or does this violate some ridiculously unsafe States' Rights issue? Did Texas not "invite" the CDC? Did the CDC ask to come but was denied?

Dr. R. Carmona, former Surgeon General, said that the biohazard training skills are forgotten over time, etc. The first nurse was only 26. She was still in high school or middle school when those protocols were first disseminated after 9-11. Hospital personnel changes greatly over even a few years.

I'm mortified that the hospital administration wasn't listening to the nurses, and that nurses didn't band together and threaten to quit over these glaring inadequacies in protocol. It endangers staff and community.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
52. They could have transferred him.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:05 AM
Oct 2014

CDC went to TX right away, so I am not sure what you are talking about when you suggest CDC came out but was denied.
CDC send a team up there to trace contacts.
Apparently they just assumed the hospital knew what they were doing, as nurses and doctors taking care of Mr. Duncan were not even assumed to be at risk.

Snarkoleptic

(5,997 posts)
48. Maybe the gubmint-hatin' Texas Republiclowns will wake up and
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 08:51 AM
Oct 2014

1) Accept the medicaid expansion
2) Back the effort to get a Surgeon General appointed.

I suspect not...

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
62. Too bad we can't have single payer.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:18 AM
Oct 2014

We could take care of outbreaks of disease, we could take care of our veterans and abolish the VA and take care of ourselves, all the time, for a lot less money.

Good old money always stands in the way. A lot of fat cats in a lot of handed down positions stand to lose a lot of cheddar if that ever happens, which is why it never will, not in America 2.0.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
69. Bisosafety level 4 procedure in lab settings...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 09:46 AM
Oct 2014

Biosafety level 4
The Galveston National Laboratory BSL-4 (P4) lab on the Campus of the University of Texas Medical Branch

This level is required for work with dangerous and exotic agents that pose a high individual risk of aerosol-transmitted laboratory infections, agents which cause severe to fatal disease in humans for which vaccines or other treatments are not available, such as Bolivian and Argentine hemorrhagic fevers, Marburg virus, Ebola virus, Lassa virus, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever, and various other hemorrhagic diseases. This level is also used for work with agents such as smallpox that are considered dangerous enough to require the additional safety measures, regardless of vaccination availability.

When dealing with biological hazards at this level the use of a positive pressure personnel suit, with a segregated air supply is mandatory. The entrance and exit of a level four biolab will contain multiple showers, a vacuum room, an ultraviolet light room, and other safety precautions designed to destroy all traces of the biohazard. Multiple airlocks are employed and are electronically secured to prevent both doors from opening at the same time. All air and water service going to and coming from a biosafety level 4 (or P4) lab will undergo similar decontamination procedures to eliminate the possibility of an accidental release.
(Wiki)

-------------------------and hospitals?

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
72. Right
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:04 AM
Oct 2014

the hospital was obviously not equipped to handle this case. I wouldn't call it sloppy so much as unprepared and inexperienced. I am sure the medical personnel were doing the best they could. The problem lies in underestimating this threat in general.

suffragette

(12,232 posts)
76. "Underestimating this threat in general" Yes, and at every level,from training to adequate equipment
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:48 AM
Oct 2014

To clean up to waste management.
Then there are social needs and costs, from quarantine of people and provision of their needs during this time as well as after - how many people can afford to be away from work 21 days, how many employers might fire them while away or not want them to come back - stigma will likely come into the picture at some point.
All of these elements need to be addressed.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
97. The idea
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 05:16 PM
Oct 2014

that ANYONE should be fired from their job as a result of being quarantined is something that is SO really, I have to say--"only in America"....

But unfortunately you are probably right.

There is precious little trust left in this country. Dog eat dog.

Spazito

(50,326 posts)
77. It has to be how the protocols were used in the Texas hospital...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:51 AM
Oct 2014

seeing as there were three other victims of ebola treated successfully without any of the health care workers contracting the disease, they were treated at other hospitals. It is only at the Texas hospital where the protocols seem to have failed which says to me it is not so much the protocols at fault but a failure somewhere along the line in their use.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
79. These other people were treated at hospitals with biosafety level 4 containment units.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 11:07 AM
Oct 2014

TX hospital does not have biosafety level 4 containment unit.
And you can see the results.

Spazito

(50,326 posts)
81. The texas hospital screwed up from the very beginning...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 01:08 PM
Oct 2014

and it seems to me the lack of proper use of the protocols is the cause here not the protocols themselves.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
82. The protocols are inadequate.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 01:11 PM
Oct 2014

But it doesn't appear the hospital was able to follow even inadequate protocols.
Yet CDC was supposed to have been monitoring Mr. Duncan's contacts.
Yet patient infected with Ebola was flying to Cleveland and then flew back to Dallas on Monday.

Spazito

(50,326 posts)
83. The protocols used were the same for years and were able to successfully contain...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 01:15 PM
Oct 2014

ebola in Africa. The difference, imo, is that those using them in Africa followed them properly due to their training and leadership. Both were and are lacking in the Texas hospital.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
85. That's absolutely false.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 01:19 PM
Oct 2014

These protocols are not used in Africa.
Also, the previous outbreaks were in remote areas, which is why they didn't spread.
This outbreak isn't successfully contained by any means. In fact, it's out of control.

Spazito

(50,326 posts)
91. Yes, the CDC protocols have been used in Africa in the past...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 02:24 PM
Oct 2014

the director of the CDC stated this during one of his press conferences. Once ebola was diagnosed, a team from CDC went to the outbreak location and, with local health care workers including Doctors Without Borders, utilized the CDC protocols to contain the disease within the affected area. The difference now is the outbreak is now in large urban centers where the traditions and lack of facilities, due in large part to the civil war that took place, make it much more difficult to contain.

Edited to add:

"The team includes experts who successfully controlled outbreaks of Ebola in Africa in the past two decades, including in health-care settings. Team members have worked with Doctors Without Borders on infection control protocols and trained others in Africa to follow those protocols. This expertise is being directly shared with the hospital."

http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/fs1014-ebola-investigation-fact-sheet.html

Spazito

(50,326 posts)
95. Your point does not negate the fact CDC protocols were used successfully in Africa in...
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 03:11 PM
Oct 2014

the past.

LisaL

(44,973 posts)
96. A lot of health care professionals have been infected and died in Africa.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 03:26 PM
Oct 2014

Define "successfully"

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
78. Criminal negligence on the part of hospital administration
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:55 AM
Oct 2014

and supervisory staff.

Somebody needs to complain to OSHA if they haven't already.

You can lead a horse to water in Texass, but you can't make him drink. And in this case, CDC brought water to the horse and it still refused to drink.

All those guidelines appear to have been tossed in the circular file.

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
92. Actually, negligent homicide is not the same as murder, so, legally, no.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 02:30 PM
Oct 2014

I think your earlier post is an example of the rampant DU misuse of "murder."

The DU definition of "murder" seems to be "someone died, I don't like it, and I wish to
assign blame."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»2nd health care worker te...