- 14,036
- Ireland
- driftking18594
- CiaranGTR94
Now I'm no expert, but there is so much wrong with this lady's protective clothing it's a joke... if this happened in my lab, I'd have no option but to take serious disciplinary action.
Now I'm no expert, but there is so much wrong with this lady's protective clothing it's a joke... if this happened in my lab, I'd have no option but to take serious disciplinary action.
It's a popularity contest between the CEO's and managers of the hospital to see who is best.
Really after all the ebola madness is over with, then I would expect at least two major hospitals in each state have room for up to five patients for disease of this type.. my two cents..
??? No comprehendo... Do you mean that if they survive what are you to do with the hospital unit?Thing is if you have a survivor.... what do you have...?
... if you have a survivor.... what do you have...?
??? No comprehendo...
ohh, yeah the transfusion of the first man's plasma (can't remember his name) to everyone else's who is compatible..
In the event of an outbreak, only having one hospital fully prepared is poor preparation. This kind of isolation facility is not something you pull out of a box and take an Allen wrench to. You need enough to handle a sudden number of patients and spread out in a way that you can move cases from non-prepped hospitals to somewhere like Emory with minimal time in travel.so unless there is another outbreak more than four people, send them to Maryland...
I guess you didn't read all of my post..In the event of an outbreak, only having one hospital fully prepared is poor preparation. This kind of isolation facility is not something you pull out of a box and take an Allen wrench to. You need enough to handle a sudden number of patients and spread out in a way that you can move cases from non-prepped hospitals to somewhere like Emory with minimal time in travel.
If you are being serious about preparing for potential you need to be ready for more than we currently have.
Really after all the ebola madness is over with, then I would expect at least two major hospitals in each state have room for up to five patients for disease of this type.. my two cents..
Doing something after is not preparedness. If the fear is a widespread outbreak, one hospital now won't cut it if it goes wrong. And 100 hospitals/500 beds after will be too late.I guess you didn't read all of my post..
And the winner of this year's prestigious Most Unprofessional Heath Care Worker is ... Kaci Hilcox! The sight of her riding her bike around whilst holding a press junket was, quite frankly, irresponsible*****
Or fully within CDC standards.And the winner of this year's prestigious Most Unprofessional Heath Care Worker is ... Kaci Hilcox! The sight of her riding her bike around whilst holding a press junket was, quite frankly, irresponsible.
...now she is trying to prove a point about civil liberties at a time when the public is concerned about the potential for an Ebola outbreak.
So far, the five or how little the amount is, have caused a massive uproar from the US. Not too much from the same people complaining is being done to help those at the source of all this. I do not expect a massive outbreak anytime soon, anywhere near above 500 in the US.Doing something after is not preparedness. If the fear is a widespread outbreak, one hospital now won't cut it if it goes wrong. And 100 hospitals/500 beds after will be too late.
My initial point was that your notion of not seeing why we need more than one hospital.So far, the five or how little the amount is, have caused a massive uproar from the US. Not too much from the same people complaining is being done to help those at the source of all this. I do not expect a massive outbreak anytime soon, anywhere near above 500 in the US.
The CDC never planned anything for this in the US, because they thought it would be contained in Africa. A little preparedness is much better than what happened before all this. Not sure what you're complaining about.
Because one hospital wouldn't be enough to contain a larger outbreak.I don't see why we have to have more than one hospital in the US to treat patients.
Well, in the scenarios that have happened like you described, no one else caught Ebola from them. In fact, Ebola has only been contracted in the US under current CDC protocols by health care workers treating a patient who was symptomatic. No case of someone contracting Ebola from someone not exhibiting symptoms has occurred.If by Nov. 10th, Hickox turns out not to have Ebola, I'm going to be a bit worried about how this may affect things in the future.
Unless through some miracle this doesn't happen, there will no doubt be more healthcare workers coming from West Africa that caught Ebola. What if they feel fine at first, tried to do what this woman is doing, and then later on they actually have the virus? This whole thing might cause a little complacency with these kind of situations.
“We have seen a big deterrence,” said Margaret Aguirre, head of global initiatives for International Medical Corps, which has about 20 Americans working in the outbreak countries. “People are worried. They don’t want to sign up.”
I don't see why we have to have more than one hospital in the US to treat patients.
Heard on a local news station that people with flu-like symptoms are showing up in ERs, thinking they might have Ebola. This is going to be an interesting winter.
By all means, have a public debate about it. But Hilcox's actions were an irresponsible stunt. She embodies the attitude that your civil rights are inviolable, and that you don't have to exercise them responsibly. Like I said, she is a health care worker with direct experience of Ebola, and she is doing this at a time when the public is concerned about an outbreak and doesn't really understand the situation. The Hippocratic Oath says "first, do no harm"; surely she understands that by deliberately defying a quarantine, she's doing damage. Just because she isn't showing symptoms, that doesn't mean that she doesn't have Ebola.Yes, this is correct. And warranted.
Just now we are testing the limits of our freedoms and civil liberties during a time of extreme fear. This is an important contest between what can be accomplished by science, reason and constitutional law on the one hand, and raw fear, media hype, political opportunism and an undercurrent of "the ends of public safety justify draconian means" rhetoric on the other hand. In America today, it is a roughly balanced contest, so it's amusing to watch.
And..State of Maine Document Reports Kaci Hickox’s Roommate in Africa Developed EbolaBy all means, have a public debate about it. But Hilcox's actions were an irresponsible stunt. She embodies the attitude that your civil rights are inviolable, and that you don't have to exercise them responsibly. Like I said, she is a health care worker with direct experience of Ebola, and she is doing this at a time when the public is concerned about an outbreak and doesn't really understand the situation. The Hippocratic Oath says "first, do no harm"; surely she understands that by deliberately defying a quarantine, she's doing damage. Just because she isn't showing symptoms, that doesn't mean that she doesn't have Ebola.
My initial point was that your notion of not seeing why we need more than one hospital.
It was a response to this.
Because one hospital wouldn't be enough to contain a larger outbreak.
Well, in the scenarios that have happened like you described, no one else caught Ebola from them. In fact, Ebola has only been contracted in the US under current CDC protocols by health care workers treating a patient who was symptomatic. No case of someone contracting Ebola from someone not exhibiting symptoms has occurred.
All this political posturing is now likely going to start costing lives.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/eb...-groups-see-fallout-quarantine-debate-n237751
Quick question for people worried about quarantine protocols: Why are you listening to politicians, who clearly don't even take even diet advice from their own doctors, instead of the scientists? There is an election next week. That is all this is about.
And my reply to both of you is the same. After this dies down a little more, I would expect to see at least two hospitals per state be equipped.It's very costly to transport patients from one local hospital to another, moving them across the country would be even more expensive. All major hospitals should be equipped to handle an infectious disease, whether it's Ebola or something like TB or MRSA.
This is already starting to occur at local organization, so much so that we've even developed software plugins to our EMR to help guide schedulers, clinical staff, and providers to make a quicker call whether or not the presenting patient is an Ebola risk or not.
And my reply to both of you is the same. After this dies down a little more, I would expect to see at least two hospitals per state be equipped.
And by dies down I don't mean after the African crisis is solved, but until enough time where the CDC can come up with a plan to see that most hospitals are structured for such..
This doesn't explain why you think we should only have one when there is a crisis that might spread to the U.S. What good would one hospital be then?And my reply to both of you is the same. After this dies down a little more, I would expect to see at least two hospitals per state be equipped.
And by dies down I don't mean after the African crisis is solved, but until enough time where the CDC can come up with a plan to see that most hospitals are structured for such..