Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ebola virus outbreak

Options
1…5051535556…99

Comments

  • Options
    #1562
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    Spring Onion wrote: »
    I am atheist.

    Very childish. No points left then obviously. I'll leave you be


  • Options
    #1563
    Spring Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,087 ✭✭✭Spring Onion


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    That wouldnt be my take on why people are being repatriated at all.

    What is your take so?


  • Options
    #1564
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    So you think that there is no medical logic to repatriate them on the grounds that their outcomes will be improved? (taking the political posturing out of it)

    How about treating patients with sever viral illness and multi organ failure in ICU, is that a waste of time too?, Should they just be sent home, not admitted to hospitals in the first place?

    Why you putting words in my mouth? The bold bit made me laugh.


  • Options
    #1565
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »

    Do you really think we would be repatriating sick people to Western hospital at huge expense and risk of spreading the virus to the west unless there was an ickle lickle tiency weeny chance that they might do better?

    The clue is in the word: repatriation.

    I dont see planes of liberians being flown over to avail of the better treatment.


  • Options
    #1566
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,420 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Just in case anyone doesn't have google installed on their computer

    http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/treatment/
    No FDA-approved vaccine or medicine (e.g., antiviral drug) is available for Ebola.

    Symptoms of Ebola are treated as they appear. The following basic interventions, when used early, can significantly improve the chances of survival:

    Providing intravenous fluids (IV)and balancing electrolytes (body salts)
    Maintaining oxygen status and blood pressure
    Treating other infections if they occur


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1567
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    Why you putting words in my mouth? The bold bit made me laugh.

    Why you not answer my question? I'm not putting words in your mouth. It was a simple question, identified by the 'question word' at the beginning, and the question mark at the end.


  • Options
    #1568
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Why you not answer my question? I'm not putting words in your mouth. It was a simple question, identified by the 'question word' at the beginning, and the question mark at the end.

    More condescension. I think Spring Onion may have a second account here. Would explain a lot.


  • Options
    #1569
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    The clue is in the word: repatriation.

    I dont see planes of liberians being flown over to avail of the better treatment.

    So you agree then?

    (I'm guessing the Liberians probably don't have insurance.)


  • Options
    #1570
    Spring Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,087 ✭✭✭Spring Onion


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    More condescension. I think Spring Onion may have a second account here. Would explain a lot.

    Please, call me Scallion. I think Wormy is suggesting that people want to die in agony at home rather than in West Africa. He does not admit that chances of survival are better outside Africa whatsoever, which is unfortunate for him.


  • Options
    #1571
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    So you agree then?

    (I'm guessing the Liberians probably don't have insurance.)

    Do i agree with what?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1572
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    Spring Onion wrote: »
    Please, call me Scallion. I think Wormy is suggesting that people want to die in agony at home rather than in West Africa. He does not admit that chances of survival are better outside Africa whatsoever, which is unfortunate for him.

    That is not what i'm suggesting. And i never said that chances of survival werent better. You deliberately not following or should i slow the pace for you?

    A scallion and a spring onion are two different things. One has a bigger bulb than the other. I'm guessing you're of the smaller bulbed variety.


  • Options
    #1573
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    Do i agree with what?

    You seem to have difficulty following your own argument. I'm not going to help you out.


  • Options
    #1574
    TheBeardedLady
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,086 ✭✭✭TheBeardedLady


    I'm just happy I'm not dead yet. Hopefully I can make it to payday.


  • Options
    #1575
    Spring Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,087 ✭✭✭Spring Onion


    I am going to persevere with this one. Apologies I do not know how to multiquote very well.

    Plum said;
    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Do you really think we would be repatriating sick people to Western hospital at huge expense and risk of spreading the virus to the west unless there was an ickle lickle tiency weeny chance that they might do better?

    Peist replied;
    Peist2007 wrote: »
    That wouldnt be my take on why people are being repatriated at all.

    Explain your take so.


  • Options
    #1576
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    You seem to have difficulty following your own argument. I'm not going to help you out.

    You suggested that repatriation was being carried out due to better facilities. I'm saying that is not the case. If a British doctor catches ebola in Liberia he/she will be transferred to Britain because they are British and the British Government will be expected by the British people to look after their own. Repatriation = being sent back to your home country. The fact that the facilities are better in Britain than Liberia is of course true, but not the primary driving factor in effecting repatriation. Quite simple really.


  • Options
    #1577
    youtube!
    Registered Users Posts: 1,265 ✭✭✭youtube!


    littlemac1980 wrote: »
    According to News reports there was no thermometer involved - that was likely deemed too scientific. Instead a simple assurance by the captain that the crew were all healthy is all that was required in that case:

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ship-in-dublin-gives-declaration-of-health-after-sierra-leone-docking-1.1958310



    ****ing astounded!


  • Options
    #1578
    youtube!
    Registered Users Posts: 1,265 ✭✭✭youtube!


    Spring Onion wrote: »
    Youtube this!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5F8BzgbgjM



    I wouldn't be taking the piss, this is not some kind of joke now really is it?


  • Options
    #1579
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    Spring Onion wrote: »
    I am going to persevere with this one. Apologies I do not know how to multiquote very well.

    Plum said;



    Peist replied;



    Explain your take so.

    I have. And notice how it i called it "my take" rather than pretending that David Cameron said it and it was now widely accepted everywhere ;)


  • Options
    #1580
    Spring Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,087 ✭✭✭Spring Onion


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    You suggested that repatriation was being carried out due to better facilities. I'm saying that is not the case. If a British doctor catches ebola in Liberia he/she will be transferred to Britain because they are British and the British Government will be expected by the British people to look after their own. Repatriation = being sent back to your home country. The fact that the facilities are better in Britain than Liberia is of course true, but not the primary driving factor in effecting repatriation. Quite simple really.

    :) that feels better now, doesn't it.


  • Options
    #1581
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    You suggested that repatriation was being carried out due to better facilities. I'm saying that is not the case. If a British doctor catches ebola in Liberia he/she will be transferred to Britain because they are British and the British Government will be expected by the British people to look after their own. Repatriation = being sent back to your home country. The fact that the facilities are better in Britain than Liberia is of course true, but not the primary driving factor in effecting repatriation. Quite simple really.

    Really!!! So explain to me why the British Government does't repatriate every other person who gets sick / injured abroad? Can we expect the British government to repatriate Britains who become sick with Ebola in the US, and are receiving treatment in US hospitals. Because 'Britian is expected to look after their own'

    Do you think Liberia should have repatriated their national who became sick in the US? Because medical facilities are not the primary driving factor.

    Do you think Liberia should have repatriated their national who became sick in Nigeria? Because medical facilities are not the primary driving factor.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1582
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    Spring Onion wrote: »
    :) that feels better now, doesn't it.

    For someone so smart, you do miss a lot ;)


  • Options
    #1583
    Spring Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,087 ✭✭✭Spring Onion


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    For someone so smart, you do miss a lot ;)

    I cant do this anymore, can you respond to Prof Plum on this line of thought, I am quitting. Best of luck.


  • Options
    #1584
    littlemac1980
    Registered Users Posts: 1,073 ✭✭✭littlemac1980


    Here's an interesting article regarding the Dallas nurse who contracted Ebola:

    http://theweek.com/speedreads/index/269775/speedreads-cdcs-protocol-breach-explanation-for-texas-ebola-case-smacks-of-scapegoating-critics-say

    http://www.christianpost.com/news/nurses-reject-scapegoat-accusations-after-cdc-head-blames-protocol-breach-for-dallas-nurse-infection-of-ebola-127957/

    It appears that there is an amount of "backlash" arising from the conclusion of the CDC - that the nurse must have broken protocol in order for the infection to have occurred, i.e. she is being referred to as a "Scapegoat"

    The other possibility - and the one that the CDC don't want to consider is that the protocol that they put in place, was in fact followed, but was in some way defective - meaning that they are to blame for this infection.

    The first article mentions that the training may have been insufficient, and that the lack of oversight procedures in relation to the implementation of the safety and containment protocols is something that may have caused this infection.


  • Options
    #1585
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Really!!! So explain to me why the British Government does't repatriate every other person who gets sick / injured abroad?

    Because Ebola is quite serious apparently.


    [QUOTE=ProfessorPlum;92592781Can we expect the British government to repatriate Britains who become sick with Ebola in the US, and are receiving treatment in US hospitals. Because 'Britian is expected to look after their own'[/QUOTE]

    Hasnt arisen yet but i would imagine they could come to an arrangement, being allies and all.
    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Do you think Liberia should have repatriated their national who became sick in the US? Because medical facilities are not the primary driving factor.

    "...not the primary driving factor" implies that there are other factors. One of those would be the standard of medical care in Liberia which seems non-existent. So, no. How is Britain or Spain repatriating a doctor and Liberia repatriating a citizen the same thing?
    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    Do you think Liberia should have repatriated their national who became sick in Nigeria? Because medical facilities are not the primary driving factor.

    See above.


  • Options
    #1586
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    Spring Onion wrote: »
    I cant do this anymore, can you respond to Prof Plum on this line of thought, I am quitting. Best of luck.

    You should have quit a long time ago. You've shown yourself up to be full of hot air presented as fact. Run along now ;)


  • Options
    #1587
    Kristopherus
    Registered Users Posts: 11,907 ✭✭✭✭Kristopherus


    Micael Essien is denying that he has contracted that accursed disease:eek:.


  • Options
    #1588
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Kristopherus wrote: »
    Micael Essien is denying that he has contracted that accursed disease:eek:.

    He was forced to deny it because of idiotic pervasive rumors being spread by idiotic people.


  • Options
    #1589
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    Because Ebola is quite serious apparently.




    Hasnt arisen yet but i would imagine they could come to an arrangement, being allies and all.



    "...not the primary driving factor" implies that there are other factors. One of those would be the standard of medical care in Liberia which seems non-existent. So, no. How is Britain or Spain repatriating a doctor and Liberia repatriating a citizen the same thing?



    See above.



    I'm not sure I can remember the British government repatriating any sick person from abroad, barring british military. It's usually arranged privately.

    But it is interesting that you think the 'primary driving force' for repatriating foreign healthcare workers is political and, according to your earlier assertion that

    "I was under the assumption that the mortality rate would remain fairly constant with this disease, there being only management of it and no tested cure."

    it is clear that you think there is no medical reason at all to influence repatriation to better facilities (a position you have somewhat softened on since).

    Anyway I think another poster provided a link to show that medical intervention improved outcomes, which is the bit you were skeptical of in the first place.


  • Options
    #1590
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ProfessorPlum wrote: »
    I'm not sure I can remember the British government repatriating any sick person from abroad, barring british military. It's usually arranged privately.

    But it is interesting that you think the 'primary driving force' for repatriating foreign healthcare workers is political and, according to your earlier assertion that

    "I was under the assumption that the mortality rate would remain fairly constant with this disease, there being only management of it and no tested cure."

    it is clear that you think there is no medical reason at all to influence repatriation to better facilities (a position you have somewhat softened on since).

    Anyway I think another poster provided a link to show that medical intervention improved outcomes, which is the bit you were skeptical of in the first place.

    It is not "clear" that i think there is no medical reason at all influencing the decision. I never said that and you know it. You're grasping


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1591
    jillymayr
    Registered Users Posts: 60 ✭✭jillymayr


    surely they've figured out a way to contain this by now


Advertisement