Ebola Patient in Atlanta Hospital

originally posted by: NEB0168
a reply to: NavyDoc

Do you believe then, in your experience, that either the US transport was totally flubbed out of incompetence, or that the publicized transport of Brantley was a diversion from the actual transport? I'd be curious to understand from those who have training in this area. If the transport of Brantley we all saw was crap, how could we go about looking into the ACTUAL transport? Is it too late to find that information from someone who may have seen the real deal somewhere?

Please explain to me how it was "flubbed"?

Did something go wrong? Was the infected patient exposed to anyone?

You can disagree with the transport, you can think they didn't take enough precautions...but you can't say it was flubbed because nothing happened, it went smoothly from what everyone knows and the patient got to where he needed to be without incident.

I wouldn't call that flubbing it...I would call that a successful transfer.

a reply to: crazyewok

Good luck finding the definitions. I spent considerable time looking for how many levels there are and what they mean. Came up with nothing.

Still hoping someone will find this.

a reply to: crazyewok

Understand, and I do agree that there can be legitimate reasons for secretive transport etc. I automatically thought that first, maybe this is being hidden because those in charge feared seeing an ACTUAL transport with all the bells and whistles might totally incite panic in people. It definitely gave me a chill to see the Spain photos. Perhaps the average Joe might be sent into panic mode too quickly. OR, they really are researching this, as previously stated, at USAMRIID.

a reply to: kruphix

No it wasn't flubbed but it was done in a pretty unprofessional way. Enough to shock me anyway.

No nothing did go wrong, but if it had the extra precautions I would have expected to be there were not.

The European model is how both me and Navy Doc would have expected.

Luckily nothing did go wrong but that isn't to say there precautions could and should of been a dam sight better.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: crazyewok

Good luck finding the definitions. I spent considerable time looking for how many levels there are and what they mean. Came up with nothing.

Still hoping someone will find this.

Its even more confusing that different agency's in different countrys use different warning models too.

It should be something that's standardised.

a reply to: kruphix

Sure you can. It was flubbed from a PR standpoint and it was flubbed from a risk standpoint.

How did it make sense for Brantly to walk across gravel and pass piled lumber?

Writebol's transfer even implies someone agrees with me.

Just sayin'

I watched this Nova/Ebola video that was posted pages back (excellent!) I urge everyone to view it. What is remarkable about this is that the doctors went ahead and gave blood from someone who survived Ebola to someone dying from it and she survived. They did it with ten others and I think seven survived. It seems survivors of Ebola's blood greatly increases the survival rates. Of course this is not approved protocol and with all the red tape in North America is unlikely to even be possible - but - it makes sense and is worth pushing for in my opinion.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: kruphix

I'm using it descriptively (as a verb (? to flub?), not adjective as I previously said, hello self, get it together). I don't know that it was TECHNICALLY "flubbed".

I do know that if you simply VIEW the pictures of what the Spanish transport looked like and compare, its not to the same level - and moreover, we have people on the thread here saying that the way they were trained is more in-line with what the Spanish have just done.

So was there an actual FLUB by the definition? I'm not sure because I am not familiar with standard protocol for this. But based on what was Said by NavyDoc, I'm throwing it out there. It's SPECULATIVE. I'm simply asking the question of someone who seems to know about it, and said the way the Spanish did it is proper protocol (which is VISIBLY not how we did it).

Look. I am not even remotely an expert here, I'm throwing out a question based on something I read here. I've been lurking here for a while - try not to drain my blood too quick while I jump into the fray with everyone who is very familiar with the level/burden of proof required to even post a reply. Perhaps how this transport was done is TO THE TEE perfect. I don't have the level of knowledge to know. But it SURE is completely different from the way the Spanish handled it, and we have people on the board here remarking they were trained to do the same. That's all.

a reply to: NEB0168

The bottom line is the transfer was successful and without incident...so why keep talking about it?

I don't pretend to be an expert, I let the experts be experts. I honestly don't care if people in this thread have said that isn't the way they were trained...they weren't in this specific situation.

Someone decided what precautions needed to be in placed, those precautions were taken, and the transfer was successful and without incident.

Case closed...only thing left to discuss about it is if you want to use this event as a scare tactic.

Dr. Friedan of the CDC is testifying live right now.

Live Feed

Should be interesting.

a reply to: kruphix

I am not interested in scare tactics, I'm interested in someone saying their training was different from what actually went down / more in line with the Spanish. It IS relevant and the case is not closed as the Spanish transfer just happened. I see it as a perfectly relevant point to discuss. If you are not an expert, can you please allow someone who is to jump in and answer without suggesting its a scare tactic? If someone with some level of knowledge of transfer protocol from a job/military perspective can actually say "well, it seems the protocol was just fine, a bit off but that happens" I'll go back to lurking.

a reply to: kruphix

There is no case closed! This thread is open to any and all, who care to express an OPINION. You don't own it Bubba.

I want all who read and post here to have the option to form their own opinions. Your opinion is NOT the end all and be all of ebola. You may think you are that important or mighty, but you are not.

To all posting and reading in this thread. Your input no matter what it is, is more than welcome. The fact we now have *confirmed* ebola on American soil is a first, that we know of. The poster I am replying to, appears to have the delusion that only his OPINIONS are valid. Please don't take his input to the bank as the final word on ebola.

Ebola is an ongoing research project across the board. There is no case closed. Please make yourself as aware of all aspects of ebola as it becomes available to us. Anything you many have questions on, do some research yourself, use the resources posted in this thread to educate yourself as much as possible.

Do not take the word of someone who says CASE CLOSED when it comes to ebola.

This Public Service Message brought to you by Des.

Des

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: NEB0168

The bottom line is the transfer was successful and without incident...so why keep talking about it?

Because it is indicative of how they are handling this situation overall. They keep saying every precaution possible is being taken. Fact is, letting him walk in to the hospital was NOT taking every precaution possible. The reason you are wheeled out of the hospital even if you're 100% healthy and fine is because falls happen, and they don't want to be liable for an injury that happened on their grounds. If that precaution is taken even for healthy people for insurance reasons, then the patients in this case should have had *at least* the same precautions taken for their own safety and especially everyone else's. It was not. Therefore, it indicates that they might be comfortable letting *other* precautions slide.

And this is a discussion forum, we are allowed to discuss whatever we want within the T&C limits. I'm sorry you don't like every single thing that's discussed here, but you do not have a right to tell people to stop talking about anything.

a reply to: Destinyone
These immigrants coming in like this and bringing God knows what with them has to be breaking some law.
I immigrated to Canada years ago and had to be tested, vaccinated. All immigrants have to!
You can't go to another country or region like Hawaii or Mexico and bring flowers or plants back. I snuck a water bottle of sand though lol.

The Canadian / US border is hard to get through. There's ways to sneak across but patrol cars are watching and catch you. I'm right on the border of Washington state in BC.

Forgot to mention, you can come in through a boat too. From Mexico or Canada. Not sure how well that is patrolled.

a reply to: kruphix

originally posted by: kruphix
...so why keep talking about it?

Case closed...

Isn't this a discussion board?

Some share the opinion, including some in the healthcare field, who think it was nuts the way we did it. Also makes you wonder what else they are doing that is nuts?

The fact that nothing bad has happened yet (a reasonable assumption for now) is not an argument for NOT discussing what could have been done better.

I can cross a busy road with my eyes closed shut and not get hit, but it doesn't make my approach very smart.

So there is NO misunderstanding when a post is removed or a post ban applied....
Members who choose to discuss other members, to belittle others, to bicker, to bait others may find themselves temporarily post banned.
It is NOT fair to those who read and post to ATS to have to have this serious topic derailed.

You are responsible for your own posts.

There were at least FOUR warnings in the last day or two about derailing the topic.
They seem to be ignored.
Community Announcement re: Decorum

An opposing viewpoint is NOT a valid reason to complain & It takes two to tango

**ALL MEMBERS** Member Guidelines For Spotting/Alerting T&C Infractions


Do NOT reply to this post......

Fifth African country with suspected ebola case

A fifth West African country has announced it is treating a patient suspected of carrying the Ebola. Benin's health minister told state television that a hospital in the country is treating a a Nigerian man who is thought to be carrying the disease. The case is unconfirmed but Dorothy Gazard's announcement triggered widespread fears in the capital Cotonou with many people saying they would stock up on food and stop eating at popular roadside food stalls to avoid possible infection.

The interesting thing about this is that it's a *Nigerian* person in Benin, and besides the 8 suspected cases in the healthcare workers that treated Sawyer, no one else in Nigeria is supposed to have it. That should spark some interesting reactions in Nigeria if it is confirmed to be ebola.

originally posted by: Seek_Truth

originally posted by: switchqm8
Nigeria Declares State Of Emergency: "Everyone In The World Is At Risk" From Ebola, CDC Issues Level 1 "All-Hands Call"

www.zerohedge.com...

Did you notice that the majority of that story is quoted from a post on Godlikeproductions.com?

ZH is generally a good source, but really?

Turns out it's true though. FIVE MORE CASES CONFIRMED IN NIGERIA. Apparently all healthcare workers who were in contact with Sawyer, which brings some relief. But 70 people still under surveillance, that's it. What a joke, still trying to find the stories i read about how many passengers were on a single flight with him. I saw first reports saying around 230 passengers on just 1 of the 2 flights (originally i read he had boarded 3 planes) but any and all sources have disappeared.

Nigerian authorities moved quickly late Wednesday, gathering isolation tents as five more cases of the Ebola Virus were confirmed in Lagos, a city bursting with 21 million people.

www.washingtonpost.com...

"Yesterday the first known Nigerian to die of Ebola was recorded. This was one of the nurses that attended to the Liberian. The other five [newly confirmed] cases are being treated at an isolation ward," the Nigerian health minister, Onyebuchi Chukwu, told reporters in the capital, Abuja, on Wednesday.

Officials initially downplayed the risk of exposure, saying Sawyer had been immediately isolated when he collapsed on arrival at Lagos's bustling main airport two weeks ago.

But on Tuesday the state health commissioner, Jide Idris, said Ebola was diagnosed only after Sawyer had been taken to hospital and had direct or indirect contact with at least 70 others.

www.theguardian.com...

Tick, tick, tick...