5 Year Old Hospitalized In NYC With Possible Ebola Symptoms

I have to agree. I'm betting they're getting their stories straight before they release results. Really makes you wonder what is going on and how much longer the truth will be hidden. There is so much information being changed and untold. There's a much bigger story to it all just not sure what it is. My heart goes out to that child, it's heartbreaking. I have 3 kids and I cannot imagine being in that situation. I still don't understand why anyone would willingly take their kids to a country ravaged by such a deadly disease.

a reply to: texasgirl

originally posted by: JG1993
I agree all signs points to positive. If this is the first infected child on American soil, misconduct will warrant a much greater reaction from the public because of the age. I'm sure they are doing everything in their power to bundle it as nicely as possible before the results are confirmed.

I agree..hence the ever-changing stories.

What if a number of New Yorkers come down with it thanks to Dr. Spencer's journeys on the subway, bowling alley, restaurants, etc etc? They will have alot of angry and scared people on their hands. The gov't will have its hands full answering to all those people.

New Yorkers are a tough bunch....no one should mess with them!

ValentineWiggin said on another thread they could be changing the 'fever' part of the story to assure everyone that, if he's positive, he was in no danger of the spreading the disease because he was not showing symptoms yet!

Well the first test came back NEGATIVE, or so they say:

Link



They also just said on CNN that he is negative, but remaining in isolation until ALL tests come back.

a reply to: WhoDat09

Thank you for posting that I got tied up and then involved in another topic.

I'm still confused though, it states the first test is negative but they're waiting for the results on the others. I hope it's just for confirmation and not that the first test is less accurate but faster to get results.

It would be a great thing if he is Ebola free but I'm worried now this will turn into a 'cry wolf' scenario. With so many false alarms I fear others may grow complacent eventually.

I don't think the first test is un-reliable, I think they may be waiting on the CDC to confirm, no idea what the other tests do that the first test doesn't or didn't. They said on CNN, that he was showing symptoms that are common for kids to get, and the other things he may have (not Ebola), can cause the same symptoms. They also said it is very unlikely that he does have Ebola, based on the first test.

a reply to: WhoDat09

The first test is accurate but for clinical confirmation it needs to be tested by a who reference lab such as cdc.

There is a huge list of other illnesses that would be more likely based on what was reported in the media (fever, vomiting Guinea). If the communication was left to the infectious disease specialists and not profit seeking tabloids people wouldnt be as anxious and misinformed as they currently are in this whole thing. There isnt enough room on a newspapper headline for the 50+ other diseases that would be in the differential diagnosis column of the treating doctors case notes.

No malaria is not contagious person to person but if they were in an area with malaria bearing mosquitos they could all have been bitten. reply to: Meldionne1

Has anyone heard any updates on this little boy? Did all tests come back negative? What does he have?

I think privacy concerns won't allow them to say what he has. The only news I saw was the first test came back negative and I read that that one is the most accurate. If he doesn't have Ebola they are not obligated to announce what his illness is. a reply to: texasgirl

The little boy has been release and is being monitored at home. He was treated for a respiratory infection and sent home.

a reply to: texasgirl

Thanks TG, I forgot all about this since it's disappearance from the media.
Glad to see the little one will pull through.

Happy Halloween Everyone!

We will probably continue to see stories like this one. I'm glad that these keep turning out to be false alarms. reply to: texasgirl

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
No malaria is not contagious person to person but if they were in an area with malaria bearing mosquitos they could all have been bitten. reply to: Meldionne1

Oh...I thought it was....hmmmmm...is it meningitis that is contagious? Maybe that's what I was thinking of.....thanks though.