Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

LannyDeVaney

(1,033 posts)

27. You are correct. I apologize ...

Reply to Dawgs (Reply #9)

Wed Oct 15, 2014, 04:51 PM

Oct 2014

was replying to this http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025669500#post1

... and it seems to have spread to 2 -3 people who were just around Duncan.

What the hell, I'm sure the nurses didn't just wash their hands with Duncans sheets or some crap like that... that they at the LEAST had some modicum of isolation away from the patient...

I heard if you're not in direct contact with fluids of an infected one you don't have anything to worry about... that seems to not be true.

Again, my apologies.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

29 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

True or not that person with Ebola won't infect others until they start getting symptoms? [View all] Dawgs Oct 2014 OP

I don't know about that now, also...my understanding was the virus was NOT supposed to be contagious uponit7771 Oct 2014 #1

The nurses were almost certainly at some point in contact with his fluids-- TwilightGardener Oct 2014 #5

I have worn the non medical rubber gloves... they are fairly tough... I'm sure they wore SOMETHING.. uponit7771 Oct 2014 #10

Probably has to do with viral load in body secretions--less likely for the virus to show up TwilightGardener Oct 2014 #2

True. Please see link underpants Oct 2014 #3

This message was self-deleted by its author ann--- Oct 2014 #4

It just seems unbelievable. amandabeech Oct 2014 #18

The likelihood of that second person SheilaT Oct 2014 #6

It wasn't after the flight. LisaL Oct 2014 #11

I had not seen that before. SheilaT Oct 2014 #14

So was Mr. Duncan's when he first showed up at the hospital. LisaL Oct 2014 #15

That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard Drayden Oct 2014 #28

It depends on who one listens to ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2014 #7

Suite lord ... LannyDeVaney Oct 2014 #8

Are you talking to me? Dawgs Oct 2014 #9

You are correct. I apologize ... LannyDeVaney Oct 2014 #27

They don't know kentuck Oct 2014 #12

yes they do know- not airborne Beaverhausen Oct 2014 #16

Obviously gospel truth.. kentuck Oct 2014 #26

She had a fever when she flew to Dallas. So she was already symptomatic. LisaL Oct 2014 #13

do you know if Duncan was already symptomatic on his flight into Dallas? Beaverhausen Oct 2014 #17

From what I understand, he wasn't during the flight deutsey Oct 2014 #20

He wasn't. LisaL Oct 2014 #21

Well, that's reason for real concern deutsey Oct 2014 #19

Like Duncan for four days out in the community and surrounded by his family. morningfog Oct 2014 #23

It's true. And, the ability to infect someone increases as the viral load increases. morningfog Oct 2014 #22

She did have a slight fever of 99.5 on the plane. According to ecstatic Oct 2014 #24

Read the actual research on pubmedcentral. Truth is they don't know for sure. ecstatic Oct 2014 #25

There is no scientific evidence/epidemiological evidence that patients are contagious kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #29