- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Ebola blood test question...(sorry for another Ebola thread)
Posted on 10/16/14 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 1:57 pm
I haven't run across the answer to these questions...
1. How quickly would ebola show up in a blood test? (ie if people thought they had been infected, yesterday, say on a plane, how long would it take for that to show up in a blood test?)
2. How long does it take to get blood test results back for ebola?
Just seems like given the over-reaction panic this is causing, it'd be a good idea to test everyone they can as soon as possible and rule them out.
Sorry for my lack of viral understanding here.
1. How quickly would ebola show up in a blood test? (ie if people thought they had been infected, yesterday, say on a plane, how long would it take for that to show up in a blood test?)
2. How long does it take to get blood test results back for ebola?
Just seems like given the over-reaction panic this is causing, it'd be a good idea to test everyone they can as soon as possible and rule them out.
Sorry for my lack of viral understanding here.
5
Posted on 10/16/14 at 1:58 pm to StormTiger
Hopeful Doc will be along shortly with his essay.
But I'll take a stab...
But I'll take a stab...
quote:From what I understand, it is based on your viral load. The higher your viral load, the better the results of the test. Also, the higher the viral load, the more likely you are to show symptoms.
1. How quickly would ebola show up in a blood test?
quote:A few hours.
2. How long does it take to get blood test results back for ebola?
This post was edited on 10/16/14 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:00 pm to StormTiger
Stick a fork in it. Ebola is done. All over. Finished.
Moving on to the next crisis.
Moving on to the next crisis.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:00 pm to StormTiger
quote:
1. How quickly would ebola show up in a blood test? (ie if people thought they had been infected, yesterday, say on a plane, how long would it take for that to show up in a blood test?)
quote:
Just seems like given the over-reaction panic this is causing, it'd be a good idea to test everyone they can as soon as possible and rule them out.
Where are you going with this?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:00 pm to StormTiger
quote:
it'd be a good idea to test everyone
That sounds expensive
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:04 pm to lsunurse
quote:
That sounds expensive
more expensive then quarantine?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:04 pm to StormTiger
I just meant...clarify who you mean by "everyone"
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:06 pm to lsunurse
quote:
I just meant...clarify who you mean by "everyone"
every nurse that was at that hospital and treated the guy?
everyone in his apartment before he was put in the hospital?
If it showed up pretty much right away (which is what I don't know), wouldn't that have been a cost worth paying for?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:06 pm to Winkface
quote:
Hopeful Doc will be along shortly with his essay.
quote:
1. How quickly would ebola show up in a blood test? (ie if people thought they had been infected, yesterday, say on a plane, how long would it take for that to show up in a blood test?)
Test can be negative for the first 3-5 days of the patient showing symptoms.
ETA: The patient is actually infected 2-21 days before showing symptoms though. It's possibly negative for up to the first 5 days of the patient showing symptoms, so, to answer your question more accurately, 2-26 days after infection.
quote:
2. How long does it take to get blood test results back for ebola?
PCR tests usually take several hours at the fastest, a few days at slowest. Probably 12-36 hours, if I'm guessing.
quote:
Just seems like given the over-reaction panic this is causing, it'd be a good idea to test everyone they can as soon as possible and rule them out.
This is a very expensive test, and it will be negative in every single person that does not show symptoms. This would be a colossal waste of money. It's what's referred to as a "confirmatory" test. What we want/need/would be what you're describing would be a good "screening" test. There is currently no good screening test for Ebola. There are several in the works, and at least one by the US Navy that will be faster but likely less sensitive.
This post was edited on 10/16/14 at 2:08 pm
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:09 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
This is a very expensive test, and it will be negative in every single person that does not show symptoms. This would be a colossal waste of money. It's what's referred to as a "confirmatory" test. What we want/need/would be what you're describing would be a good "screening" test. There is currently no good screening test for Ebola. There are several in the works, and at least one by the US Navy that will be faster but likely less sensitive.
/end thread.
Thanks for the definitive answer.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:13 pm to Hopeful Doc
Why haven't they whipped up more batches of the "experimental" drug that they gave the two missionaries in Atlanta? Or have they, and I just haven't heard about it?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:16 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
“The current test requires that you take a tube of blood from a person’s arm, first of all that’s a risk for the person drawing the blood. What our test allows you to do is just use a finger prick; very safe device, small drop of blood, you can put a band-aid over it. You don’t have to expose the person drawing the blood to the risk of a needle or a needle stick. Then you take that small drop of blood, put it on this device, 15 minutes later you have a result,” explains Dr. Garry.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:31 pm to CadesCove
quote:
Why haven't they whipped up more batches of the "experimental" drug that they gave the two missionaries in Atlanta? Or have they, and I just haven't heard about it?
That's on the company itself. Every patient treated in the US has received some form of experimental drug. There is zero data on any of them to suggest that it helped, harmed, or had no effect on any of the patients who have received the drugs to date.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:38 pm to CadesCove
quote:
What is being done to accelerate ZMappTM production?
Mapp and KBP are working with the U.S. government to accelerate scaled up
production. The work to date has been funded by grants and contracts that were only
sufficient to produce doses for animal safety and efficacy testing. The present epidemic
has changed the picture dramatically, and additional resources are being brought to bear
on scaling up. It is important to note that the emergency use of an experimental
medicine is a highly unusual situation. As a consequence global high-level discussions
concerning the policy, ethical, and medical implications of this exceptional situation have
been initiated.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:41 pm to Hopeful Doc
quote:
There is zero data on any of them to suggest that it helped, harmed, or had no effect on any of the patients who have received the drugs to date.
Didn't the two in Atlanta live after they got it? And the guy in Dallas died after not getting it. I feel like it might make a difference.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:47 pm to StormTiger
Better question is if you had ebola and a vampire sucked your blood, would the vampire get ebola and would it kill said vampire?
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:50 pm to CadesCove
quote:
Didn't the two in Atlanta live after they got it? And the guy in Dallas died after not getting it.
Since this outbreak, ZMapp has been used in:
2 Americans who recovered
1 75 year old Spanish priest who died after receiving it (1)
3 Liberians, one died (2)
1 British nurse who lived
2/7 who have received ZMapp died.
One received Brincidofovir and died.
quote:
I feel like it might make a difference
It might. To say so definitively is to be highly swayed by a very unconvincing sample size which also doesn't mention when during the infectious process the patients began aggressive supportive therapy as well as antiviral therapy.
Posted on 10/16/14 at 2:56 pm to Hopeful Doc
And it was made in the good ol' USofA with KY tobacco plants, correct? So Michael Bloomburg can go frick himself.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News