I think most people here are well aware that our information on these incidents is quite incomplete. It almost goes without saying—but I am careful to add in many posts and comments of mine disclaimers such as “if this information is correct.” It think it’s obvious the information we have may not just be incorrect, but is very incomplete.

After all, if Duncan’s medical history at the Dallas hospital ran to over 1000 pages, we know very little of it. But what we know is not the least bit reassuring.

I wonder why you keep acting as though you’re the only person who can think of things that are actually rather obvious. I missed where people here were saying “Our information on this is now complete.”

I agree with you, however, that we should be very concerned about the administrators and the government re ebola and its treatment. They have hardly covered themselves with glory—au contraire.

I just meant that if the gear is too cumbersome, the worker can’t work at all. At some point, that would happen. The trick is to get just to that point, but stop short of it.

While it is true that protocols/procedures can not be 100% effective due to human fallibility, the idea that safety must be sacrificed because of “cumbersome” protective gear is the wrong way to go. If anything, sacrificing ‘the work’ to protect the worker is paramount. Who decons the reactor if the decon team is contaminated? Who treats the patients if the caregivers die from the disease? Its not as if there is an endless supply of trained people to decon the reactor or treat the diseased patients.

Guidelines are not procedures. Guidelines are a foundation. Procedures are the minutiae of each tiny step to maximize safety. Guidelines will protect no one, rigorously following procedures will; not 100% but perhaps 98 %. Treating ebola patients under guidelines is not good enough. For example, the procedures I followed for removing gloves contaminated with radioactive material involved 4 steps and the use of 2 other pairs of sterile gloves. With a few exceptions monitoring for radioactivity is a quick and simple process. This is not true when a virus or bacteria are involved. Which means the sop for enbola requires extremely detailed procedures.

Finding someone to blame in this case is akin to blaming the Ferguson cop the first night and going on a tear. No one here admits the obvious: We do not know 99% of the evidence. How many of you know an abdominal CT scan was done? What did it show? What were his blood counts? His serum chemistries? Even if we knew, the results would have to be explained to you. Etc, etc, etc.
Perhaps we should all temper our righteous indignation. Our government and authorities worry me a great deal more than finding blame re Duncan. Or are we trial lawyers in front of a jury?