Undue worry over ebola or due diligence

Don't touch the corpses of Ebola victims and don't drink their excretions. You won't get Ebola. Stop worrying and wishing for a biblical plague!
 
norters said:
Don't touch the corpses of Ebola victims and don't drink their excretions. You won't get Ebola. Stop worrying and wishing for a biblical plague!
Click to expand...
Ohhh ok...It's that simple? Ok then that's that problem solved :rolleyes:
 
Too be honest if you worried about everything that might kill you, you'd never go out or do anything.
 
so....did you actually read my source? Let me quote part of it for you...

A low risk exposure includes any of the following

being within approximately 3 feet (1 meter) of an EVD patient or within the patient’s room or care area for a prolonged period of time (e.g., health care personnel, household members) while not wearing recommended personal protective equipment (i.e., standard, droplet, and contact precautions


from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who are one of the major operating components of the Department of Health and Human Services (American)

so you see what it says - being within 3 feet of an EVD patient without protective clothing - ie not touching them or their clothing/bedding/bodily fluids

so, airborne

would you be happy to sit on an aeroplane with someone who has Ebola?
 
viv1969 said:
Ohhh ok...It's that simple? Ok then that's that problem solved :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Pretty much actually, yes.

http://www.geek.com/science/so-just-how-contagious-is-ebola-really-1606117/

The people who are going to Sierra Leone will basically be there to dispose of bodies. They are there in a humanitarian effort to stop people there dying, not to stop it spreading "here" because that's really really unlikely and any cases in developed nations are surrounded and choked out pretty quickly.
 
crofter said:
Don't say that, I'm about to start selling full body protection suits on Ebay, I think they'll become quite fashionable.
Click to expand...

Just don't ever go outside and shop anyone who sneezes to the authorities.
 
sturisoma said:
so....did you actually read my source? Let me quote part of it for you...

A low risk exposure includes any of the following

being within approximately 3 feet (1 meter) of an EVD patient or within the patient’s room or care area for a prolonged period of time (e.g., health care personnel, household members) while not wearing recommended personal protective equipment (i.e., standard, droplet, and contact precautions


from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who are one of the major operating components of the Department of Health and Human Services (American)

so you see what it says - being within 3 feet of an EVD patient without protective clothing - ie not touching them or their clothing/bedding/bodily fluids

so, airborne

would you be happy to sit on an aeroplane with someone who has Ebola?
Click to expand...

Actually, yes, I read your source. I wondered if you'd linked to the page you intended.

1. It says nothing about sneezing. At all. That's getting hyped up by known doomsday/anti science websites like natural news but I can't even see where the CDC were "forced to admit it".

2. Low risk is exactly that. A non zero risk. It's very different from, say, a high risk.

3. The CDC are heavy duty people. These are the ones who are tasked with making absolutely sure people are safe. Their precautions go far far beyond what is "reasonable" because their job is to reduce the risk to zero.

4. It says nothing about an airborne risk either. Bodily fluids can move through the air e.g. if you have a fever and thrash about it's theoretically possible that a drop of sweat could travel 3 feet. But that's a very different thing from airborne.

Here's what the CDC actually said about sneezing

While Frieden admitted that it is theoretically possible to be infected with Ebola after touching something an infected person has sneezed or sweated on (and then touching your eyes, mouth or nose), he bluntly said that public transportation via a bus or plane is not a conduit for Ebola.
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/09/will-i-get-ebola-transmission-virus-spread_n_5946534.html
 
JonathanRyan said:
Pretty much actually, yes.

http://www.geek.com/science/so-just-how-contagious-is-ebola-really-1606117/

The people who are going to Sierra Leone will basically be there to dispose of bodies. They are there in a humanitarian effort to stop people there dying, not to stop it spreading "here" because that's really really unlikely and any cases in developed nations are surrounded and choked out pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

Yes but norters' post was ridiculously simplistic.
 
don't forget that the Spanish nurse caught the disease in Spain not Africa - I think travel to and from effected countries should be halted with only medical staff allowed in or out and only after extensive quarantine and testing has been carried out. Imagine what would happen if an Ebola patient used the tube at rush hour...
 
sturisoma said:
Imagine what would happen if an Ebola patient used the tube at rush hour...
Click to expand...

Well, first they would have to get to London....

But still, the risk would be tiny. You're still not getting the contagious not infectious thing are you?
 
hope it keeps the kids away this christmas save us a fortune
 
A while ago I mentioned "influenza infested trains". Well, by the looks of it "ebola infested trains" may very soon become the dreaded reality. Boris, your turn, you car hating hippy!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Quick Q then, say you are on a packed tube train and in the carriage is a person incubating the virus. They sneeze near you and a drop or two lands on exposed skin surface, lip or eye of yours and a few other people. Are you saying they would not be at risk from them catching it?
 
DorsetDude said:
Quick Q then, say you are on a packed tube train and in the carriage is a person incubating the virus. They sneeze near you and a drop or two lands on exposed skin surface, lip or eye of yours and a few other people. Are you saying they would not be at risk from them catching it?
Click to expand...

The only way Ebola gets into the air is in large droplets of vomit or saliva. These droplets are heavy and wouldn’t be able to travel very far.

In theory, people might be able to catch it if someone coughed or sneezed directly onto them, but people who get Ebola generally don’t cough or sneeze.

What’s more, the WHO says it’s not aware of any studies that have ever shown the virus spreading this way.

Catching Ebola from someone else requires “close and direct” contact with infected body fluids, the WHO says. The most infectious body fluids are blood, stool, and vomit.

The virus has also been found in breast milk and urine -- and in semen for up to 70 days, though those fluids are considered to be less infectious.

Finally, the WHO says saliva and tears may also carry some risk, but it says more research is needed.

In studies of saliva, the virus was only found in people who were in advanced stages of the disease. The live Ebola virus has never been found in sweat, the WHO says.

The CDC says that in a single study, done under ideal conditions, the virus has been found to remain active on solid surfaces for up to 6 days.

In theory, then, a person might be able to touch a contaminated surface, rub their nose or eyes, and become infected.
Click to expand...

{WebMed}
 
cheers gramps.


I still find it hard to believe how fast its spreading if you have to come in contact with infected blood, stool or vomit though.
 
DorsetDude said:
cheers gramps.


I still find it hard to believe how fast its spreading if you have to come in contact with infected blood, stool or vomit though.
Click to expand...

Poor clean up procedures might have a lot to do with it in regards to the surfaces these bodily fluids have been in contact with.
Posted in a previous Ebols thread:

In regard to the viable infectivity of the Ebola virus outside of a host; taken from a Pathogen Safety Data Sheet:

SURVIVAL OUTSIDE HOST: The virus can survive in liquid or dried material for a number of days. Infectivity is found to be stable at room temperature or at 4°C for several days, and indefinitely stable at -70°C. Infectivity can be preserved by lyophilisation.

(Lyophilisation, in simple terms is freeze drying)

Source: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/lab-bio/res/psds-ftss/ebola-eng.php
 
DorsetDude said:
cheers gramps.


I still find it hard to believe how fast its spreading if you have to come in contact with infected blood, stool or vomit though.
Click to expand...

It's very easy to forget just how dramatically proper sanitation changes our lives. Even a pair of marigolds would easily stop transmission.
 
Well, just in case it takes a grip in the UK I've got my emergency kit ready to protect me. Face mask, gloves and a barge pole.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Well, just in case it takes a grip in the UK I've got my emergency kit ready to protect me. Face mask, gloves and a barge pole.
Click to expand...

I may opr for the 3 mtr cattle prod myself :lol:
 
gramps said:
I refer to the Spanish nursing assistant m'lud!
Click to expand...

'k a pair of marigolds and remembering not to lick them....

Without wanting to sound too harsh on the unfortunate nurse, there are some proper procedures to follow and sadly it doesn't look from the news reports like she followed them. I remember doing a first aid course years ago and they were very particular about teaching us how to take gloves off so that you didn't touch the contaminated bits of them.
 
I think the risk here is relatively small but am a bit concerned that we have been told it cannot be transmitted in the same way as influenza but then there is the comment about survivability outside the host in Ruth's thread (post 65) above. That sounds very much how 'flu gets around.

The suggested checking at UK airports seems a bit pathetic - asking the passenger where they have come from. If you were from one of the African countries with Ebola and thought you could be refused entry, what would you say?

However, I did hear somewhere that if you were infected with Ebola and in a position to infect others, you would not be physically able to get on a plane.

Dave
 
Tringa said:
The suggested checking at UK airports seems a bit pathetic - asking the passenger where they have come from. If you were from one of the African countries with Ebola and thought you could be refused entry, what would you say?
Click to expand...


It shouldn't really be necessary to ask where a passenger came from. After all, you know where the plane came from.....

Chap from the WHO was on the radio this morning and he said the main benefits of checks at Heathrow etc was "to raise awareness". He said it was very unlikely somebody with ebola would be on a plane to the UK and even if they were the chances that they were showing symptoms just at the point where they arrived at the airport were miniscule. But airport security is generally more about politics than security.
 
JonathanRyan said:
'k a pair of marigolds and remembering not to lick them....

Without wanting to sound too harsh on the unfortunate nurse, there are some proper procedures to follow and sadly it doesn't look from the news reports like she followed them. I remember doing a first aid course years ago and they were very particular about teaching us how to take gloves off so that you didn't touch the contaminated bits of them.
Click to expand...

To be fair, there is now a small but significant number of healthcare workers who have become contaminated with the virus ... the point being, it can happen and has happened to even those trained to deal with it.
 
gramps said:
To be fair, there is now a small but significant number of healthcare workers who have become contaminated with the virus ... the point being, it can happen and has happened to even those trained to deal with it.
Click to expand...

True that. But I do wonder how many of them have been properly trained in the handling of patients with contagious diseases and how many were general nursing staff. It should be covered at all basic training but I know that the medical teams working in isolation hospitals get a _lot_ more training in this than somebody working on a general ward.
 
I'm flying back to the UK tomorrow from Kos. The trouble with the air conditioning on these jets is that if someone's got a cold. It's recirculated around the aircraft - I'm bound to pick a cold, there's always someone with one. I wonder what the effect would be with someone with Ebola?
 
JonathanRyan said:
True that. But I do wonder how many of them have been properly trained in the handling of patients with contagious diseases and how many were general nursing staff. It should be covered at all basic training but I know that the medical teams working in isolation hospitals get a _lot_ more training in this than somebody working on a general ward.
Click to expand...

Remember that most of these were straight from working with ebola in West Africa and hence, one would assume, they had more than 'basic training'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top