Ebola

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
281

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Ok. I have to convey a marginal mea culpa here. I’m revising my views on the situation and travel ban due to reading a bit more into exactly what we can and can’t get done easily in a bureacracy like ours. I think the travel ban is workable and should be completely implemented contrary to what I’ve implied earlier. I think I mentioned it but if not the quarantine is an excellent measure that–for one tiny instant–shows some common sense in otherwise crazy states :slight_smile:

This is a long interview, but extremely–Extremely–informative. Where Does Ebola Come From? - The Atlantic

I still don’t buy the aerosol transmission based on the complete lack of evidence for it in real world outbreak transmission and the stringent laboratory settings for the most recent experiment that came up with suggestive evidence on it (I think that paper is freely available). That said I agree with the point he’s making 100%. And I am doing another revision of my criticism of the CDC to be much harsher than it already was before. I had no idea that the protocols in place were so lax–I was under the impression that the guidelines were more stringent and just being ineptly carried out (although that part is still true, because nurses break contact exposure protocol all the time and when you practice bad habits you get them when you need to stay sharp under threat)[/quote]

About aerosol transmission. Am I understanding this correctly?

They don’t believe it’s carried through the air like dust particles, with the virus surviving in a dry form. BUT if I am close to a person in an infectious stage, they cough on me and a droplet of their saliva lands on my eyeball, that could transmit the virus. Correct?

282

This pretty much sums it up.

Text from a short Wall Street Journal (WSJ) editorial on the Governors enacting quarantines from the state level. FYI, the governor of Connecticut put a quarantine in place right after the Yale grad student Ebola scare. FYI, they have continued a 3 week quarantine of the two grad students who were in Liberia.

The Incredibility Infection
The White House objects to the state quarantines its own failures invited.
Updated Oct. 27, 2014 2:24 p.m. ET

So the Obama Administration is pressuring the Governors of New York and New Jersey behind the scenes to reverse their decision on Friday to impose a mandatory quarantine on health workers returning from treating Ebola patients in West Africa. Well, if it weren’t for the Administration’s incompetence in handling Ebola risks on U.S. soil, maybe the state leaders wouldn’t have felt they had to take matters into their own hands.

Anthony Fauci, the infectious disease expert at the National Institutes of Health, took to the airwaves Sunday to say that as a physician scientist he would not have recommended the mandatory quarantine. The obvious risk is that a mandatory quarantine for 21 days might deter some from volunteering. And Western doctors and nurses are urgently needed to control Ebola in the three African countries that are now the locus of the disease.

No doubt Chris Christie and Andrew Cuomo thought about that. But these Governors are responsible for public health in their populous states, and they were reacting to the Ebola diagnosis of Craig Spencer, the doctor who returned from West Africa and traveled the city despite the CDC’s self-quarantine guidelines.

He went bowling and took the crowded subway, even as he showed signs of fatigue, on the day before he came down with a fever. Transmission in a subway may be unlikely, but you can’t blame politicians for wanting to reduce the risks. The transmission of a killer disease in a subway would unleash genuine panic and do great economic harm.

The real problem is that the CDC, the World Health Organization, the Health and Human Services Department and the White House have all given ample reason not to trust their assurances. They said the chance of an Ebola case in the U.S. was remote. They said airport screeners would catch anyone sick trying to enter. They said U.S. hospitals were prepared for such cases, and that doctors and nurses would be protected. And they said self-quarantines would prevent new cases.

It’s understandable that Kaci Hickox, the nurse detained in New Jersey after treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone, didn’t like her treatment. Airport cops aren’t known for their bedside manner. And in the great American tradition, she has retained a civil-rights attorney to sue.

Meanwhile, Illinois has also imposed a 21-day quarantine similar to New York’s, and Florida is requiring twice daily monitoring for anyone returning from Ebola-infected areas. This patchwork mess is what happens when the federal government demonstrates a persistent record of incompetence and incredibility. As long as that holds, the Governors shouldn’t be criticized for using even blunt tools to protect the public.

283

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Ok. I have to convey a marginal mea culpa here. I’m revising my views on the situation and travel ban due to reading a bit more into exactly what we can and can’t get done easily in a bureacracy like ours. I think the travel ban is workable and should be completely implemented contrary to what I’ve implied earlier. I think I mentioned it but if not the quarantine is an excellent measure that–for one tiny instant–shows some common sense in otherwise crazy states :slight_smile:

This is a long interview, but extremely–Extremely–informative. Where Does Ebola Come From? - The Atlantic

I still don’t buy the aerosol transmission based on the complete lack of evidence for it in real world outbreak transmission and the stringent laboratory settings for the most recent experiment that came up with suggestive evidence on it (I think that paper is freely available). That said I agree with the point he’s making 100%. And I am doing another revision of my criticism of the CDC to be much harsher than it already was before. I had no idea that the protocols in place were so lax–I was under the impression that the guidelines were more stringent and just being ineptly carried out (although that part is still true, because nurses break contact exposure protocol all the time and when you practice bad habits you get them when you need to stay sharp under threat)[/quote]

About aerosol transmission. Am I understanding this correctly?

They don’t believe it’s carried through the air like dust particles, with the virus surviving in a dry form. BUT if I am close to a person in an infectious stage, they cough on me and a droplet of their saliva lands on my eyeball, that could transmit the virus. Correct?
[/quote]

More or less, yes. That is why health workers use face shields/goggles along with everything else. There is something else at work here though, because if it were highly contagious via aerosolized particles we would expect much, much more from the outbreak–notably the police and Duncan’s family, none of whom contracted the virus and all of whom were around the house, infected clothing, and/or Duncan in an infectious state. Not to mention I would expect more evidence in the West African outbreak or airborne virulence. What that something else is, I don’t know.

284

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
I still don’t buy the aerosol transmission based on the complete lack of evidence for it in real world outbreak transmission and the stringent laboratory settings for the most recent experiment that came up with suggestive evidence on it (I think that paper is freely available). That said I agree with the point he’s making 100%. And I am doing another revision of my criticism of the CDC to be much harsher than it already was before. I had no idea that the protocols in place were so lax–I was under the impression that the guidelines were more stringent and just being ineptly carried out (although that part is still true, because nurses break contact exposure protocol all the time and when you practice bad habits you get them when you need to stay sharp under threat)[/quote]

Re:aerosol transmission
I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re playing semantics when they refer to aerosolized, and using the dust particle meaning with respect to not wanting people to panic, and as you just mentioned it can be aerosolized eg when someone is hemorrhaging and they sneeze, you better bet that they’res ebola virions in that.
So I don’t really buy the whole non-aerosolizable meaning, because I don’t believe they’re being forthright with their definition.

285

Realize I probably should have written airborne instead of aerosolizable, but w/e.

286

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Ok. I have to convey a marginal mea culpa here. I’m revising my views on the situation and travel ban due to reading a bit more into exactly what we can and can’t get done easily in a bureacracy like ours. I think the travel ban is workable and should be completely implemented contrary to what I’ve implied earlier. I think I mentioned it but if not the quarantine is an excellent measure that–for one tiny instant–shows some common sense in otherwise crazy states :slight_smile:

This is a long interview, but extremely–Extremely–informative. Where Does Ebola Come From? - The Atlantic

I still don’t buy the aerosol transmission based on the complete lack of evidence for it in real world outbreak transmission and the stringent laboratory settings for the most recent experiment that came up with suggestive evidence on it (I think that paper is freely available). That said I agree with the point he’s making 100%. And I am doing another revision of my criticism of the CDC to be much harsher than it already was before. I had no idea that the protocols in place were so lax–I was under the impression that the guidelines were more stringent and just being ineptly carried out (although that part is still true, because nurses break contact exposure protocol all the time and when you practice bad habits you get them when you need to stay sharp under threat)[/quote]

About aerosol transmission. Am I understanding this correctly?

They don’t believe it’s carried through the air like dust particles, with the virus surviving in a dry form. BUT if I am close to a person in an infectious stage, they cough on me and a droplet of their saliva lands on my eyeball, that could transmit the virus. Correct?
[/quote]

More or less, yes. That is why health workers use face shields/goggles along with everything else. There is something else at work here though, because if it were highly contagious via aerosolized particles we would expect much, much more from the outbreak–notably the police and Duncan’s family, none of whom contracted the virus and all of whom were around the house, infected clothing, and/or Duncan in an infectious state. Not to mention I would expect more evidence in the West African outbreak or airborne virulence. What that something else is, I don’t know.[/quote]

I was thinking similarly.

I keep hearing people compare Ebola to HIV, since it is transmitted through body fluids. Obviously, Ebola is much more contagious than HIV but I don’t see it as the next pandemic like the post WWI flu that killed 50-100 million people, or 3-5% of the world’s population between 1918-1920.

I don’t believe we’ll have widespread Ebola outbreaks here in first world countries like the US, but some precaution is certainly within reason. Like you, I hate to see medical personnel not go help because they have to accept quarantine conditions when they return, but there is too much uncertainty to not take those precautions at this point, IMO. We’re really in our infancy in developing protocol to cope with it even in a hospital situation, as the two infected nurses in Dallas just showed us.

I do think the loss of human life in West Africa is going to go down as one of the worst instances of human tragedy. We are all used to hearing about famine, pestilence, or bloody military coups in Africa. So much so that we’re almost desensitized to it. We tend to distance ourselves from the real human tragedy there. It’s a human survival trait to care more about people who seem like us or “of our tribe” and in some ways third world Africa seems like another planet. Still, whole communities will be completely decimated, whole families just gone. Heartbreaking.

287

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
We’re really in our infancy in developing protocol
[/quote]

No. If you read that atlantic article you’ll see that the protocols are there, they’re just not being followed.

288

[quote]MattyG35 wrote:

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
We’re really in our infancy in developing protocol
[/quote]

No. If you read that atlantic article you’ll see that the protocols are there, they’re just not being followed.

[/quote]

You’re right, Matty. I should have said, we need to practice implementing the guidelines, and the guidelines have been insufficient and are being modified as we go, and most US hospitals are not prepared to follow through with the kind of protocols that would be safe.

BTW, I asked the question about the air born scenario before I read the Atlantic article. That was just something I’d been thinking about and Aragorn’s post made me think of it.

That is a GREAT article from the Atlantic, Aragorn. Thanks for passing it on. I don’t want to contemplate the infected bats ranging far and wide. That is scary indeed. And it pointed out the number people who are infected and are NOT running a fever - around 15% can be infectious and not run a fever. That’s also alarming, no?

EDIT: If anybody missed the link to that Atlantic article Aragorn posted back there, go read it. Fascinating. Where Does Ebola Come From? - The Atlantic

289

The New Yorker, The Ebola Wars

It’s a long article, but it reads like a thriller. Gripping.

If you’ve been following this thread, you may remember the Science research article Aragorn put up about how the virus mutates so quickly? The one where 5 of the co-authors had succumbed to Ebola? This article references that research, but tells the progression in more layman’s terms. And it tells the story of Humarr Khan, a physician at a hospital in Sierra Leone who ended up in the middle of things as the epidemic really exploded there. What a beautiful human being. If you want to see what a hero looks like, he’s it.

Incidentally, I’m the room-parent for my 5th grader’s class this year, and I was looking for a slightly scary Halloween story, appropriate for kids that age to read aloud at the class party on Friday. I could go with this one, or the Atlantic Article. I’ll arrive with the cupcakes and some protective gear, “Once upon a time, there was this thing called Ebola…” :wink: I kid.

290

I dig the new CDC approved sexy ebola containment suits.

http://www.brandsonsale.com/sexy-costumes-2015.html

291

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I dig the new CDC approved sexy ebola containment suits.

http://www.brandsonsale.com/sexy-costumes-2015.html[/quote]

The weirdest thing about that is that it doesn’t come close to earning its adjective.

Compared with the average, run-of-the-mill partygirl Halloween costume, that is a parka over a sweater over a chastity belt.

292

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I dig the new CDC approved sexy ebola containment suits.

http://www.brandsonsale.com/sexy-costumes-2015.html[/quote]

The weirdest thing about that is that it doesn’t come close to earning its adjective.

Compared with the average, run-of-the-mill partygirl Halloween costume, that is a parka over a sweater over a chastity belt.
[/quote]

Its no Princess Leia slave costume, but I thought it was funny.

I guess its hard to turn Camus’ The Plague into a romantic comedy.

293

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I dig the new CDC approved sexy ebola containment suits.

http://www.brandsonsale.com/sexy-costumes-2015.html[/quote]

The weirdest thing about that is that it doesn’t come close to earning its adjective.

Compared with the average, run-of-the-mill partygirl Halloween costume, that is a parka over a sweater over a chastity belt.
[/quote]

Its no Princess Leia slave costume, but I thought it was funny.

I guess its hard to turn Camus’ The Plague into a romantic comedy. [/quote]

Incidentally, “sexy Albert Camus” strikes me as the perfect Halloween costume for a young lady who likes a challenge.

294

Though it wouldn’t be nearly as difficult to pull off as sexy Jean-Paul Sartre.

295

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I dig the new CDC approved sexy ebola containment suits.

http://www.brandsonsale.com/sexy-costumes-2015.html[/quote]

The weirdest thing about that is that it doesn’t come close to earning its adjective.

Compared with the average, run-of-the-mill partygirl Halloween costume, that is a parka over a sweater over a chastity belt.
[/quote]

Its no Princess Leia slave costume, but I thought it was funny.

I guess its hard to turn Camus’ The Plague into a romantic comedy. [/quote]

Incidentally, “sexy Albert Camus” strikes me as the perfect Halloween costume for a young lady who likes a challenge.[/quote]

So funny. I can’t believe they made an Ebola containment suit sexy. Of course they did. And I thought things had really jumped the shark when I saw a sexy Spongebob.

I just got finished sewing a girl’s Robin Hood costume, and I have to say I was happy that my daughter wanted the green skirt to hit just above her knees. Fortunately being sexy is not yet part of Halloween. GAH! Some things about our culture are just so messed up.

298

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]smh_23 wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
I dig the new CDC approved sexy ebola containment suits.

http://www.brandsonsale.com/sexy-costumes-2015.html[/quote]

The weirdest thing about that is that it doesn’t come close to earning its adjective.

Compared with the average, run-of-the-mill partygirl Halloween costume, that is a parka over a sweater over a chastity belt.
[/quote]

Its no Princess Leia slave costume, but I thought it was funny.

I guess its hard to turn Camus’ The Plague into a romantic comedy. [/quote]

Incidentally, “sexy Albert Camus” strikes me as the perfect Halloween costume for a young lady who likes a challenge.[/quote]

So funny. I can’t believe they made an Ebola containment suit sexy. Of course they did. And I thought things had really jumped the shark when I saw a sexy Spongebob.

I just got finished sewing a girl’s Robin Hood costume, and I have to say I was happy that my daughter wanted the green skirt to hit just above her knees. Fortunately being sexy is not yet part of Halloween. GAH! Some things about our culture are just so messed up.
[/quote]

On the phone with my parents the other day, my mom told me that the little girls next door look like miniature adults these days as they wait for the elementary school bus. Leggings and oversized scarves (the stylish kind, not the warm-little-kid kind), etc.

What I wonder is if this is like a Jack thing where they will continue at this accelerated pace: business suits at 15, muumuus and old-lady jewelry at 24.

299

[quote]pushharder wrote:
.[/quote]

This is not a public health situation, Push. It’s a public relations problem that requires the right spin.

An Ebola Czar is a lot like a kindergarten teacher, reassuring all the kids that they don’t need to panic 'cause the WHO is on the case. I mean, since when has the UN not just kicked booty on… whatever needed it’s booty kicked? Relax. And the CDC, also TOTALLY on the case. It’s all good, kids. And the President is doing a great job.

I have been wondering where all the panicked people are. Are people in NYC avoiding the subways, making runs on the grocery stores, and then staying home from work? Did people do that in Dallas? I don’t know, but I haven’t seen any panic going on here.

300

CDC admits Ebola can be passed to others by sneezing

?The CDC said it doesn?t spread at all by air ? then Friday they came out with this poster,? she said, the newspaper reported. ?They admit that these particles or droplets may land on objects such as doorknobs and that Ebola can be transmitted that way.?

Rossi Hassad, a professor of epidemiology at Mercy College, said the droplets could stay active for a day, the New York Post reported.

?A shorter duration for dry surfaces like a table or doorknob and longer durations in a moist, damp environment,? he said, the newspaper reported.