Man Being Tested At Mount Sinai Hospital For Possible Ebola Virus

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) – A patient at Mount Sinai Hospital was under treatment Monday afternoon, after being tested after traveling to a country where the Ebola virus is present, the hospital said in a statement.

The man arrived at the East Harlem medical center’s emergency room early Monday morning with high fever and gastrointestinal symptoms.


The man told doctors he had recently traveled to a West African country where Ebola has been reported, the hospital said. The man has been placed in “strict isolation” and is undergoing various tests to determine the cause of the symptoms, the hospital said.

CBS NY

Its only a matter of time till this is on every continent, as the spread continues.

If positive, we need to know how long he has been here and where he went.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Now paranoia takes it's ugly hold.

Everytime some guy eats a bad burrito he's going to run to the hospital convinced he has Ebola.

Even though we should keep an eye on this, there is a whole lot of fear going out here.


Overall, this has been going on for what 5 months now? only 1400 people died from this, that ain't to bad. I keep hearing about a 90% death rate, but the figures don't match.

Not downplaying the current Ebola pandemic, but still figures seem low.

a reply to: LDragonFire

I want to know how the news outlets are finding out so fast about those being tested. Is it that drs / nurses are letting the news out? Wouldn't they and the patient be told not to say anything to not cause undue panic?

originally posted by: LDragonFire

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) – A patient at Mount Sinai Hospital was under treatment Monday afternoon, after being tested after traveling to a country where the Ebola virus is present, the hospital said in a statement.

The man arrived at the East Harlem medical center’s emergency room early Monday morning with high fever and gastrointestinal symptoms.


The man told doctors he had recently traveled to a West African country where Ebola has been reported, the hospital said. The man has been placed in “strict isolation” and is undergoing various tests to determine the cause of the symptoms, the hospital said.

CBS NY

Its only a matter of time till this is on every continent, as the spread continues.

And it begins. So, they obviously have enough based on his symptoms to isolate him and believe it could be ebola. This is not good, but I guess he can't say he was the first in the US with it.

[sarcasm]
Don't worry. They have a vaccine and a cure. Pull out your wallets or die.
[/sarcamn]

ETA: Don't believe a word the media says. They don't check their facts.

The proof is in the pudding, of course, but I still have my doubts that it will get much of a foothold in a country with a well-developed medical infrastructure and modern attitudes toward medicine. It's highly infectious once it erupts, but only in very close contact for a limited window before the patient is too sick to go far. It would have to be a perfect storm even to overwhelm the medical system and society.

In West Africa, you have a society that doesn't believe it exists as a disease and openly fights best medical practices which helps it spread. You also have no medical infrastructure to be overwhelmed. There really IS no line of defense.

a reply to: LDragonFire

For a virus that is apparently bad at spreading, it certainly seems to be doing a good job. I don't study virology, but I would think that the more people it infects and the more ways we try to treat it, the more likely it would be to mutate into possibly/probably something even more dangerous which is pretty worrying.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Right now, they're going to isolate anyone who has traveled to West Africa within the appropriate time frame who presents with ANY of the appropriate symptoms whether they think there's a good chance of it actually be Ebola or not. The only possible good treatment is to catch it early and start supportive care.

You could go into an ER complaining of a simple headache, and if you told them you were in W. Africa anywhere from a few to as a many as 20 or more days ago, they'd likely isolate and test you right now.

a reply to: MessageforAll

Well...those figures say over 50%. And they do not show if the ones that are included in the "cases" column are not showing symptoms anymore. There is no cure for this, so the updated numbers could be that all of them are dead. Sure if you catch someone before they die and put the numbers out there, wait 21 days and check on them again.

a reply to: LDragonFire

I seriously doubt we will see it spread to many countries outside of Africa and all the cases will be from Africa not spread around here.

Its just not the kind've disease we have to worry about for a pandemic.

originally posted by: wtf2008
a reply to: LDragonFire

For a virus that is apparently bad at spreading, it certainly seems to be doing a good job. I don't study virology, but I would think that the more people it infects and the more ways we try to treat it, the more likely it would be to mutate into possibly/probably something even more dangerous which is pretty worrying.

Not really. There are millions of people in the affected countries and the epidemic has been going on since late Frebruary or early March. We have just now topped 800 casualties. If it was really all that good at spreading, in a third world, unsanitary mess like those places tend to be, we'd be well into the tens of thousands or more by now.

So scares so far? UK, Philippines, Hong Kong, and now New York. I think I missed at least one country.

And this is going to be fun...Airlines told they can deny boarding to people with Ebola symptoms

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Right now, they're going to isolate anyone who has traveled to West Africa within the appropriate time frame who presents with ANY of the appropriate symptoms whether they think there's a good chance of it actually be Ebola or not. The only possible good treatment is to catch it early and start supportive care.

You could go into an ER complaining of a simple headache, and if you told them you were in W. Africa anywhere from a few to as a many as 20 or more days ago, they'd likely isolate and test you right now.

Isolation is good, but how many people came in contact with those being isolated prior to isolation? How many hospital staff touched him without a glove? Was this guy in a position where he would have had contact with multiple people? How do you find those people to test as well? These are all things that can come of this and what nobody is talking about. Isolation is great, but you can only isolate those that come to the hospital and say they have some of the symptoms. By that time they could have passed it on to any number of people. Exponential equation here.....and in NYC, that is not a good thing. An island of millions...ebola would spread like wildfire and nothing anyone could do about it really.

a reply to: MessageforAll

The 90% death rate is the average for Ebola Zaire with no treatment whatsoever. If you catch it and try to live through it without medical attention you have about a ten percent chance. Currently the death rate is about 60 percent and that is with full medical treatment. So you can see how a disease killing 60 percent of those treated would be really bad untreated.

As for the fear mongering, it is not the type of disease to worry about the spread of. I fear the flus and ones you can't see.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

And for each of those people, you have a window of incubation before they start showing symptoms in which to find them. Remember, they can't spread the disease until they start showing symptoms, until then the viral load is too low. And of course, any health care professionals at the hospital are all accounted for already. That leave the ones he's been in contact with since he started feeling ill.

Yes, it's not perfect.

But it's better than in Africa where they will fight you tooth and nail even after it's obvious they are ill.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

I thought this strain was one that actually had the 60% even without the treatment making it somewhat less deadly than Ebola Zaire as originally discovered meaning your chances with supportive care are event better.

originally posted by: MessageforAll
Even though we should keep an eye on this, there is a whole lot of fear going out here.

Overall, this has been going on for what 5 months now? only 1400 people died from this, that ain't to bad. I keep hearing about a 90% death rate, but the figures don't match.

Not downplaying the current Ebola pandemic, but still figures seem low.

I don't believe those numbers. I don't believe the authorities are telling us the truth; they will engage the damage control press to avoid panic.

This is essentially a WAR on a viral pandemic and the first causality in war is the truth.

And to add, there is nothing I've seen in the spread of this virus in Africa where it has the best possible conditions (including local funeral customs and local attitudes) to spread that indicates to me that it would be capable of overwhelming a modern medical system in a well-developed country which is what we should all fear from any disease.

To me, something like the avian flu has that potential in spades. It would likely spread quickly and widely enough that hospitals would be overwhelmed and people wouldn't be able to get the care they would need to fight the disease so that what was already a serious situation would become a true disaster as you would lose many who wouldn't otherwise have likely died because of lack of available care. We are seeing this in Africa because they don't have a developed medical system to begin with.

They have admitted there not sure of the total death toll because of tribal customs and distrust of hospitals. Its still the largest in history in both infected, deaths and area of effect and is growing, daily.