Ebola Patient in Atlanta Hospital

Am I the only one wondering why this CNN story has so many different versions from the original story we were given.

Maybe I missed the part where they claim multiple doses of the secret serum were flown to Africa and that Dr. Brantly took Nancy's dose because he thought he was going to die...

Brantly began to deteriorate and developed labored breathing. He told his doctors, "I am going to die," according to a source with firsthand knowledge of the situation.

Knowing his dose was still frozen, Brantly asked if he could have Writebol's now-thawed medication. It was brought to his room and administered through an IV. Within an hour of receiving the medication, Brantly's condition was nearly reversed. His breathing improved; the rash over his trunk faded away. One of his doctors described the events as "miraculous."

By the next morning, Brantly was able to take a shower on his own before getting on a specially designed Gulfstream air ambulance jet to be evacuated to the United States. www.cnn.com...

What is going on with this story...are we starting to see media spin?

Des

This is frightening.

Ebola virus: British aid worker's diary reveals horror as SIX nurses die from killer bug

From overflowing morgues to corpses being pushed around in wheelbarrows, a British aid worker today reveals the horror she has seen battling to tackle the Ebola outbreak in West Africa .

DIARY

Day 1
It’s 5.30am and I’m the first out of bed. It’s a half-hour drive to the Ebola ­treatment centre. I arrive at 7.30am and change into scrubs and rubber boots in the “low-risk zone”.

I need to put on full protective gear. I pull on a pair of examination gloves, and then a yellow suit. It goes up to my neck and down to my ankles. Already I’m starting to sweat.

It’s very humid and hot. Next is the mask, the hood, and then an enormous plastic apron. I fumble with surgical gloves, then thick rubber household gloves. Finally I put on my goggles.

Before I go in the high-risk zone, a staff member checks to make sure not one millimetre of skin is showing.

I start by emptying buckets of faeces and vomit. Some people have terrible diarrhoea or are bleeding, so there’s a lot of cleaning. I make sure they all have water – most are so weak, they can’t even unscrew the lid of a plastic bottle; some can barely speak.

Soiled sheets go in bins, which are taken to the burning pits – once a day we burn the waste. Every day there are dead bodies, every day the number is increasing. When somebody dies, we put their belongings in bags and burn them, with the mattress cover and sheet.

Day 2

I am training some new staff, locals who will work as hygienists and cleaners.

I listen to a radio phone-in. Someone calls in to say there’s no such thing as Ebola. This is the first time the disease has broken out in West Africa, there’s a lot of fear and misinformation. We go through all the rumours and dispel them.

Then I explain what Ebola is and how you can protect yourself.

Day 3

I’m heading out of Monrovia to visit the main hospital in Bong County. It’s a three-hour trip.

When the outbreak started local health workers weren’t taking proper precautions. It spread through the hospital staff. Seven nurses from this hospital have been admitted to the centre in Monrovia; six are dead.

I meet the head of the health team. He’s doing his best in very difficult circumstances, with terrified staff.

They have only one ambulance. The burial team has to use a wheelbarrow, or garbage collecting truck, to move corpses around.

Local religious leaders are preaching against health workers, saying it is them spreading the disease. They’ve set up a small isolation unit, but there’s nobody to staff it. It’s an impossible situation.

Day 4

I feel we’ve reached a tipping point. When I arrived in Liberia four weeks ago, there were four or five patients in the treatment centre. Now the centre is overflowing, we don’t know where to put people, the morgue is full, people are turning up with sick relatives.

Day 5

I wake with a sore throat – it’s almost certainly due to chlorine, but paranoia has set in and I take my temperature for the tenth time this morning.

At night, sleeping can be hard. You lie there thinking, I feel hot, am I getting a fever? If I catch Ebola, who will I get to tell my family?

link to story

a reply to: MrLimpet

wow ,just wow,,

now this should be headline news on both CNN AND FOX AND CBC AND THE WHO AND THE u.n.

originally posted by: MrLimpet
This is frightening.

Ebola virus: British aid worker's diary reveals horror as SIX nurses die from killer bug

From overflowing morgues to corpses being pushed around in wheelbarrows, a British aid worker today reveals the horror she has seen battling to tackle the Ebola outbreak in West Africa .

DIARY

Day 1
It’s 5.30am and I’m the first out of bed. It’s a half-hour drive to the Ebola ­treatment centre. I arrive at 7.30am and change into scrubs and rubber boots in the “low-risk zone”.

I need to put on full protective gear. I pull on a pair of examination gloves, and then a yellow suit. It goes up to my neck and down to my ankles. Already I’m starting to sweat.

It’s very humid and hot. Next is the mask, the hood, and then an enormous plastic apron. I fumble with surgical gloves, then thick rubber household gloves. Finally I put on my goggles.

Before I go in the high-risk zone, a staff member checks to make sure not one millimetre of skin is showing.

I start by emptying buckets of faeces and vomit. Some people have terrible diarrhoea or are bleeding, so there’s a lot of cleaning. I make sure they all have water – most are so weak, they can’t even unscrew the lid of a plastic bottle; some can barely speak.

Soiled sheets go in bins, which are taken to the burning pits – once a day we burn the waste. Every day there are dead bodies, every day the number is increasing. When somebody dies, we put their belongings in bags and burn them, with the mattress cover and sheet.

Day 2

I am training some new staff, locals who will work as hygienists and cleaners.

I listen to a radio phone-in. Someone calls in to say there’s no such thing as Ebola. This is the first time the disease has broken out in West Africa, there’s a lot of fear and misinformation. We go through all the rumours and dispel them.

Then I explain what Ebola is and how you can protect yourself.

Day 3

I’m heading out of Monrovia to visit the main hospital in Bong County. It’s a three-hour trip.

When the outbreak started local health workers weren’t taking proper precautions. It spread through the hospital staff. Seven nurses from this hospital have been admitted to the centre in Monrovia; six are dead.

I meet the head of the health team. He’s doing his best in very difficult circumstances, with terrified staff.

They have only one ambulance. The burial team has to use a wheelbarrow, or garbage collecting truck, to move corpses around.

Local religious leaders are preaching against health workers, saying it is them spreading the disease. They’ve set up a small isolation unit, but there’s nobody to staff it. It’s an impossible situation.

Day 4

I feel we’ve reached a tipping point. When I arrived in Liberia four weeks ago, there were four or five patients in the treatment centre. Now the centre is overflowing, we don’t know where to put people, the morgue is full, people are turning up with sick relatives.

Day 5

I wake with a sore throat – it’s almost certainly due to chlorine, but paranoia has set in and I take my temperature for the tenth time this morning.

At night, sleeping can be hard. You lie there thinking, I feel hot, am I getting a fever? If I catch Ebola, who will I get to tell my family?

link to story

Yet again, religion makes a bad situation even worse! From the OP's content, is this line

Local religious leaders are preaching against health workers, saying it is them spreading the disease.

originally posted by: DrHammondStoat

originally posted by: 00nunya00

originally posted by: DrHammondStoat


Have you seen some of the stories, headlines like 'Ebola scare in London', even though the woman had no infectious disease according to doctors, complete with scary images of the virus and just tiny paragraphs on how the person didn't have it, fictional accounts of people passing the virus on to 1000s printed like a news report !? If people in the UK government want to supress panic they are getting off to a very bad start!

Have you seen the scientific studies and papers that cast huge doubt on the efficacy of that rapid-response ebola test? Read this, brother, and try not to crap your pants. The MORE of the virus that's in the blood, the more likely the chance of a false-negative. Sorry, but blind faith in governments and fallible humans is not in my play book.

For one this study was looking at "patients with severe viral hemorrhagic fevers, especially in the acute phase of the disease"

In Ebola we know that the acute stage involves severe vomiting and bleeding, If someone is bleeding out of every orifice it's pretty likely they have Ebola, test or no test. A person at this satge is alreay likely to be in hospital and a strong suspect for the disease.

Not everyone visibly bleeds in the acute stage. Some only bleed on the inside. The rest of the symptoms look like a bad case of flu.

From the study you quoted people in the earlier stages of Ebola will not be affected by this false negative scenario.

The woman on the plane to London, was ill after she left the plane and according to doctors did not have typical Ebola syptoms i presume that to mean she wasn't bleeding) , As she got ill and died soon after leaving the plane, without having the typical acute symptoms that would be present in an Ebola, they thought she was unlikely to have it and she didn't have the hemorrhaging that causes false positives.

It's the concentration of virus in the blood that causes the false negative, not hemorrhaging. And if her symptoms were so bad that she died shortly after, then she would be in that exact phase where it's hardest to detect. Plus, there are differing accounts as to whether she had symptoms on the plane or not; some passengers say she was sweating buckets and vomiting.

Also we don't know what tests the medics used or whether they tested dilute and undilute samples just to be sure. The study was published in 2002 so don't you think the doctors would realise to adapt their tests by now?

Exactly, we don't know how they tested it. Therefore, none of us can say with certainty that the negative can be taken to the bank. And no, seeing as ebola is not a common occurrence in the UK, I am not confident that this particular lab knows anything about dilution. Expecting medical professionals to keep up with every single paper that's ever published is illogical, especially when the paper doesn't really fall into the realm of things they "expect" to have to deal with. Like the "rare" ebola virus.

I don't have blind faith in the government far from it but I believe in basing things on balanced research, there are papers about that demonstrate Ebola and related viruses don't spread that easily Being informed is good, running about like a headless chicken is not going to help.

I've not seen a single person in this thread run around like Chicken Little. In fact, most people here have contributed far more scientific research and facts than I've seen in years from the media. And when we put 2+2+2+2 together, our concern is based on a string of facts that seem to be pointing towards a perfect storm of spreading disease.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Yet again, religion makes a bad situation even worse! From the OP's content, is this line



Local religious leaders are preaching against health workers, saying it is them spreading the disease.

What does that have anything to do with religion??? Because its preachers who claim that they are spreading the disease??

What a fail attempt

a reply to: DrHammondStoat

Is only one reason for news to go viral, while the government claim that is not epidemic, the news coming from other sources like the internet can be over whelming.

The only feasible outcome of such panic is one thing, people will be begging for a vaccine even if the vaccine is only on the testing stage, corporate greed sometimes border on criminal.

I believe in mass hysteria and that is all is needed for big pharma to push anything on the herd.

a reply to: Hellas

Thanks Hellas.

You had a much nicer way of saying what I was about to!

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: DrHammondStoat

Is only one reason for news to go viral, while the government claim that is not epidemic, the news coming from other sources like the internet can be over whelming.

The only feasible outcome of such panic is one thing, people will be begging for a vaccine even if the vaccine is only on the testing stage, corporate greed sometimes border on criminal.

I believe in mass hysteria and that is all is needed for big pharma to push anything on the herd.

So you don't believe the UK government will suppress it if it's here then?

a reply to: 00nunya00

The ebola symptoms that are given to the public are those that are limited to the region where the spread started, now that ebola is been allow to travel to other countries like US, like any other infectious diseases the response of the disease will be limited to the regions, weather and specific environmental issues to either die or proliferate, also is the fact that in developing countries like America we deal with a lot of secondary diseases that affects the immune system.

But like everything is all speculation

a reply to: DrHammondStoat

I do, actually, I do, just like news has been traveling around here in the US that ebola will not affect people in the US because of our weather, but that is speculation.

But with the internet things are different, news tend to spread faster and sometimes more myth than truth.

All we can do is thin out the myth from the truth, taking into consideration that I personally have no trust in government news I can not believe what they tell.

Information is the best tool we regular people have, but choosing the source is what will be a problem.

a reply to: 00nunya00

You right only 10-20% have the dramatic bleeding.

Unfortunately if that happens it normally means your a gonna.

Basically it means your body put up very little fight and the virus completely overwhelmed everything.

The majority it like a flu/sickness bug and you die in a pretty "mundane" way.

originally posted by: 00nunya00

Yes sorry, I can see that it's the dying of tissue/ bleeding on the inside that causes the false positives. What I should have said is that this woman according to doctors, did not appear to have a hemorhagic fever, they didn't believe it was likely from her symptoms.
The point I was making about the woman in London is that (if we take reports to be true) She went from being ill in the morning when she was getting off the plane to being dead in the afternoon. That would be a very short acute phase for Ebola and is why the medics believed she was low risk.
I am not saying that there couldn't be atypical cases but we have to go off what we know, not what 'might' happen.

No we cannot say that the negative test was correct with complete certainty but I think it's quite likely that the doctors would not do a half arsed test that didn't take into account medical knowledge from 10 years ago if they themselves and their familes are at risk from them getting it wrong.

I know people are pulling up good research here but the reaction to it doesn't seemed to be balanced. Anything supporting the 'Ebola is going to be a huge pandemic' stance is recieved almost enthusiastically and not questioned, anything presented that supports it is not a great risk yet is virtually ignored.

I suppose in a month or so we'll see whether people have been overeacting or not!

a reply to: crazyewok

Precisely. So when I hear people saying it will be "obvious" that a person has Ebola, that's a pretty good sign they know very little about the virus and risk. Hell, I didn't know anything about it until the last week or so, but research is your friend. All the info is out there to be read, you just have to be willing to actually do deep research and not simply stop at the latest "official" pronouncements. It reminds me a lot of armchair politicians: because Glen Beck or Rachel Maddow said it, it must be true, no further questions needed. :/

a reply to: DrHammondStoat

I agree with you 100%, I am too waiting if the ebola brought to the US is going to cause either more mass hysteria than actually epidemic.

But we should be prepared in any event, because as today, Ebola has no cure and it have a 90% fatality.

a reply to: DrHammondStoat

actually i use July 25th as my Zero Point,,then
21 Days.
Equals=

As the safe period.

Generally speaking,,

a reply to: DrHammondStoat

Touché, the official reports say she showed no symptoms on the plane. Less reliable sources say she was showing late-stage symptoms, but we have no way of knowing. My concern is that if she collapsed immediately after deboarding, and died hours later, they would have told us if she had a heart attck or stroke or something commonplace that would cause these symptoms (privacy laws do not apply to the dead). Instead, they're just saying she tested negative for Ebola. I'll wait until we have autopsy results to decide.

ETA: it's good to remember that the National Enquirer broke the story about the John Edwards affair weeks before any mainstream credible outlet did. Tabloids are unreliable, but they have one advantage: they don't usually have to bow to the same pressures of censorship other outlets do. Perhaps the Mirror is actually more accurate about her symptoms and the rest are downplaying fears?

Somethings been bothering me a bit. The other day I heard a report concerning the two Ebola patients flying into Atlanta. It was reported moving them could compromise their condition but air travel puts them at a greater risk for set backs/complications. Something about altitude.

No other details/explanation was given as to why/how air travel effects Ebola patients. I assumed it was due to their weakened state/possible organ damage etc. maybe air travel is just too much for their overtaxed system.

If Ebola patients risk set backs in flight I'm wondering if it could kick start symptoms in those who were asymptomatic before boarding?

Seems Patrick Stewart got much worse after 2 flights. He couldn't have been that bad when he boarded in Liberia yet by the time he got to Lagos he was an insane mess/near death.

originally posted by: Morningglory
Somethings been bothering me a bit. The other day I heard a report concerning the two Ebola patients flying into Atlanta. It was reported moving them could compromise their condition but air travel puts them at a greater risk for set backs/complications. Something about altitude.

No other details/explanation was given as to why/how air travel effects Ebola patients. I assumed it was due to their weakened state/possible organ damage etc. maybe air travel is just too much for their overtaxed system.

If Ebola patients risk set backs in flight I'm wondering if it could kick start symptoms in those who were asymptomatic before boarding?

Seems Patrick Stewart got much worse after 2 flights. He couldn't have been that bad when he boarded in Liberia yet by the time he got to Lagos he was an insane mess/near death.

Your right if you are symptomatic it will make the situation more dangerous.

Ironically clotting is a big problem with Ebola. Although haemorrhaging is a symptom before it start your blood start clotting. Air travel can make that extremely dangerous. when your body is throwing clotts about travel is one of the worse things you can do.


As for setting off symptom? I doubt it will have a major effect. The stress of travel may weaken your immune system a bit but it wont do anything is a major way. Its just the clotting problems that cause the issue.

Since there is a bit of confusion, i located a paper that does a decent job explaining the differences between large droplet (what they are claiming Ebola is) versus aerosol (what USAMRIID said ebola was in 2006)
Dynamics of Infectious Disease Transmission

The classification used in the medical literature considers ‘contact’, ‘droplet’ and ‘airborne’ transmission. Contact transmission (be it direct or indirect) arises from contact with pathogen-containing droplets: direct contact transmission refers to physical contact and transfer of pathogens from an infected person to a susceptible, whereas indirect contact transmission refers to contact with fomites and subsequent transport of the pathogen via, for example, hands to the upper region of the respiratory tract (mouth, nose). Droplet transmission occurs via large droplets that are generated by a close expiratory event (coughing, sneezing): they deposit immediately onto a susceptible's mucous membranes. As large droplets gravitationally settle quickly droplet transmission constitutes a transmission mode only for close contact. Airborne transmission (also referred to aerosol transmission) occurs via inhalation of small respiratory droplets (also referred to as ‘droplet nuclei’) that are small enough to remain airborne.

If it is aerosol, as USAMRIID claimed in 2006, it would explain why doctors and healthcare workers are getting sick, even after using standard precautions. The procedures (even the type of masks used) are different for large droplet vs. Aerosol-transmitted virii. Ebola going truly airborne might explain the lower mortality rate (60% for this strain vs. 90% for Ebola Zaire (ZEBOV)) as mutating virii have a history of trading mortality for increased transmissability.

Ebola going truly airborne would be truly horrendous.