alprova said...Sir, there are TWO cases in TWO weeks.
True, and is not true those were two lower level healthcare workers. How many deaths so far? Only two I think so I guess you are right no reason for congress and the media to react just because the virus is very deadly. Apparently the major risk is to those attending to the afflicted. Should we consider them expendable?
Wash your hands often and keep them away from your face and avoid contacting bodily fluids of those infected is the current advice.
Those dummies that caught the virus must not have done that and are themselves to blame, is that correct? They are accused of not following the protocol but exactly what the violation was has not been publicized, the steps taken to communicate and educate them of the protocol has not been publicized, the steps being taken to prevent a recurrence is still not clear.
alprova said... The chances of this disease spreading to any great number of Americans in this nation are next to ZERO!!
Is it zero or just next to it? What would you call a great number of Americans? Those two recent cases need to hear those calming words. It would probably help them to hear.. "don't worry you are among a very unfortunate few, a great number of Americans will not be affected". Another way to say it would be "your azz may die but there won't be very many, maybe none, experience the misery you face."
You are far more likely to know someone who will die today of a sudden heart attack, get killed in a car accident, or someone who will stub their toe, than you will EVER FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE know anyone who contracts Ebola That is the reality you people need to find and realize.
Ebola is not going to become a plague in this nation. We're still going to have to wait for another round of Spanish Flu to find a global killer.
I see said the blind man we should stop all that crap and just let it play itself out. STOP making a to do over a failure here and there. STOP isolating people, STOP restricting some people from being around other people, STOP limiting travel. STOP the news people from reporting and questioning action taken and not taken.
Alprova, you may be right, we are only talking about sacrificing a few for the many. You are also right that a czar is needed to put a good political spin on this nothing issue. So we give up a few of the 315 million to avoid an inconvenience for many. We can prevent people being fearful the government may fail them again.
BTW, did I see where the probability of death was "only" 40-60%?
Yep, alprova, people just need to suck it up and quit giving so much attention to what amounts to nothing more than a few deaths here and there at the worst case scenario.
Interesting it will be when we get to scene three.
If talk and good intentions will prevent an Ebola outbreak our leadership will be successful. The newly appointed Ebola czar reportedly is a public relations expert known as an electronic communications guru. His medical expertise probably comes from a personal visit to a doc in the box. Where is the head of HHS? Why is it necessary to appoint someone not accountable to congress to do the job someone already in place is supposed to do? Government is not the well oiled highly effective machine many believe it to be. Should a czar be appointed to deal with the ISIS terrorist, a similar situation with open intent to harm others?
We should know in about one month if the current effort is adequate.
The reason for not requiring those leaving the region in Africa to be quarantined for 21 days then have a negative blood test result is that it will not be perfect and some may not follow the rules. Is that really justification for not trying to contain the Ebola virus and eradicate it at the source?
Here's the bottom line if the doctors in that emergency room in Texas had been doing their job CORRECTLY then they would have kept Duncan in the hospital the first time he arrived when he told them he had RECENTLY returned from West Africa.
I think a nurse made that decision and he never saw a doctor. No state is prepared for the problem. Take all the shots at Perry you want but he is as good as Obama, I don't think either is worth a dime. Obama makes better use of a teleprompter and does better at fund raising than Perry.
No reason to panic but a damn good reason to get your azz in gear and prevent any further spread.
Why another Czar? Where in the hey is the head of the HHS? Would this not fall under Health and Human Services? What is requiring so much time of the HHS they haven't stepped up to take the lead? Any significant event means creating a whole new Hierarchy. They are all so busy doing make work they can't do essential work. The constitution has no provisions for czars. Will we also have a czar to deal with ISIS and other radicals?
Anyone have the nerve to say anyone that has been in the effected region will be required to spend 21 days in isolation, monitored and have a blood test on day 21 before traveling to the U.S. The guy that died lied and this process would have prevented him from traveling to the U.S. and he would have died there.
What happens when healthcare providers refuse to participate in the care of an Ebola patient? So they resign or they are fired, then what?
Only one hospital (Emory) has demonstrated they have facilities and ability to care for an Ebola patient but they are limited as to how many. Most hospitals are not equipped or prepared to handle the care necessary for Ebola patients.
The best solution is to do whatever necessary to contain, prevent and eradicate. Imagine the impact of failure to do so on the cost of healthcare, the economy, national defense, the food industry and food availability. It is not comparable to a flu epidemic. Would people complain if a pharmaceutical company spent 1-2bil developing an effective drug and charged enough to recover what they spent plus make a good profit? Profits are used to develop new drugs to meet other needs. Should the government nationalize the pharmaceutical industry and decide what they work on and how much is spent? Some politicians have alluded to the possibility.
The Senate never passed the bill, so the cuts never happened.
Thanks for taking the time to post what I didn't to explain my comment this a.m. Keep in mind the republicans like to say they are cutting when most often all they are doing is not approving the full amount of the typical budget increase. They actually say it like they are reducing spending from current levels which is most often not true.
Congress is too lazy and incapable of a zero based budget where each department head explains what each dollar will be spent for. If it is a feel good activity or welfare explain who, where, what, when and why. I am not aware of any entity in government currently accountable for assuring those authorized to spend are exercising responsible fiduciary behavior that avoids frivolous spending, fraud and embezzlement. The amount and number of those in need could be increased just by preventing waste of resources. I have no illusion that will ever happen, it will only get worse as government grows larger and less manageable. How many people do you think are employed or contracted to do government work at the federal level? Add to that state and local government employees, a staggering number beyond most peoples imagination. People expect the POTUS to know anytime someone farts.
By accountable I mean swift punitive consequences for failures.
It is rare, less than .0001 percent, of government employees that are terminated for failure to accept job responsibility. It is not possible to hire that good.
There is a big difference in cuts and not increasing a budget or not approving all the money requested. What about some priorities setting and efficiency improvements training with any additional spending?
How often have you heard...
"I am just as angry as you are and I am going to get to the bottom of it and hold people accountable". Ebola, IRS, Benghazi, VA etc. etc.
Not a smidgen of truth?
alprova said...Clearly, the two nurses broke protocol, in some manner, for them to have contracted the disease.
Not necessarily, the protocol may not be as thorough as it should be. Were they properly trained and instructed? Some say no.
alprova said... That could mean they did not utilize every layer of the protective gear each and every time they had contact with the patient up to an including a breach of some sorts of that protective gear.
A nurse interviewed by CNBC said the neck area was left bare. Her attempts to question that got no response although one of the VP of the facility told her he would check on her concerns and call
alprova said...It will eventually be contained in Africa.
How will that be accomplished and how long it will take since Africa doesn't have the knowledge, resources or resolve to do so? There will need to be a minimum of 21 days in the U.S. with no new cases to reduce the anxiety level.
The hospitals don't have the capacity to handle an outbreak of this deadly virus. Hospital workers may refuse to work at those locations. They can't be forced to not resign and to provide care for those hospitalized with Ebola.
I am not concerned about getting Ebola. I can stay home and totally avoid people.
Is it time for FDR's "we have nothing to fear but fear itself."