More Ebola

[Fingerplucked]

Here's a thought experiment: The protocol is in place. We know how to avoid ebola contagion. Now we have to hire the guy who will be in charge of implementing that protocol across a continent-wide, national health network. We have three candidates for the job. President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney.

Who do you hire?

First choice: Mitt Romney. He's unemployed and he's not looking for a job. He has plenty of time. He's smart, organized, and driven when he sets his mind to something.

Second choice: Hillary Clinton. She's unemployed but she's campaigning for a job. She has the same qualifications as Romney.

Last choice: Obama. He already has a job. He has the same qualifications as Romney, but he's busy.

[fauxmaha]

Oct 16, 2014 16:38:22 GMT -5 Fingerplucked said:

Its one thing to say "if we have the right gloves and masks and hazmat suits and all the rest, and then know how to use them correctly, then the risk of infection is effectively eliminated".

That's the easy part.

The hard part is promulgating that protocol and the required equipment/supplies/training to the thousands of places where it needs to be.

Not every hospital needs to be equipped to handle Ebola.

There's "handle", and then there's "handle".

Not every one needs the Defcon 5 level biohazard containment stuff like they built here, but every single one needs to know how to deal with a guy who walks in the door with active ebola. Unless we know where the next case is going to turn up. Which we don't.

[Fingerplucked]

I agree. Screening should be done at the local level.

[jdd2]

Since the feds have so obviously blown this (apart from those 2-3 hospitals that they probably funded), how about letting each state, or county, set up their own respective response teams & decide their own protocols?

States each have been able to adopt their own healthcare exchanges, or not, and each one has been able to expand medicare, or not.

Since they're doing that so effectively, let them choose whether, and how, to deal with this ebola thing on their own, too.

[Doug]

While I know you are being snarkie you do have it right it's something that the States should handle.  

[coachdoc]

You give it to the states and we will have border crossing guard stations and Balkanization will be reality.

[Deleted]

Forget ebola. It's cats!!

www.bottomlinepublications.com/content/article/health-a-healing/6-ways-your-cat-can-make-you-sick-or-even-kill-you?utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=Content+Marketing&utm_campaign=killer_cat

[millring]

[Fingerplucked]

Oct 16, 2014 16:38:22 GMT -5 Fingerplucked said:

Its one thing to say "if we have the right gloves and masks and hazmat suits and all the rest, and then know how to use them correctly, then the risk of infection is effectively eliminated".

That's the easy part.

The hard part is promulgating that protocol and the required equipment/supplies/training to the thousands of places where it needs to be.

It doesn't have to be done all at once.  We currently have four hospitals that are equipped: one in Nebraska, one in Atlanta, and two others someplace.  I don't know how many people the CDC has available to train hospitals, but I think I'd start with a small team at three or four strategically located hospitals and make damn sure everything is in place before moving on to the next three or four locations.

I might have been wrong.  When I heard that we currently have four facilities equipped to handle ebola cases I thought we were talking maybe dozens of patients in each that could be cared for.  But I guess that's not the case. The facility in Nebraska that was built in response to the 9/11 attacks for fear of bio-terrorism can handle a maximum of three patients, and one of those three beds is already being used.  The four facilities combined can handle nine patients total. They're already dealing with four, so our remaining total national ebola capacity is five patients.

Three of the four facilities are limited by having enough of the proper equipment. The fourth, which I think is the NIH, has excess equipment but does not have enough staff.  With additional staff they could add a few more ebola beds.

I believe the experts when they say a major outbreak in the U.S. is extremely unlikely.  But I can't imagine how a total of nine beds could handle what we're going to need, unless we don't see any more than five more victims, which also seems unlikely.

[patrick]

Oct 16, 2014 16:38:22 GMT -5 Fingerplucked said:

Its one thing to say "if we have the right gloves and masks and hazmat suits and all the rest, and then know how to use them correctly, then the risk of infection is effectively eliminated".

That's the easy part.

The hard part is promulgating that protocol and the required equipment/supplies/training to the thousands of places where it needs to be.

It doesn't have to be done all at once.  We currently have four hospitals that are equipped: one in Nebraska, one in Atlanta, and two others someplace.  I don't know how many people the CDC has available to train hospitals, but I think I'd start with a small team at three or four strategically located hospitals and make damn sure everything is in place before moving on to the next three or four locations.

Not every hospital needs to be equipped to handle Ebola. They only need to be able to screen for possible victims, and then refer those people to the nearest hospital that is equipped. It wouldn't take long to have a fully functional hospital in the northeast, southeast, upper and lower midwest, and north/south west. From there they could just keep filling in the blanks until every major metropolitan center has at least one facility.

From what I could see, the gowning could be improved with a few simple changes available right now. First, the gloves end at the wrist. They could use veterinary exam gloves that come farther up the arm, at least for the inner glove. Second, when removing the facemask , provide impermeable wipes for a person to grasp while touching the mask.

As for disseminating the protocols and equipment, mostly the stuff is readily available from standard catalogs. And doctors and nurses are perfectly capable of learning new procedures from watching videos and reading reports, they do it all the time.

I don't see why you need lots of people touring the country training people to do this.

[Fingerplucked]

I don't see why you need lots of people touring the country training people to do this.

Neither did I until the hospital in Dallas did such a great job of screwing everything up.  

What I don't get about Dallas is why they didn't know that they didn't know what they were doing.  

[Deleted]

Hubris?

[Chesapeake]

Oct 16, 2014 12:51:30 GMT -5 dickt said:

Oct 16, 2014 12:03:04 GMT -5 Chesapeake said:

Flake: That'll teach you to make fun of Sophocles.

My first guitar--a cheap nylon string came from Sophocles' (Papas) shop on Connecticut Ave.

Wow. When I was in college I made leather guitar straps to sell in his shop.

[Chesapeake]

Helps account for why my GPA wasn't as high as it could have been. Well, that and several other things.

[Supertramp78]

"they didn't know that they didn't know"

Who does? That is the definition of ignorance, the absence of information. Hospitals deal with infectious people every day. Most of those infectious people don't explode in a shower of infectious goo. SO we learn a little.

[Chesapeake]

Oct 16, 2014 15:27:32 GMT -5 Marshall said:

Oct 16, 2014 8:51:07 GMT -5 Cornflake said:

Marshall, the Sophocles thing was a feeble attempt at humor.

So was Paul Simon.

I heard that the "La, la, la" parts in The Boxer were supposed to be a chorus, but, try as he might, Simon couldn't come up with any lyrics that worked. So he finally gave up and they just sang "La, la, la."

If "la-la-la": starts showing up in my posts from now on, you'll know why.

[Chesapeake]

Oct 18, 2014 11:28:17 GMT -5 Fingerplucked said:

....
What I don't get about Dallas is why they didn't know that they didn't know what they were doing.  

[Fingerplucked]

Hubris and ignorance are good as possible or partial answers. In fairness I think we ought to add courage and dedication.  And probably something else.

I'm just trying to picture myself as a nurse. No, not in a Bill Hammond sort of way, looking sexy in my nurse's uniform and high heels. I meant as someone who was supposed to help take care of an eboloa patient and clean up after him.

Ebola has been in the news for the last few months as doctors were being brought back to the U.S. from Africa because they had become infected. I can't believe there is anyone at all in the medical profession who was not aware of that. And although there is still much that we don't know about ebola such as where it comes from, what it uses as a natural host, or how to cure it, there is a lot we do know, like the fact that it is transmitted by bodily fluids, that victims' blood doesn't clot and pours from every bodily orifice, that projectile vomiting is common, as are convulsions which helps spread fluids and at times has caused healthcare workers to lose control of sharp objects like hypodermic needles that they wind up stabbing their gloves and themselves with.  The information has been freely available for decades. So I'm trying to picture myself deciding to volunteer to help or being ordered to help when I can see that my hospital's equipment or expertise is lacking. 

These people must be braver than I am.

[Chesapeake]

Well said.

[millring]

www.cnbc.com/id/102094512?__source=msn|money|headline|story|&par=msn