Ebola - can UK cope in a crisis?

[anfisa]

There might be and it's still better to base medicine on science rather than fear.

 

But no one is basing medicine on fear so I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

 

---------- Post added 30-12-2014 at 18:43 ----------

 

Stop taking the posts so literally. I was talking about the practice of medicine not medicinal drugs. With good treatment Ebola isn't a death sentence.

 

I will correct that for you. With good treatment Ebola isn't a death sentence for everyone.

[melthebell]

There is no medicine for Ebola.

 

yes there is, what do you think theyve been treating those that have survived with? an experimental vaccine made from the blood of others that have had the virus

[JFKvsNixon]

I will correct that for you. With good treatment Ebola isn't a death sentence for everyone.

 

No need to correct as I wasn't wrong.

[anfisa]

No need to correct as I wasn't wrong.

 

You was wrong because it is still a death sentence for some despite getting the best care.

[cgksheff]

yes there is, what do you think theyve been treating those that have survived with? an experimental vaccine made from the blood of others that have had the virus

 

Now just take a step back.

 

What has saved the lives of those infected has been prompt intensive care.

 

There is, currently, no successful medicinal cure for Ebola.

[Zamo]

What has that got to do with the case in the Metro upon which I was commenting upon?

 

Anyway, the gentlemen in question's opinion is interesting I don't think that as a psychiatrist he's qualified to question the governments position, which would have been taken under advice of experts in the field.

 

I guess what qualifies him is having actually worked 'in the field'. He was out there working with patients, he was trained in the tactics of avoiding infection, identifying symptoms etc. He would have been putting into practice the procedures and protocols that the 'experts in the field' who advised the government came up with. He is perfectly qualified to inform us of the reality of the protection measures on the ground... the government and it's expert advisors can only comment on theory, which is irrelevant.

 

Because it's better to base our medicine on evidence rather than fear.

 

There might be and it's still better to base medicine on science rather than fear.

 

What the hell are you two on about... those sentences doesn't actually mean anything.

 

Is putting on protective suits, mask and rubber shoes the 'medicine of fear'? Yes and no I would have though but it is the right thing to do isn't it? Isn't it right to be fearful and respectful of a virus that kills 25-90% of the time depending on the strain and treatment received?

 

Putting on protective clothing, using isolation wards and special tents over beds is about containment. It is putting a barrier between the infection and people. Quarantining is no different and is a tried and tested tactic used by the medical profession when faced with a virus this deadly when there is no known cure.

 

The risk of an outbreak of Ebola in this country is very small but the consequences would be devastating. Therefore you managing the risk completely differently to a very low risk with a low, medium or even high impact i.e. you do everything you can to prevent it. At present we are not doing everything and the cracks in what we are doing are beginning to show. We need to change strategy and introduce quarantining and stopping domestic flights from the region (as lots of other countries in Africa have done).

[JFKvsNixon]

I guess what qualifies him is having actually worked 'in the field'. He was out there working with patients, he was trained in the tactics of avoiding infection, identifying symptoms etc. He would have been putting into practice the procedures and protocols that the 'experts in the field' who advised the government came up with. He is perfectly qualified to inform us of the reality of the protection measures on the ground... the government and it's expert advisors can only comment on theory, which is irrelevant.

 

Are you sure that a psychiatrist that last practiced hospital medicine when they were an SHO in their late 20s can supersede the advice given to the government by the people and who are experts in their fields, in practice and theory.

 

If that's your position then we'll have to agree to disagree, because it will be a pointless argument.

 

 

What the hell are you two on about... those sentences doesn't actually mean anything.

 

Is putting on protective suits, mask and rubber shoes the 'medicine of fear'? Yes and no I would have though but it is the right thing to do isn't it? Isn't it right to be fearful and respectful of a virus that kills 25-90% of the time depending on the strain and treatment received?

 

Putting on protective clothing, using isolation wards and special tents over beds is about containment. It is putting a barrier between the infection and people. Quarantining is no different and is a tried and tested tactic used by the medical profession when faced with a virus this deadly when there is no known cure.

 

The risk of an outbreak of Ebola in this country is very small but the consequences would be devastating. Therefore you managing the risk completely differently to a very low risk with a low, medium or even high impact i.e. you do everything you can to prevent it. At present we are not doing everything and the cracks in what we are doing are beginning to show. We need to change strategy and introduce quarantining and stopping domestic flights from the region (as lots of other countries in Africa have done).

 

Haven't you heard of the terminology, evidence based medicine? Maybe you need to read up some more?

[cgksheff]

Are you sure that a psychiatrist that last practiced hospital medicine when they were an SHO in their late 20s ...

 

It doesn't take a minute to learn that Dr Martin Deahl is a hands-on volunteer in the Ebola wards in Sierra Leone.

He is in an eminent position to describe the UK airport screening as chaotic.

 

It is. It is only there as a PR exercise and of no real value.

[Zamo]

Are you sure that a psychiatrist that last practiced hospital medicine when they were an SHO in their late 20s can supersede the advice given to the government by the people and who are experts in their fields, in practice and theory.

 

If that's your position then we'll have to agree to disagree, because it will be a pointless argument.

 

He has not superseded any of the advice given by the government or it's advisors. He is saying that the arrangements for the procedures and protocols to be properly followed are not in place... which only someone who had experienced the reality on the ground can comment on.

 

He says the rooms were too small and forced people to stay in close proximity... not a good idea if you want to avoid a highly infectious disease being passed on.

 

He says that he still hasn't received the temperature kit so he can follow the governments advisors procedure of testing and reporting.

 

The infected woman has now confirmed that she reporting feeling unwell at Heathrow and she was allowed to continue because she didn't have a raised temperature. In that case it would seem to be a case of too rigorously following procedure and not applying common sense - you might be specifically looking for a raised temperature, vomiting, diarrhea and bleeding but how about not forgetting that feeling unwell is a symptom of being unwell? I guess the advisors thought that was too obvious to write down.

 

Haven't you heard of the terminology, evidence based medicine? Maybe you need to read up some more?

 

The sentences don't make any sense because of the evidence!

 

The evidence is we have a virus that kills 25-90% of the time and there is no known cure. Containment of the virus until it dies out is the only course of action to prevent a pandemic.

 

The evidence is current measures have not contained it.

 

If we wait for a pandemic to evidence tactics are failing then it is too late. We need to act on current evidence of failures to contain as oppose to failure to prevent an outbreak.

[JFKvsNixon]

It doesn't take a minute to learn that Dr Martin Deahl is a hands-on volunteer in the Ebola wards in Sierra Leone.

He is in an eminent position to describe the UK airport screening as chaotic.

 

It is. It is only there as a PR exercise and of no real value.

 

I agree that it's political exercise that has no medical value, that is obvious. This is because screening is such an ineffective method of detecting many diseases.

 

Of all the people referred to CDC entering the US due to screening, not one has gone on to develop Ebola, whereas two people managed to pass through screening with Ebola. Source.

 

The only way to protect our country is to control the outbreak at source.

 

---------- Post added 31-12-2014 at 09:53 ----------

 

The evidence is we have a virus that kills 25-90% of the time and there is no known cure. Containment of the virus until it dies out is the only course of action to prevent a pandemic.

 

If this is the only evidence that your looking at I understand why you're feeling so panicky. Fortunately, medics like to take a much more broad approach to analysing the evidence.