CDC says nurses infected with Ebola wore too much gear

As Thomas Eric Duncan's health deteriorated, nurses Amber Joy Vinson and Nina Pham were at the Ebola patient's side. They wore protective gear including face shields, hazardous materials suits and protective footwear as they inserted catheters, drew blood and dealt with his body fluids. Still, the two somehow contracted Ebola from the dying man.


mashable.com...

Absurd in its finest form

These are good, dedicated people who worried about themselves and their families and they were trying to protect themselves better, but in fact by putting on more layers of gloves or other protective clothing, it becomes much harder to put them on, it becomes much harder to take them off," Frieden said Wednesday.

"And the risk of contamination during the process of taking these gloves off gets much higher. That's true for several different areas of the body," he added.

...is he trying to look like the dumbest person on the planet?

deary me the farce is strong in this whole ebola situation!

a reply to: MGaddafi

And to think a spray bottle of bleach could have stopped this.

a reply to: LukeDAP

Crazy isn't it?

overall, it can be true. the more layers you have on, the more friction,the more strength you need, the higher the chances to rip something. that being said, am i supposed to believe that professionals actually thought "we need moar layers!!1!"??
jesus man at least make up a lie that makes sense.

a reply to: judydawg

Bleach or Collodial Silver

a reply to: judydawg

Safety rules have evolved since Ebola was first recognized in 1976 in Zaire. And while there is still no cure, the World Health Organization and Doctors Without Borders have developed relatively safe ways to care for people during many large and deadly outbreaks in Africa over the past four decades.

Trust much? Particularly when you find out 16 members of the Doctors without borders caught the virus with 8 or 9 dead...

Some rules.

a reply to: judydawg
I suppose it's easy to be an armchair quarterback--I shouldn't even try... but I'm only human, and at the moment, I'm a little ticked off at this comedy of errors. I can't help but wonder why the CDC didn't react more vigorously to the US's first Ebola case. From what I've read, it appears as if they did not send someone stat to Texas Presbyterian the very day that the late Mr. Duncan was diagnosed. With the CDC's self-proclaimed superior knowledge, they could have performed a mandatory in-service for health care givers--showing the employees the proper way to disrobe their contaminated gear. And maybe the staff could have been protected, and the CDC wouldn't be playing the blame game.

a reply to: judydawg

Really?

I wonder how the CDC can explain this!

Health care workers treating Thomas Eric Duncan in a hospital isolation unit didn’t wear protective hazardous-material suits for two days until tests confirmed the Liberian man had Ebola — a delay that potentially exposed perhaps dozens of hospital workers to the virus, according to medical records.

But workers at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas did not abandon their gowns and scrubs for hazmat suits until tests came back positive for Ebola about 2 p.m. on Sept. 30, according to details of the records released by AP.

Presbyter ian workers wore no hazmat suits for two days while treating Ebola patient

The more information that comes out, shows that either the CDC is not telling the truth OR proving to be another incompetent government agency........

originally posted by: judydawg
a reply to: MGaddafi

And to think a spray bottle of bleach could have stopped this.

I think I'd have a bucket of bleach available to stick my gloves down in to it.

I think that people may be confused as to what the mission of the CDC is. They are primarily a research entity that assists local community health centers through providing knowledge.

CDC increases the health security of our nation. As the nation’s health protection agency, CDC saves lives and protects people from health threats. To accomplish our mission, CDC conducts critical science and provides health information that protects our nation against expensive and dangerous health threats, and responds when these arise.

www.cdc.gov...

It was the hospital that Duncan was at that dropped the ball. Not the CDC.

We've heard several versions of the "truth" from the CDC to date.
Of the several versions of the truth, only one of them could be the truth.
Of course, it's possible they've never told us the truth.

What we can logically state is that they've obviously lied quite a bit.

I don't trust them to tell the truth.

The CDC does create policy for these types of situations but our present administration rejected the last set of policies from the CDC regarding Ebola.

As with a lot of things this administration has done away with, they did not replace it but left a void.

Words cannot describe how this makes me feel. I think they are trying to get us riled up. That has to be what they are doing. They must be pushing our buttons so they can implement phase 2. I mean it's nuts but what else could it be?

I'm already so on edge I nearly jumped out of my truck and killed someone that cut me off. Must be the Ebola. I'm going to blame it on the rage I feel at the officials. Yeah... Going with that....

Dr. Varga is the chief clinical officer for Texas Health Resources that oversees Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, where Duncan was treated and two nurses were infected.

In his prepared remarks Thursday morning, Dr. Varga also gave a few new details about the early days of care provided to Mr. Duncan, a period that is reported to have been marked by some confusion and is potentially when the nurses became infected.

In his prepared testimony, Dr. Varga said that Mr. Duncan “met several of the criteria of the Ebola algorithm,” when he arrived at the hospital on Sept. 28, and that the C.D.C. was notified at that time. He said C.D.C. protocols for basic protective gear had been followed although on Wednesday he had acknowledged that workers did not start wearing full biohazard suits for two days. He also said in his prepared remarks that, since the patient was having diarrhea, “shoe covers were added shortly thereafter,” implying that caretakers had not initially been wearing them.

Dr. Paul E. Jarris, the executive director of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, said the C.D.C. as well as state and local agencies had been sending out materials on Ebola for months, but that it was up to each of the 5,000 hospitals to prepare and drill.

So in short, the hospital misidentified what was wrong with Duncan and once they realized that Duncan had Ebola, they still did not adequately follow protocols. The CDC doesn't oversee local hospitals. That is done at the state level. The CDC provides information and protocols to local hospitals in regards to infectious disease. That doesn't mean that hospitals are always a. aware that they are dealing with a deadly infectious disease or b. will properly follow that advice.

www.nytimes.com... click&contentCollection=U.S.&pgtype=Multimedia

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: judydawg

Really?




I wonder how the CDC can explain this!

Health care workers treating Thomas Eric Duncan in a hospital isolation unit didn’t wear protective hazardous-material suits for two days until tests confirmed the Liberian man had Ebola — a delay that potentially exposed perhaps dozens of hospital workers to the virus, according to medical records.

But workers at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas did not abandon their gowns and scrubs for hazmat suits until tests came back positive for Ebola about 2 p.m. on Sept. 30, according to details of the records released by AP.

Presbyter ian workers wore no hazmat suits for two days while treating Ebola patient

The more information that comes out, shows that either the CDC is not telling the truth OR proving to be another incompetent government agency........

Not telling the truth and incompetent are the norm for a government agency. So the CDC is right on track.

Bull#. They wore too much or too little of the WRONG equipment.

You need a level IV biocontainment setup with positive pressure suits, their own oxygen supply, and the ability to chemically disinfect the outside layer before you take that off, then a shower after you remove the equipment, and airlocks along the whole pathway. It's an ungainly way to administer medical care to a patient, but works great if you're only entering and exiting the lab to work on vials of viruses and leaving for lunch or the day.

There are NO hospitals that I know of in the US who have this setup, only US military labs, as seen in the movie The Andromeda Strain.

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
deary me the farce is strong in this whole ebola situation!

This is what I think. Not real to begin with, and Murder Incorporated elites are choosing to promote fear and choosing their victims. Who knows what they are giving them, that deadly TB also has some similar symptoms. Malaria does. Lots of things do.

I remember initially they were saying washing your hands with soap and not having intercourse or licking the eyeballs of infected patients is precaution enough.
So I figure, less is more? One glove instead of double gloving? How about no gloves or boots at all?