Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Ebola
Oct 16, 2014 20:48:58 GMT -6
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2014 20:48:58 GMT -6
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 6:56:51 GMT -6
Post by rukidding (towns local troll) on Oct 17, 2014 6:56:51 GMT -6
The Governments way of doing Population Control.
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 8:32:18 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by northsider on Oct 17, 2014 8:32:18 GMT -6
Sounds more like the Texas hospital's way of controlling costs.
|
|
|
Post by roman on Oct 17, 2014 8:47:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 11:01:18 GMT -6
Post by toshiko on Oct 17, 2014 11:01:18 GMT -6
Sounds more like the Texas hospital's way of controlling costs. Great post. Nurses told them, they did not have the correct equipment, and also not proper training. They were told to watch a Utube video. The hospital, has alot of explaining to do. There were many breaks, in the initial presentation, of this man. Then the passing of his blood samples, thru a tube system, and placing him in a room w/ other folks. So many poor choices, this hospital made. helen, I, too am stunned, this gal even thought of travelling, after treating said pt. There should have been protocols, in order, to prevent just that, for a period of time. Oh and not to mention, ebola is treated, in other places, and it is not spread to the healthcare worker. WHY? because they are prepared and use the correct protocol and equipment. NO SHORTCUTS.
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 11:33:34 GMT -6
Post by dog on Oct 17, 2014 11:33:34 GMT -6
Sounds more like the Texas hospital's way of controlling costs. Great post. Nurses told them, they did not have the correct equipment, and also not proper training. They were told to watch a Utube video. The hospital, has alot of explaining to do. There were many breaks, in the initial presentation, of this man. Then the passing of his blood samples, thru a tube system, and placing him in a room w/ other folks. So many poor choices, this hospital made. helen, I, too am stunned, this gal even thought of travelling, after treating said pt. There should have been protocols, in order, to prevent just that, for a period of time. Oh and not to mention, ebola is treated, in other places, and it is not spread to the healthcare worker. WHY? because they are prepared and use the correct protocol and equipment. NO SHORTCUTS. I am curious why you blamed the nurse instead of the CDC. She called the "experts" and told them everything and they told her it was ok to fly. They have had a lot more experience with Ebola than she did so why would she NOT believe them? I can see fault with the hospital after he came to them with a fever AND stated where he had been. It was wrong for them to send him away at that point. What do you really expect hospitals to do? Should every hospital or health clinic be donned with protective clothing and all patients with a fever be isolated from one another until it is determined they dont have Ebola? It would make sense that healthcare workers in other places arent getting sick. Not because they are following the correct protocol, but because they are working in a area that all they are treating is Ebola. In the clinics in Africa, out of 100 patients I would bet 99 of them are there for Ebola. In the case of Dallas, I would guess it is a complete reversal:1 out of 100.
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 11:50:47 GMT -6
Post by toshiko on Oct 17, 2014 11:50:47 GMT -6
" Should every hospital or health clinic be donned with protective clothing and all patients with a fever be isolated from one another until it is determined they dont have Ebola? " If they have a travel history. There is enough blame all the way around. The nurse, should not have been allowed to fly out of Dallas to Cleveland, imho. Had they had some sort of guidelines, maybe this could have been prevented at that step. Yep CDC, too, as well as administration. Why don't we have a Surgeon General? That may help. But now we have a czar. I just read, some of these folks, did not wear gear, for days, while taking care of him. So many mixed messages and all have to get on the same page. Use the protocols used in the other countries. It can be done.
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 13:43:16 GMT -6
Post by Blue Star on Oct 17, 2014 13:43:16 GMT -6
I just heard today, that a lab tech. from there is now on a cruise ....
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 14:59:46 GMT -6
Post by roman on Oct 17, 2014 14:59:46 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 15:21:50 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2014 15:21:50 GMT -6
I'd like to say I'm shocked. But I'm not..
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 17, 2014 21:28:32 GMT -6
Post by toshiko on Oct 17, 2014 21:28:32 GMT -6
I think a Surgeon General is in order. Gosh, it has only been a year or so.
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 18, 2014 7:00:05 GMT -6
Post by dog on Oct 18, 2014 7:00:05 GMT -6
I think a Surgeon General is in order. Gosh, it has only been a year or so. We have an acting Surgeon General and a functioning office now,dont we? What difference would it really make to have an officially appointed one?
|
|
|
Post by job on Oct 18, 2014 7:05:50 GMT -6
Surgeons General today have very little power. Over the years, both parties have reduced the power of the person holding the position.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Star on Oct 18, 2014 7:48:25 GMT -6
Heyyyyyy.....don't worry and get all upset over all this. Our fearless leader is uh...uhhhh....working on a plan to make the world safe for all of us. Yeah....that's it....he's working on coming up with a plan. Isn't that great!? Isn't it odd that AIDS reached America in 1981, but Reagan did not address the issue until 1987? Was he not a "Fearless" leader too?
|
|
|
Ebola
Oct 18, 2014 7:54:37 GMT -6
Post by dog on Oct 18, 2014 7:54:37 GMT -6
Surgeons General today have very little power. Over the years, both parties have reduced the power of the person holding the position. I borrowed this from scienceblogs.com from Jan 7,2009: "The SG is the head of the uniformed services of the United States Public Health Service, wears a Navy uniform and holds a rank equivalent to a Vice Admiral. If this makes you think the Surgeon General is a powerful position, you’d be half right. Whatever power the SG has comes from your thinking he or she (and there have been a number of women SGs in recent years) is powerful. The SG has a very small staff and even less real power to do anything — except look and sound powerful. The SG is the public face of the USPHS and to some extent federal public health (although the Director of CDC is much more visible and genuinely powerful and shares that public perception). The Office of the Surgeon General’s also issues reports, some of which have been very influential in highlighting important public health problems." So, I interpret this to mean that they dont have any power to actually combat this, other than to increase public awareness.
|
|