Last night I read that the CDC is planning to transport at least one American Citizen with the ebola virus to Atlanta for treatment. Driving around today my car radio kept assaulting me with experts soothingly asserting that there is no reason for the American population to fear exposure to the virus. To a man they all went on to say that only healthcare workers were likely to be exposed.
If you're a healthcare worker raise your hand. Are you angry? Do you feel like you're being considered expendable? Less than fully human? Are you worried?
I don't favor deliberately bringing ANY known infected person across the ocean to this continent. OK, Ebola is not all that easy to contract. It's a lot harder to contract if it is thousands of miles away.
The virus is spread by contact with infected body fluids. So lets say a nurses aid in a hospital comes in contact with those body fluids (diarrhea, emesis, blood, whatever. Accidents happen even if you take precautions.) What is to stop her from spreading the virus to her husband or child? What is to stop a child infected in this way from spreading it within his classroom?
I have always been able to deal with the concept of ebola by reminding myself that it exists on another continent. Perhaps I'm being selfish, but I believe that anyone sickened in Africa should be treated in Africa. We don't need to help diseases spread around the globe any more than we already do.
NIMBY. In this case, NIMBY. I'm not a NIMBY kind of girl, but this terrifies me.
What do you think? What would you do if you were assigned a patient know to be infected with Ebola?
This is a very interesting video of a MN Doctor who contracted Ebola while performing an autopsy back in the 70's, before they even knew what it was called.
This could be because in most of our lifetimes, due to the availability and use of preventative vaccines in our country, seriously infectious and deadly diseases have been mostly eradicated.
Not eradicated, but held at bay. The one that "was" eradicated was recently discovered in an NIH freezer with no lock, no key, and no knowledge that it was there.
However, the course of discussion has gone there; there are situations that we face as nurses that do come down to an ethical and moral question.
I think being practical as far as this situation based on the information at hand; this organization had paid for a vaccine or serum that helped improved the doctor and nurse and are being flown to a place that is specialized in infectious diseases and has been working on a vaccine is less of a risk of someone that is unknowingly infected and spreads it through coming back into the states and going about business but that's me.
My preservation level is adjusted in this case, when a vaccination and signs and symptoms are improved; with thinking about incubation and window of transmission, they may be less infectious; having the proper training, PPE and universal precautions, I have no issues caring for a known carrier of the disease-I've done so for many years, as well as my most recent shift was caring for someone with two highly infectious, airborn illnesses; I gave them the medication they needed as well as practiced universal precautions to prevent spreading it to other pts as well as my home environment; I have a routine that I hope decreases the retaining of infectious microbes and the like; so it's more like muscle memory to me; guess that why my take on the situation is that IF (that's a big IF) Ebola (even though it's been in the US for quite some time now) were to hit my area or I had to provide care, I am prepared the best way I can, because I do believe and exercise self preservation.
I think this is a mistake. There is so much we still do not know about the Ebola virus. The doctor who contracted it was known to take up to thirty minutes painstakingly donning his PPE prior to patient contact. He does not know how he contracted it. Ebola is highly infectious. My understanding is that it takes only one viron to cause infection, and that although it is not airborne (yet), respiratory droplets are infectious.
Showing up for work knowing that I will care for people with infectious diseases is one thing, and it is a choice I make. But to actually knowingly bring such a virulent pathogen with such a high mortality rate across international borders just seems like a really bad idea to me.
I do not trust all the smooth reassurance that "we have nothing to worry about". How many times has the American public been lied to?
Would I knowingly care for a person infected with Ebola? That's a really huge hypothetical since, for me, I do not work inpatient. I work in Emergency, and we see people with unknown diagnoses all the time. If the virus began to spread and we were seeing people present to emergency departments with the virus, I might actually take some time off and stay home in my little cabin in the woods with my food stockpile and shotgun.
The hypothetical people who have recently traveled to (or left) the West African regions where the epidemic is happening (and were exposed) may not start feeling symptoms for a few weeks. If they have symptoms, they will pop up in the ED with "flu-like" symptoms. You won't be in full hazmat gear when you introduce yourself as the nurse.
That being said, I have no idea how likely that scenario is (I really don't) but I imagine there are precautions in place.
RE: your shotgun-- it must be...very very tiny ;-)
The hypothetical people who have recently traveled to (or left) the West African regions where the epidemic is happening (and were exposed) may not start feeling symptoms for a few weeks. If they have symptoms, they will pop up in the ED with "flu-like" symptoms. You won't be in full hazmat gear when you introduce yourself as the nurse.
That being said, I have no idea how likely that scenario is (I really don't) but I imagine there are precautions in place.
Exactly...who knows many times we have been "exposed" to the virus, and yet, continue on as business as usual...over the past 30, almost 40 years; it's not that improbable that we have been exposed and never got any symptoms.
I don't think it's the same thing at all. Driving a car is a necessity in our society, unless you have the luxury of arranging your life differently, or if you live in NYC. ;-P
Making the decision to go to a third world country and volunteer to care for people suffering from Ebola virus, knowing that you could be exposed and contract the disease yourself, is completely different from getting into your car to go to work.
And nowhere did anyone say that Dr. Brantly is not deserving of treatment. That is a huge leap.
I’d argue that getting the current Ebola outbreak curbed and under control is a necessity too. We do live in a global world. Providing medical assistance to countries in dire need is the right thing to do for humanitarian reasons as well as being in our (not yet afflicted countries’) self-interest.
I admire people who try to make a difference and of course they should receive medical care in their own country.
Taking refuge to a remotely located cabin in the woods won’t stop this outbreak. Deploying people with medical expertise to the actual areas afflicted, providing personal protective equipment and medical supplies and educating the public on disease prevention will stop this outbreak.
The hypothetical people who have recently traveled to (or left) the West African regions where the epidemic is happening (and were exposed) may not start feeling symptoms for a few weeks. If they have symptoms, they will pop up in the ED with "flu-like" symptoms. You won't be in full hazmat gear when you introduce yourself as the nurse.
THIS. I do not understand why educated professionals are flipping out over the two who have been brought in under extremely controlled conditions when the above scenario is highly likely and should be of much more concern. So if the two infected patients hadn't been brought in we would be more safe? Uh, no.
Specializes in Oncology; medical specialty website.
Okay...good for you???
Why be so snarky? People are going to great lengths to explain why they won't take care of Ebola patients. Why shouldn't someone who is willing to care for them have the same opportunity to give her side?
Why be so snarky? People are going to great lengths to explain why they won't take care of Ebola patients. Why shouldn't someone who is willing to care for them have the same opportunity to giveherside?
"Their" side. There are male nurses too. Just say'n.
Why be so snarky? People are going to great lengths to explain why they won't take care of Ebola patients. Why shouldn't someone who is willing to care for them have the same opportunity to give her side?
Yes, that was a little snarky of me, but I am not taking away anyone's opportunity to express their opinion just by being a little snarky, LOL. I just thought it odd that she quoted me to express her opinion when I had clearly stated that it wasn't about whether or not I'd care for someone with Ebola- and I have NOT gone to any lengths really to explain whether or not I would. It didn't really make sense to me to quote me to go on and on about that. Plus I found her post to be somewhat incoherent. I guess it all just brought out the snark in me. I'll never do it again, I promise, since nobody EVER gets snarky around here (yeah, that's more snark- I guess I'm just a horrible person...a horrible person with a tiny member...er uh shotgun).
Just say'n.
LadyFree28, BSN, LPN, RN
8,429 Posts
Fascinating-indeed.