Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"We will from this moment forward ensure that no other individual who is being monitored for exposure undergoes travel in any way other than controlled movement," Dr Frieden said, meaning, for example, in chartered flights or ambulances."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29632433

Doesn't this seem like it was a common sense action that should've been done from the outset?

Why is the CDC always one step behind?

Also, please tell me they will now monitor every passenger on that plane. Though seeing how effective they've been so far, I doubt it.

It's not just the plane - it's anyone who was behind her in her travels - public bathroom, cab, coffee shop.

True. Plus all her family members and whoever she visited in Cleveland. I wish I could be confident CDC would do contact tracing properly, but so far I doubt it. Nigeria, which has a lot fewer resources than we do, managed it, so you'd think we'd be able to as well, but seeing how incompetent everyone is being so far, I have my doubts.

Seems to me that our nation is at a pivot point now. Get tough now or start looking at triage centers down the road. By that I mean developing designated areas to care for and quarantine patients.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When booking flights I am avoiding anything that connects through or lands at Dulles, Dallas, Newark, JFK, etc. I am also not booking on united.

ok. Are you taking your bubble as a carry on?

No but why bother if I can fly to DCA? How often do you fly?

I just heard that she had a low grade fever while on the plane. Don’t know if this is true. If so, not great news. The public will go nuts. However, seeing that none of Duncan’s relatives have shown any symptoms of this virus and they were exposed to it when he had a low grade fever, I only hope the likelihood of anyone else contracting this virus is very, very low.

And it isn't just more fluids around - it is that there is so much virus in every droplet of fluid near the end. That isn't so at the start of the infection.

Yes, it is the final days when a person is most contagious. With the low grade fever, at the start of the infection, transmission risk is very low. At the end stages, when the person is hospitalized is when they are very likely to transmit to health care workers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested to see if Duncan's family eventually becomes infected. With the two nurses getting sick so quickly, I wonder if those final days is when a person is most contagious.

Perhaps that's just when the most bodily fluids are presented, making exposure more likely.

viral load is higher too

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested to see if Duncan's family eventually becomes infected. With the two nurses getting sick so quickly, I wonder if those final days is when a person is most contagious.

Perhaps that's just when the most bodily fluids are presented, making exposure more likely.

I'm interested to see if Duncan's family eventually becomes infected. With the two nurses getting sick so quickly, I wonder if those final days is when a person is most contagious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"We will from this moment forward ensure that no other individual who is being monitored for exposure undergoes travel in any way other than controlled movement," Dr Frieden said, meaning, for example, in chartered flights or ambulances."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29632433

Doesn't this seem like it was a common sense action that should've been done from the outset?

Why is the CDC always one step behind?

Also, please tell me they will now monitor every passenger on that plane. Though seeing how effective they've been so far, I doubt it.

It's not just the plane - it's anyone who was behind her in her travels - public bathroom, cab, coffee shop.

her parents..

There should be a small healthcare group assigned to an ebola patient and those providers should be quarentined on-site during the duration of care and for 21 days after.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"We will from this moment forward ensure that no other individual who is being monitored for exposure undergoes travel in any way other than controlled movement," Dr Frieden said, meaning, for example, in chartered flights or ambulances."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29632433

Doesn't this seem like it was a common sense action that should've been done from the outset?

Why is the CDC always one step behind?

Also, please tell me they will now monitor every passenger on that plane. Though seeing how effective they've been so far, I doubt it.

It's not just the plane - it's anyone who was behind her in her travels - public bathroom, cab, coffee shop.

I believe 99.5 is the fever Pham had when she self reported her symptoms and tested positive. When Vinson self reported, her fever was much higher, so would Vinson be similar to Pham and been positive with the lower fever which she had in Ohio and on the plane?

I would be concerned about the bathroom on a plane. There is all sorts of human waste (pee, feces, nasal discharge, spit) everywhere. Even if you don't see it, if you have a paper cut, etc on your hand, isn't that a point of entry to get an infection, just like a staph infection????

Anonymous wrote:"We will from this moment forward ensure that no other individual who is being monitored for exposure undergoes travel in any way other than controlled movement," Dr Frieden said, meaning, for example, in chartered flights or ambulances."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29632433

Doesn't this seem like it was a common sense action that should've been done from the outset?

Why is the CDC always one step behind?

Also, please tell me they will now monitor every passenger on that plane. Though seeing how effective they've been so far, I doubt it.

Anonymous wrote:"We will from this moment forward ensure that no other individual who is being monitored for exposure undergoes travel in any way other than controlled movement," Dr Frieden said, meaning, for example, in chartered flights or ambulances."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29632433

Doesn't this seem like it was a common sense action that should've been done from the outset?

Call it a teachable moment.