Swine Flu Screening @ U.S. Border
Apr 29, 2009 | 1:25 am
#31
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NorCal
Posts: 658
Where were they detained- inside or outside of the plane?
Anyone else remember how during SARS there were cases when airplanes landed with a potentially sick passenger, and they'd hold all the passengers INSIDE THE PLANE while checking it out? And they didn't immediately run boxes of N95 masks, protective eyewear and gowns on board either.
I was then (and through memory, am now again) angry for all the other passengers trapped with the sick person. I've spent time visiting a person hospitalized with MRSA- even with the disposable covers etc., there was still a danger of transmission, but then I was volunteering to visit. To be trapped in a seat near a person-of-illness with the authorities not letting you move away? That's just wrong.
I understand the need to screen the one potentially sick passenger. I understand why they might need to isolate all passengers from the rest of the airport, sure. Build a screening zone, and let everyone out so they can stand as far apart from each other as is possible. But the first person to board the isolated plane better have a box of masks, gloves, gowns and SaniZide wipes.
Anyone else remember how during SARS there were cases when airplanes landed with a potentially sick passenger, and they'd hold all the passengers INSIDE THE PLANE while checking it out? And they didn't immediately run boxes of N95 masks, protective eyewear and gowns on board either.
I was then (and through memory, am now again) angry for all the other passengers trapped with the sick person. I've spent time visiting a person hospitalized with MRSA- even with the disposable covers etc., there was still a danger of transmission, but then I was volunteering to visit. To be trapped in a seat near a person-of-illness with the authorities not letting you move away? That's just wrong.
I understand the need to screen the one potentially sick passenger. I understand why they might need to isolate all passengers from the rest of the airport, sure. Build a screening zone, and let everyone out so they can stand as far apart from each other as is possible. But the first person to board the isolated plane better have a box of masks, gloves, gowns and SaniZide wipes.
Apr 29, 2009 | 1:39 am
#32
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Rapids Reward
Posts: 40,124
Yes, it might be too late for the passengers who does not onboard the aircraft more than 15 minutes. The gate door will be closed before the aircraft is takeoff. If they doesn't show up at the gate on-time.
Apr 29, 2009 | 1:53 am
#33
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: usually SFO, sometimes SJC or OAK
Programs: United premier
Posts: 99
1. How the risk of transmission changes with time.
The risk of transmission often depends on how close one is seated to the passenger (see TB cases), so perhaps for those nearby people it's a binary "not too late / too late" situation. For everyone else, though, their risk might grow as the sick person increases their fever/ cough, and each time the sick person moves around and uses the facilities. So the last half hour could be far more important than the first half hour.
2. How the perception of risk changes when you know there's a sick person on board.
Of course there can always be a sick person that no one else knows about. But by the end of a flight, if a plane is being held and you know exactly who/where the sick person is, you will want to get away from them. Being held with a known sick person and not allowed to move away from them, and not being given protection, that's not good.
Apr 29, 2009 | 3:30 am
#34
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Yes, I remember what happening lot of those people who cause of death with SARS in Asia. So the situation is going on lot of people who gotten very sick. It was more than 200 people death due to swine-flu. So homeland security need to have more precautions with those people who does not have sick with swine-flu. So they won't let the passengers onboard the aircraft. So they will have need to be check with doctor to make sure its everything okay. So this is too much vulnerable lot of those people who have any diagnosis before. It might to be very carefully out there in between Mexico or USA. I believe there is enough evidence some of those few people who gotten swine-flu. The CDC will have to screening for every passengers before they are allowed onboard the aircraft. The safety must to be screening who is not have any health illness. I think they will have to get flu-shot before they are clearance enter into USA. I think it would best time try to stay home and don't go anywhere to see these people will causing lot of disease problems. I think it should getting better to stop the flu-swine.
Apr 29, 2009 | 5:09 am
#35
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
Speaking of swine, it appears that an entire planeload on Airtran inbound from Mexico was detained at BWI tonight after the crew noted 2 people who seemed sick....
http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1663213
"Out of an abundance of caution....."
http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1663213
"Out of an abundance of caution....."
. you should see me when my allergies are in "full bloom".....eyes watery, bloodshot & looking like went 12 rounds plus not to mention the sneezing, stuffy doze and blocked ears.
Apr 29, 2009 | 6:09 am
#37
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
For the same reason that those assclowns were put in charge of making a complete cluster____ out of Katrina. DHS consistently screws up because it is a bloated, unnecessary, un-American agency that should have never been created.
Apr 29, 2009 | 6:16 am
#38
Suspended
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,953
My thought was along those lines, too, Spiff. If we want an epidemic, put DHS in charge rather than people who know a bit more about what they are doing.
Apr 29, 2009 | 8:58 am
#39
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
HHS Secretary, Surgeon General and some other appointed health-related senior positions (including at CDC IIRC) had not yet been filled/confirmed by the Senate at the time this flu started grabbing headlines -- so DHS was given the lead by default.
Apr 29, 2009 | 7:17 pm
#41
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
sheesh..... i can't wait for some pax to pick out some brown skinned pax who sneezes and then screams, "there's a swine flu ter'wrist on the plane" . you should see me when my allergies are in "full bloom".....eyes watery, bloodshot & looking like went 12 rounds plus not to mention the sneezing, stuffy doze and blocked ears.
. you should see me when my allergies are in "full bloom".....eyes watery, bloodshot & looking like went 12 rounds plus not to mention the sneezing, stuffy doze and blocked ears.http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=598&sid=1663315
Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Jim Peters says the men just had too much to drink.
The men refused treatment after being evaluated. The rest of the passengers had to stay on the plane for a little under an hour.
The men refused treatment after being evaluated. The rest of the passengers had to stay on the plane for a little under an hour.