The effective way to fight disease would be health care, and that's the one measure the United States will never take to fight any disease.
What are you trying to say? That the US doesn't do health research? That the US doesn't have the best medical care in the world? That we haven't yet invented the magical cure to Ebola and shipped it to West Africa? Or are you trying to politicize a virus discussion into something about insurance?
I'm loathe to get involved as I know this is a very emotive subject to you friends over the pond, but from my various (largely anecdotal) readings on the subject I fear the view may be correct.
I don't think it's unfair to say that there's a percentage of the population that is scared of incurring healthcare costs and that these people will not seek medical attention as pro-actively. With something like Ebola this is very bad news for their family, friends and community.
We have an experimental treatment, and there are questions as to why it was used on two doctors flown back from Africa, but not on the patient in Dallas.
What are you implying?
The Dallas patient was given an experimental treatment, brincidofovir. This is the same drug that is reportedly being given to the NBC cameraman who was infected. There are other experimental treatments, including ZMapp and TKM-Ebola, that have been used.
One report[1] suggested that TKM-Ebola was not given to the Dallas patient because of concerns that it could have made his condition worse, and ZMapp wasn't an option because there are no more supplies of it[2].
Furthermore, according to this article[3], "All non-human primate work done with any of the experimental treatments from any company have never extended beyond treatment four days post-infection." The Dallas patient was apparently 19 days into his infection when he presented.
There is no evidence at this point that the experimental treatment you were referring to (ZMapp) "cured" the doctor and nurse flown back from Africa. To that point, the Spanish priest who was given ZMapp died.
But access would seem to be an important dimension to any effort to stop the spread of a pandemic, since pathogens do not discriminate by insured status.
Comments
What are you trying to say? That the US doesn't do health research? That the US doesn't have the best medical care in the world? That we haven't yet invented the magical cure to Ebola and shipped it to West Africa? Or are you trying to politicize a virus discussion into something about insurance?
I'm loathe to get involved as I know this is a very emotive subject to you friends over the pond, but from my various (largely anecdotal) readings on the subject I fear the view may be correct.
I don't think it's unfair to say that there's a percentage of the population that is scared of incurring healthcare costs and that these people will not seek medical attention as pro-actively. With something like Ebola this is very bad news for their family, friends and community.
[deleted]
What are you implying?
The Dallas patient was given an experimental treatment, brincidofovir. This is the same drug that is reportedly being given to the NBC cameraman who was infected. There are other experimental treatments, including ZMapp and TKM-Ebola, that have been used.
One report[1] suggested that TKM-Ebola was not given to the Dallas patient because of concerns that it could have made his condition worse, and ZMapp wasn't an option because there are no more supplies of it[2].
Furthermore, according to this article[3], "All non-human primate work done with any of the experimental treatments from any company have never extended beyond treatment four days post-infection." The Dallas patient was apparently 19 days into his infection when he presented.
There is no evidence at this point that the experimental treatment you were referring to (ZMapp) "cured" the doctor and nurse flown back from Africa. To that point, the Spanish priest who was given ZMapp died.
[1] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/06/thomas-...
[2] http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2014/1007/Why-didn-t-Texas-Ebol...
[3] http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkroll/2014/10/08/dallas-ebo...
In what way does the US have the best medical care in the world?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthca...
*if the patient can afford it / isn't bankrupted by the cost
In this way, among others....
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba596
I wonder if the study includes those who died of cancer but were never diagnosed?
But access would seem to be an important dimension to any effort to stop the spread of a pandemic, since pathogens do not discriminate by insured status.