"(CNN) -- A surgeon infected with Ebola will be transported from Sierra Leone to The Nebraska Medical Center for treatment, a U.S. government official familiar with the situation said."
"The doctor, a Sierra Leone national and legal permanent resident of the United States, is expected to arrive this weekend, most likely Saturday, the official said."
"The official said it's not known whether the doctor was working in an Ebola treatment unit or some other type of hospital. The surgeon is married to a U.S. citizen and has children, the official said."
"Salia is a general surgeon who had been working at Kissy United Methodist Hospital in the Sierra Leone capital of Freetown. Patients, including mothers who hours earlier had given birth, fled from the 60-bed hospital after news of the Ebola case emerged, United Methodist News reported."
"The hospital was closed on Tuesday after Salia tested positive and he was taken to the Hastings Ebola Treatment Center near Freetown, the church news service said. Kissy hospital staffers will be quarantined for 21 days."
2. Ebola is not transmitted by aerosolized particles. That has been debunked several times over. There is a theoretical concern that the EBV could mutate and become aerosolized, which has never occurred in any other virus and is highly unlikely to happen with EBV.
Those measures to protect against aerosolized particles is unnecessary, and no I would not like them implemented in my workplace.
This happened with the Motaba virus in Cedar Creek, CA after it was brought in by a monkey resulting in widespread hysteria and talk of dropping a fire bomb on the town.
This happened with the Motaba virus in Cedar Creek, CA after it was brought in by a monkey resulting in widespread hysteria and talk of dropping a fire bomb on the town.
Ebola is a deadly disease, and a variety of ebola studies have given rise to differing opinions among noted scientists and infectious disease specialists regarding modes of transmission and incubation period, i.e., how, when, and under what conditions transmission of the virus can/does take place. In addition to watching the news, the general public have access to many of these studies and opinions. Why shouldn't some members of the public be angry and frightened? It is unfortunate that you characterize the public as a whole in this way. The general public have also witnessed the response of politicians and the health care industry to nurses pressing for better quality PPE and training when caring for patients with confirmed/suspected Ebola. Given the above, and the recent events of health care workers becoming infected with the Ebola virus, it is reasonable that the general public should favor quarantine for returning health care workers, or for health care workers who have treated patients with Ebola in this country. A great majority of nurses (yes, we can continue to argue about whether they were really nurses) who participated in the AN survey supported quarantine.
California has implemented new OSHA regulations that hospitals are required to comply with: High quality PPE, including portable air purifying respirators in order to protect against aerosolized transmission of the virus, in person training, and whistleblower protection. This came as result of nurses advocating for these measures in order to protect themselves, other health care workers, and the general public. These measures exceed the existing CDC regulations. Do you believe these measures are unnecessary? Would you like to have these measures made mandatory in your workplace?
I understand that when treating possible/confirmed Ebola patients you would like to be protected with the highest quality PPE including PAPR's, including training, with the aim of protecting yourself, other health care workers, and the general public, but do not wish to be personally inconvenienced by a short period of quarantine that also aims at protecting the individual concerned, other health care workers, and the general public. The general public, who you continually refer to in your posts as hysterical and ignorant, are in favor of quarantine, like the majority of nurses polled on AN, and the majority of clinicians polled on a recent Medscape survey (do you consider these clinicians hysterical and ignorant too?).
And yet, in all the years HCW have been coming and going to Africa to take care of ebola patients, NOT ONE has ever infected a US resident with ebola upon their return. Mr. Duncan came into contact with 40 or 50 people in Dallas AFTER he became symptomatic, and AFTER he became rather ill (but before he was admitted to PHD), and he infected NOT ONE person. Amber Vincent traveled via mass transportation while febrile. Where are the victims of her action? NOT ONE person infected by her. Dr. Craig Spencer, for all the outrage about his galavanting about town the day before he became febrile, infected NOT ONE person. These facts should reassure people that the experts who have studied ebola for decades and who have maintained that people are not infectious until they become very ill and their viral load is high actually know what they are talking about.
But no, people will still insist that completely asymptomatic individuals present some kind of massive public health threat, with no evidence to support that whatsoever, and that public health policy should change to assuage their irrational fears. These people are very cavalier about restricting the freedom of others, saying "it's no big deal," "it won't kill them," etc., without ever actually considering how this could impact those persons. Also ignored is the very real negative effect of these quarantines on the willingness of others to go to the hot spots to treat this disease, which has been acknowledged by everyone who knows anything about epidemiology is NECESSARY in order to protect the US from ebola in the big picture.
It's absolutely ridiculous to insist that these people be restricted from seeing their families for 3 weeks, from going about their business like any other person NOT sick with ebola just so that people who don't understand the disease or who refuse to believe the implications of the events which have already occurred in the US can feel "safe."
And yet, in all the years HCW have been coming and going to Africa to take care of ebola patients, NOT ONE has ever infected a US resident with ebola upon their return. Mr. Duncan came into contact with 40 or 50 people in Dallas AFTER he became symptomatic, and AFTER he became rather ill (but before he was admitted to PHD), and he infected NOT ONE person. Amber Vincent traveled via mass transportation while febrile. Where are the victims of her action? NOT ONE person infected by her. Dr. Craig Spencer, for all the outrage about his galavanting about town the day before he became febrile, infected NOT ONE person. These facts should reassure people that the experts who have studied ebola for decades and who have maintained that people are not infectious until they become very ill and their viral load is high actually know what they are talking about.
But no, people will still insist that completely asymptomatic individuals present some kind of massive public health threat, with no evidence to support that whatsoever, and that public health policy should change to assuage their irrational fears. These people are very cavalier about restricting the freedom of others, saying "it's no big deal," "it won't kill them," etc., without ever actually considering how this could impact those persons. Also ignored is the very real negative effect of these quarantines on the willingness of others to go to the hot spots to treat this disease, which has been acknowledged by everyone who knows anything about epidemiology is NECESSARY in order to protect the US from ebola in the big picture.
It's absolutely ridiculous to insist that these people be restricted from seeing their families for 3 weeks, from going about their business like any other person NOT sick with ebola just so that people who don't understand the disease or who refuse to believe the implications of the events which have already occurred in the US can feel "safe."
Your post sums up my opinion on this matter perfectly.
I simply can't understand why some people insist on being afraid of something that has NEVER HAPPENED.
If we were to apply that approach to all aspects of our lives we would become paralyzed by fear and unable to function.
Perhaps we should all shield the walls and roofs of our homes with six feet of high density concrete and remain in our homes 24/7. You never know... A meteorite might strike earth, a nearby nuclear power plant may have a meltdown or your crazy neighbor might build a linear accelerator in his kitchen. Better safe than sorry...
(The first two are actually much more likely to happen than EVD being spread by asymptomatic persons. The last example (depending on your neighbor's DIY
skills and knowledge of physics) I admit is probably slightly less likely).
I am utterly amazed that some people regard civil liberties as something that can be so easily forsaken for a sense of false security and that they are blindly oblivious to the very real risks that unwarranted quarantines pose.
Specializes in Emergency/Trauma/Critical Care Nursing.
Does anyone know if the Ebola Reston virus that is the subject of The Hot Zone, was always transmissible by air or if that was a result of a mutation? I know it isn't harmful to humans, but just wondering since people are saying no virus has ever mutated to airborn transmission.
Does anyone know if the Ebola Reston virus that is the subject of The Hot Zone, was always transmissible by air or if that was a result of a mutation? I know it isn't harmful to humans, but just wondering since people are saying no virus has ever mutated to airborn transmission.
Unless you are referring to another study I have already discussed both studies that supposably showed Ebola could be airborne transmitted. The first study design was eloquent, but basically showed nothing.
It took 25ml of concentrated EBV then aerosolized the EBV at 20psi to a monkey in rubber hood. This study is easily disputed and all you need to do is take a nebulizer fill it with water and hold it near a plastic sheet to show that droplets will form. This doesn't even mention the fact how could this research design ever be clinically relevant. The second studies placed infected pigs next to uninfected monkeys separated by wire mesh about 6 feet apart. The monkeys got the EBV, but one very important thing that was not controlled for was the fact that pigs regularly blow nasal secretions up to 15 feet.
The follow up to these studies separated infected animals next to uninfected animals by 1 foot of space with a plastic shield that did not interfere with air circulation, and guess what the uninfected animals did not catch EBV.
I stand by my original statement that no virus has been shown to mutate to another basic mode of transmission.
Specializes in Oncology; medical specialty website.
Unless you are referring to another study I have already discussed both studies that supposably showed Ebola could be airborne transmitted. The first study design was eloquent, but basically showed nothing.
It took 25ml of concentrated EBV then aerosolized the EBV at 20psi to a monkey in rubber hood. This study is easily disputed and all you need to do is take a nebulizer fill it with water and hold it near a plastic sheet to show that droplets will form. This doesn't even mention the fact how could this research design ever be clinically relevant. The second studies placed infected pigs next to uninfected monkeys separated by wire mesh about 6 feet apart. The monkeys got the EBV, but one very important thing that was not controlled for was the fact that pigs regularly blow nasal secretions up to 15 feet.
The follow up to these studies separated infected animals next to uninfected animals by 1 foot of space with a plastic shield that did not interfere with air circulation, and guess what the uninfected animals did not catch EBV.
I stand by my original statement that no virus has been shown to mutate to another basic mode of transmission.
I appreciate the patient and informative posts from both you and BostonDNP, particularly in the face of posters choose to believe in hyper rather than science.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
The general public, who you continually refer to in your posts as hysterical and ignorant, are in favor of quarantine, like the majority of nurses polled on AN, and the majority of clinicians polled on a recent Medscape survey (do you consider these clinicians hysterical and ignorant too?).
When those clinicians polled are making decisions regarding the civil rights of others which is based in fear rather than in the preponderance of scientific evidence, then YES I consider them hysterical and ignorant also. Their ignorance is fueling fears that they shouldn't share precisely because of their professions and education in the sciences. They should be ashamed, IMV.
Unless you are referring to another study I have already discussed both studies that supposably showed Ebola could be airborne transmitted. The first study design was eloquent, but basically showed nothing.
It took 25ml of concentrated EBV then aerosolized the EBV at 20psi to a monkey in rubber hood. This study is easily disputed and all you need to do is take a nebulizer fill it with water and hold it near a plastic sheet to show that droplets will form. This doesn't even mention the fact how could this research design ever be clinically relevant. The second studies placed infected pigs next to uninfected monkeys separated by wire mesh about 6 feet apart. The monkeys got the EBV, but one very important thing that was not controlled for was the fact that pigs regularly blow nasal secretions up to 15 feet.
The follow up to these studies separated infected animals next to uninfected animals by 1 foot of space with a plastic shield that did not interfere with air circulation, and guess what the uninfected animals did not catch EBV.
I stand by my original statement that no virus has been shown to mutate to another basic mode of transmission.
According to much of the criticism of the first study with the pigs and monkeys, not only do pigs have an uncanny ability to spread aerosolized particles unlike any other species, the study also did not control for the spread of the virus when their cages were sprayed clean with water. The monkeys' cages were so close to the pigs' cages that there was no way to know if the monkeys were infected via pigs aerosols or contamination of their cages during the process of washing out the pigs' cages.
When the second study was done which actually controlled for some of the confounding variables, the results were not replicated and none of the healthy monkeys ever became infected. For some reason, much is made of the first study, but the results of the follow up study by one of the original study participants, Mr. Kobinger, are almost never mentioned.
2. Ebola is not transmitted by aerosolized particles. That has been debunked several times over. There is a theoretical concern that the EBV could mutate and become aerosolized, which has never occurred in any other virus and is highly unlikely to happen with EBV.
Those measures to protect against aerosolized particles is unnecessary, and no I would not like them implemented in my workplace.
This happened with the Motaba virus in Cedar Creek, CA after it was brought in by a monkey resulting in widespread hysteria and talk of dropping a fire bomb on the town.
The book, Hot Zone, and the cited film adaptation, thereof (Outbreak; 1995) was about an airborne virus.
The Cal-OSHA rationale for specifying PAPR's is linked with the likely event of HCWs, here, in the U.S. performing high-risk aerosol-generating procedures, which are not performed in field hospitals in Africa. Please also refer to current CDC guidelines in re droplet precautions.
The book, Hot Zone, and the cited film adaptation, thereof (Outbreak; 1995) was about an airborne virus.
The Cal-OSHA rationale for specifying PAPR's is linked with the likely event of HCWs, here, in the U.S. performing high-risk aerosol-generating procedures, which are not performed in field hospitals in Africa. Please also refer to current CDC guidelines in re droplet precautions.
"Although there are limited data available to definitively define a list of AGPs, procedures that are usually included are Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BiPAP), bronchoscopy, sputum induction, intubation and extubation, and open suctioning of airways.
..The biocontainment unit's director, Dr. Phil Smith, said Salia was in "very critical condition" when he arrived. Salia had no kidney function, had difficulty breathing, and was unresponsive at that time, said the hospital's chief of critical care, Dr. Dan Johnson. Doctors put him on dialysis, intubated him and put him on a mechanical ventilation device. They also gave him blood pressure medication, but he went into cardiac arrest. Mapp Pharmaceutical, the company that makes ZMapp, provided the drug. The supply of the experimental drug had been exhausted months earlier. An unnamed Ebola survivor provided plasma...
BostonFNP, APRN
2 Articles; 5,584 Posts
This happened with the Motaba virus in Cedar Creek, CA after it was brought in by a monkey resulting in widespread hysteria and talk of dropping a fire bomb on the town.
So we should all be cautious.