Message Boards

Topic : 04/01 The Superbug

Number of Replies: 539
New Messages This Week: 0
Last Reply On:
Created on : Friday, February 29, 2008, 01:21:15 pm
Author : DrPhilBoard1
Could a grave danger be lurking in your home? If you believe the headlines, you know that catching the Superbug can have deadly consequences, but should you be concerned? How can you spot the danger, and what can you do to stay safe? Dr. Phil gets to the bottom of these questions and others. Melissa's son, Mark, was just 13 when he went to the hospital and wound up with MRSA, also known as the Superbug. Learn about Melissa’s tragic loss and why she thinks her son’s death could have been prevented. Then, 19-year-old Stephanie has been battling the Superbug for almost a year. Get a firsthand account of her experience with the disease, and find out what advice her doctor gave her that has Dr. Phil shocked and concerned. Even doctors aren’t immune to the Superbug. Dr. Drew O’Neal had an accident while on vacation, and what happened next changed his life forever. He shares his valuable insights as both doctor and patient. Plus, two years ago, Glen was your average sophomore playing on his high school football team -- until he contracted the Superbug right from the team’s locker room. Find out what important lessons he learned that could help protect you and your children from the disease. And renowned pediatrician Dr. Jim Sears weighs in with the latest information and shows off products to keep on hand that could save your life. Join the discussion.

Find out what happened on the show.

As of January, 2009, this message board will become "Read Only" and will be closed to further posting. Please join the NEW Dr. Phil Community to continue your discussions, personalize your message board experience, start a blog and meet new friends.

March 4, 2008, 8:27 am CST

Good luck in getting people to understand the scope

I am going to give a snapshot of the problem based on both posted “theories” as that is what medicine is anyhow. Let’s see if anyone can relate to “STATS” as they are and not as we hope they are. Now if the theories correct it should work like this:

 Survey: 46 of 1,000 Hospital Patients Infected or Colonized With Super Bug”

So we start off with 1000 Patients that have gone through any hospital in any city in the U.S.A. in the time frame of say 1 month. To this we add this statement reported by Web MD.:  "Our current understanding is that 20% of healthy people never seem to carry staph, while up to 60% carry it sometimes," This means that up to 600 of the 1000 can carry staph, it did not say they will it says can. “For every 1,000 patients treated in U.S. hospitals, 46 cases of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) now occur, researchers concluded.”  Now this is saying that for every 1000 Patients 46 of that up to 600 people that can have / carry “staph” do in fact have MRSA. Now we add to this you own posting that says: "Roughly 5% of people treated in U.S. hospitals for MRSA died of the infection in 2005, according to a new report from the government's Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality." Now we do the math for your 5%; and 5% of 46 is right at 3 as you cannot have .7 of a person. If we use 1000 treated and take 5% of that you get 50 people that died from MRSA. This is what the numbers say but to see the scope of this stuff; and that is what people are not seeing the “BIG PICTURE” change that 1000 to say 500,000 treated across the ½ of the U.S and see what you get. Doing it your way as posted; what is 5% of 500,000 patients treated? Is it around 1,500 that died from MRSA.  As for this posting that you put up: "MRSA is carried, or "colonized," by about 1% of the population, although most of them aren't infected." Now this is a nice statement but; just how many people does it take to make the POPULATION? In short 1% of what number? This is better 5% of the people treaded in the U.S… What was the number treated?

 

The finding I posted are from WEB MD and anyone can find them but reread this:

“The finding was based on “snapshot” surveys of infection control workers representing 21% of the health care facilities in the United States, conducted by the group Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC).

The study was also the first to include both active MRSA infection and patients who were carriers of the bacteria (not sickened by infection, but were able to transmit it to others).”

If people do not want to believe that a “SUPER BUG” can kill them if it gets into the blood stream that is fine by me as it is a “FREE” country and one is “FREE” to make that choice. But one last thing you should understand in all this is that MRSA is also “FREE” and it has not looked at any of the postings to try and tear apart what Doctors are now saying. MRSA is “FREE” to kill if left unchecked and just one human is too many to die for what; someone’s mistake or lack of sanitizing in a hospital.

Some also think that the nursing staff is amine to Staph / MRSA and they are not as after spending time with MRSA in the hospital I can tell you exactly how it can happen. I saw how they can transfer the bug but there is no report or stats for that so it must not be true…   

Dr. Phil; I hope the show on Friday scares the pants off of people as this is one scary disease that can and dose kill. I also hope this will be a wakeup call to our medical system that something within is broken and they fix it before more humans die for no good reason.  This other numbers statement should make people ask “What are they thinking” but for some reason it does not. This is the statement :  The survey responses indicated that for every 1,000 patients treated in hospital or other in-patient health care settings, 34 are infected and 12 are colonized with MRSA”   and no one can do the math that runs hand in hand with it. Good luck in getting people to understand the scope of this!

 

 
March 4, 2008, 9:04 am CST

I pulled the numbers out of thin air!

 

 

By the way I pulled numbers below out of the air as nothing was posted to say how many people got treated that were infected; see what happens and I’m scaring people? I did say 70% of the people have it yes I did as so it looks like the hospital nurse’s think STAPH and MRSA are the same and I really do not care much how you slice it they both can kill. Be politically correct all you want however; you will not change the fact MRSA is now worse / widespread than AIDS can you.   

 

"If we use 1000 treated and take 5% of that you get 50 people that died from MRSA. This is what the numbers say but to see the scope of this stuff; and that is what people are not seeing the “BIG PICTURE” change that 1000 to say 500,000 treated across the ½ of the U.S and see what you get. Doing it your way as posted; what is 5% of 500,000 patients treated? Is it around 1,500 that died from MRSA." 

 
March 4, 2008, 9:22 am CST

Glad to meet you... what is baseline?

Quote From: gwarrior6

 

If it's true that 70% of ALL people have MRSA (which is incredibly FALSE), every patient I had in NOVEMBER of 2007 would have been in isolation (we screen for it on admission).  There was about 3-5% in the hospital at any given time, and we live in a "hot spot" for it (btw, I myself am VERY hygenic before AND after I care for an isolation pt, wash my hands thoroughly and use the alchohol foam on top of it, in addition to gloves, gowns, and masks as necessary).  I take MRSA very seriously.

 

60% of people may have a transient form of plain ol' staph at a given point in their lives, but NOT MRSA.  All MRSA is staph, but not ALL staph is MRSA.  Some are more predisposed to it than others, and other than good hygiene and proper treatment, there's nothing you can really do about it, you might as well worry the sun will run out of Helium....UGH!

But you have done it again; 3 – 5 % of what. What is the base number?

The nurse’s at the TAMPA  V.A. stated to myself and then my later roommate that 70% of the people have it and “WE” both were in the room for MRSA at the time that was late 2007. Like it or not WEB MD is using base numbers and you are not so one can use any number out of the air one wants as a base. The baseline is important for a true picture as “figures do not lie but liars cannot figure” is the old saying. “IF” you are a Doctor / RN you should know the baseline of the health facility you are in. However Web MD is stating that up to 60% of 1000 patients have staph and as many as 46 are MRSA is this a true statement to you? Or is 1000 patients have staph and as many as 34 are infected and 12 are colonized with MRSA? What is closer to the truth as you see it?   

 
March 4, 2008, 11:45 am CST

My #'s

Quote From: f_brosius

But you have done it again; 3 5 % of what. What is the base number?

The nurses at the TAMPA  V.A. stated to myself and then my later roommate that 70% of the people have it and WE both were in the room for MRSA at the time that was late 2007. Like it or not WEB MD is using base numbers and you are not so one can use any number out of the air one wants as a base. The baseline is important for a true picture as figures do not lie but liars cannot figure is the old saying. IF you are a Doctor / RN you should know the baseline of the health facility you are in. However Web MD is stating that up to 60% of 1000 patients have staph and as many as 46 are MRSA is this a true statement to you? Or is 1000 patients have staph and as many as 34 are infected and 12 are colonized with MRSA? What is closer to the truth as you see it?   

 

The nurse's at your little hospital are giving you the stats on staph itself.  I hope you realize the difference between that and MRSA!  I've explained the difference (and there is a BIG one!) OVER AND OVER! I doubt you WILL do the research on your own to clarify your own misunderstanding. 

 

I DO know the #'s.  Out of 1000 pts one month, we had 50 that had MRSA, that's 5%.  I do know the baseline, so there you go.  This is about you sensationalizing something that can be easily controlled because of YOUR OWN bad experience.  I know I'm right and don't necessarily have to prove myself to you,  but I can't stand people who have to embellish or lie and don't have their facts straight because they cannot interpret a statistic!  UGH!

 

 
March 4, 2008, 12:10 pm CST

f brosuius

 

There's no credible source that's going to convince you of reality.  You'll just misinterpret or twist it to sound 10 x more awful than it is.

 

  I'm not going to sit there and worry over the 30-50 out of 1000 people with this infection at my hospital (the 3-5%). 

 

If you want to sit around and be scared, have at it, but I won't because I know the truth and it sets me free.

 
March 4, 2008, 3:41 pm CST

May I interject?

Quote From: gwarrior6

 

The nurse's at your little hospital are giving you the stats on staph itself.  I hope you realize the difference between that and MRSA!  I've explained the difference (and there is a BIG one!) OVER AND OVER! I doubt you WILL do the research on your own to clarify your own misunderstanding. 

 

I DO know the #'s.  Out of 1000 pts one month, we had 50 that had MRSA, that's 5%.  I do know the baseline, so there you go.  This is about you sensationalizing something that can be easily controlled because of YOUR OWN bad experience.  I know I'm right and don't necessarily have to prove myself to you,  but I can't stand people who have to embellish or lie and don't have their facts straight because they cannot interpret a statistic!  UGH!

 

 gwarrior6: "I DO know the #'s.  Out of 1000 pts one month, we had 50 that had MRSA, that's 5%."

 

fbrosius: "However Web MD is stating that up to 60% of 1000 patients have staph and as many as 46 are MRSA is this a true statement to you?

 

 

46 out of 1,000 (Web MD) vs. 50 out of 1,000 (gwarrior6's own hospital) patients that are colonized w/MRSA -- statistically, that is nearly identical.

 

FYI, fbrosius, although NOBODY is attempting to minimize the suffering you are going through thanks to the SHODDY care you got at the VA (Our tax dollars at work), attempts to scare the rest of the forum with blatantly false information is NOT helping your cause.

 

gwarrior6 is dead-on. I'll try to explain it another way -- when an authority refers to "staph" colonization, they are referring to ALL species of the genus Staphylococcus. Of the 60% that are "carrying staph," the overwhelming bulk of them are carrying the benign Staphylococcus epidermiditisStaphylococcus aureus is ONE species that does colonize relatively few people, but can cause MAJOR problems, particularly regarding hospital-acquired infections. MRSA is but a sub-set of all S. aureus cases. The new twist is the community acquired (schools, gyms, etc) variant.

 

Although epidemiology is not my area of expertise, I am looking forward to Friday's show.

 

Prof

 
March 4, 2008, 4:49 pm CST

Thank u

Quote From: profmaryann

 gwarrior6: "I DO know the #'s.  Out of 1000 pts one month, we had 50 that had MRSA, that's 5%."

 

fbrosius: "However Web MD is stating that up to 60% of 1000 patients have staph and as many as 46 are MRSA is this a true statement to you?

 

 

46 out of 1,000 (Web MD) vs. 50 out of 1,000 (gwarrior6's own hospital) patients that are colonized w/MRSA -- statistically, that is nearly identical.

 

FYI, fbrosius, although NOBODY is attempting to minimize the suffering you are going through thanks to the SHODDY care you got at the VA (Our tax dollars at work), attempts to scare the rest of the forum with blatantly false information is NOT helping your cause.

 

gwarrior6 is dead-on. I'll try to explain it another way -- when an authority refers to "staph" colonization, they are referring to ALL species of the genus Staphylococcus. Of the 60% that are "carrying staph," the overwhelming bulk of them are carrying the benign Staphylococcus epidermiditisStaphylococcus aureus is ONE species that does colonize relatively few people, but can cause MAJOR problems, particularly regarding hospital-acquired infections. MRSA is but a sub-set of all S. aureus cases. The new twist is the community acquired (schools, gyms, etc) variant.

 

Although epidemiology is not my area of expertise, I am looking forward to Friday's show.

 

Prof

 

Thank you for eloquently putting it that way.  I'm glad that people know about it and how to avoid it.  I hope that the community can stop or impede the spread of it without fear.  Again, thank you for clarifying.

 
March 4, 2008, 5:10 pm CST

THX for the help in understanding.

Yes I am waiting till the show on Friday to see what comes out. I have had a chance to see what this has done to people and the numbers mean nothing really but the people do. It is more the way the medical community is looking at it as more of a pain in the butt and we should be laughed it off. It’s nothing really as it comes down to about 3 people passing on, out of 46 that have it colonized, per 1000 people treated in a medical facility. I do not know about you but that is unacceptable to me just because someone did not take proper precautions and got lax on their job. As if you do the math for the entire health care system that have been treated in the U.S. alone the number of people that have died from this will set you on your ear. As when you look at the entire system VS one medical facility and use the numbers that have been said to be almost equal as posted then we have a problem in this country with our health care system. As it looks to me that losing 3 people per thousand is ok by health care system standards. Otherwise, why is there a show about this “Staph” and how many will have died from it on the show and not just lost a limb or gotten sick? Friday will tell…    THX, for the time!

 
March 5, 2008, 3:57 pm CST

Suffered from MRSA

            

  •        HI, MY NAME IS KIM, AND I SUFFER FROM MRSA.  I BELIEVE IT STARTED LAST FEB. 07 WHEN I WAS HAVING LYMPHNODE DISECTION DUE TO VULVAR/VAGINAL CANCER.  I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THIS WAS GOING ON WHEN I WENT ON VACATION TO CANADA.  I WASN'T EVEN THERE FOR 2 DAYS WHEN I ENDED UP IN THE HOSPITAL IN CANADA AND THEN GOT TRANSFERED TO ERIE COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER IN BUFFALO, NEW YORK.  I HAD SURGERY FOR AN INFECTION THAT I HAD WHILE I WAS THERE, THEN I GOT RELEASED 4 OR 5 DAYS LATER.  WHEN I GOT BACK HOME I WENT TO GO SEE MY DR. WHO HAD ME GO TO THEIR SURGEON WHO TOLD ME THAT I HAD MRSA AND THAT I NEEDED TO HAVE ANOTHER SURGERY THE NEXT DAY.  WHILE I WAS IN THE HOSPITAL THAT TIME I WAS PUT ON A WOUND VAC TO TAKE THE INFECTION OUT.  THIS INFECTION LASTED ABOUT7 MONTHS.  AFTER I GOT HOME FROM THE HOSPITAL I HAD TO HAVE A NURSE COME IN DAILY TO GIVE ME IV ANTIBIOTICS AND TO CHANGE THE WOUND VAC EVERY OTHER DAY.  THIS WENT ON FOR ABOUT 2 MONTHS UNTIL I COULDN'T TAKE THE PAIN ANYMORE.  ALL I WANTED TO DO WAS GO BACK IN THE HOSPITAL AND STAY THERE UNTIL I WAS NO ;ONGER ON THE WOUND VAC MACHINE.  THE DR'S THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST IF I WENT TO A NURSING/REHABILITATION CENTER UNTIL THE INFECTION WAS HEALED.  AND TO THIS DAY, I HAVEN'T HAD ANY MORE PROBLEMS WITH MRSA.
 
March 7, 2008, 7:07 am CST

03/07 The Superbug

From the "urgent announcement" e-mail I received yesterday, it looks like this installment is going to be pre-empted for a "Dr. Phil NOW" on sex offenders.

 

=(

 

Any indication when this topic will be broadcast?

 

Prof

 
First | Prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Next | Last