UtahApocalypse
04-27-2009, 09:53 PM
Read the following....
N.C. official: Swine flu cases suspected
Raleigh, N.C. — The state's health director said Monday afternoon that there are suspected cases of swine flu in North Carolina, but declined to say how many cases or where they were located.
Dr. Jeffrey Engel said Monday evening that officials are involuntarily isolating patients who may have the virus. He declined to specifically say how many suspected cases were in the state, noting that the number is always changing, and he declined to say where they were located.
"We're working very closely with providers, and they are investigating cases on a daily basis," Engel said. "It's a very fluid situation and there will be suspect cases. People travel all the time."
Investigators were gathering specimens and hope to know whether the cases are "probable" some time Tuesday and will seek confirmations by Wednesday.
Federal health officials have confirmed 40 cases in the United States – in New York, Ohio, Kansas, Texas and California. Of those, only one person has been hospitalized and all have recovered. That's in contrast to Mexico, where the suspected death toll was at 149, with more than 1,600 cases reported.
Track swine flu cases across the globe.
Engel said the suspected cases are related to travel, mostly to Mexico. He said nobody has been hospitalized and that the suspected cases have been ordered to in-home isolation.
Along with the travel history, Engel said the suspected cases involve patients with severe flu symptoms. The state is encouraging providers to only report more severe cases – people with higher fevers or more prominent respiratory problems.
Engel said he expects the number of suspected cases to increase. "This is dynamic," he said.
At a news briefing Monday morning, Engel said the state is "better prepared" than ever to handle any potential outbreak of the virus in North Carolina. The state has a stockpile of 660,000 doses of treatment for the flu, if necessary.
He urged residents to take precautions by staying at home if they present with flu-like symptoms, wash their hands frequently with soap and water for at least 15 seconds, and see a doctor if flu symptoms become serious.
"To ward off any potential, just be prudent as you would during normal flu season," he said.
But, Engel said, there's one thing people don't have to stop doing in order to avoid the swine flu: eating pork.
"You can't catch the flu through eating any food item," he said.
That announcement was welcome news for those who profit from pork such as restaurants and grocery stores. "That would affect our business" if people were afraid to eat pork, said Worth Westbrook, co-owner of McCall's Bar-B-Que & Seafood in Clayton.
"I am not too concerned, because I love barbecue," said McCall's customer Glenn Hines, who filled up his plate at the buffet while updates on the swine flu played on television screens.
Gov. Bev Perdue, in a statement Monday morning, also advised people to be careful and take proper preventative measures and that she is confident in the state's readiness to handle a potential pandemic.
"North Carolina is equipped with a full supply of antiviral medications and personal protective supplies such as face masks," Perdue said. "We have public health teams ready to deploy to any community in our state that needs assistance."
Local hospitals, meanwhile reviewed emergency plans, many of which were put in place after the SARS epidemic in 2003 that infected more than 8.000 people and caused 74 deaths worldwide.
"We all have plans on how to deal with that," Dr. David Weber, an infectious diseases expert at UNC Hospitals. "The hospital has detailed 20-page plan."
Weber said it includes how to protect staff treating patients. He also said the hospital has enough protective gear to last up to six months.
"We have ability for rapid communications and to expand the number of both beds within the hospital and clinic availability, if wee need, too,' he added.
On the higher-education level, UNC System President Erskine Bowles asked universities to review their emergency plans and distribute basic information on flu prevention.
At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, students preparing for final exams said they were concerned about the swine flu because of the number of people in the college environment who travel.
"I guess there are a lot of people coming in and out, so it could be more likely to happen here," sophomore Jill Zartman said.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5034385/
Related legal....
(a) The State Health Director and a local health director are empowered to exercise quarantine and isolation authority. Quarantine and isolation authority shall be exercised only when and so long as the public health is endangered, all other reasonable means for correcting the problem have been exhausted, and no less restrictive alternative exists.
(b) No person other than a person authorized by the State Health Director or local health director shall enter quarantine or isolation premises. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to restrict the access of authorized health care, law enforcement, or emergency medical services personnel to quarantine or isolation premises as necessary in conducting their duties.
(c) Before applying quarantine or isolation authority to livestock or poultry for the purpose of preventing the direct or indirect conveyance of an infectious agent to persons, the State Health Director or a local health director shall consult with the State Veterinarian in the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
(d) When quarantine or isolation limits the freedom of movement of a person or animal or of access to a person or animal whose freedom of movement is limited, the period of limited freedom of movement or access shall not exceed 30 calendar days. Any person substantially affected by that limitation may institute in superior court in Wake County or in the county in which the limitation is imposed an action to review that limitation. The official who exercises the quarantine or isolation authority shall give the persons known by the official to be substantially affected by the limitation reasonable notice under the circumstances of the right to institute an action to review the limitation. If a person or a person's representative requests a hearing, the hearing shall be held within 72 hours of the filing of that request, excluding Saturdays and Sundays. The person substantially affected by that limitation is entitled to be represented by counsel of the person's own choice or if the person is indigent, the person shall be represented by counsel appointed in accordance with Article 36 of Chapter 7A of the General Statutes and the rules adopted by the Office of Indigent Defense Services. The court shall reduce or terminate the limitation unless it determines, by the preponderance of the evidence, that the limitation is reasonably necessary to prevent or limit the conveyance of a communicable disease or condition to others.
If the State Health Director or the local health director determines that a 30‑calendar‑day limitation on freedom of movement or access is not adequate to protect the public health, the State Health Director or local health director must institute in superior court in the county in which the limitation is imposed an action to obtain an order extending the period of limitation of freedom of movement or access. If the person substantially affected by the limitation has already instituted an action in superior court in Wake County, the State Health Director must institute the action in superior court in Wake County or as a counterclaim in the pending case. Except as provided below for persons with tuberculosis, the court shall continue the limitation for a period not to exceed 30 days if it determines, by the preponderance of the evidence, that the limitation is reasonably necessary to prevent or limit the conveyance of a communicable disease or condition to others. The court order shall specify the period of time the limitation is to be continued and shall provide for automatic termination of the order upon written determination by the State Health Director or local health director that the quarantine or isolation is no longer necessary to protect the public health. In addition, where the petitioner can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that quarantine or isolation was not or is no longer needed for protection of the public health, the person quarantined or isolated may move the trial court to reconsider its order extending quarantine or isolation before the time for the order otherwise expires and may seek immediate or expedited termination of the order. Before the expiration of an order issued under this section, the State Health Director or local health director may move to continue the order for additional periods not to exceed 30 days each. If the person whose freedom of movement has been limited has tuberculosis, the court shall continue the limitation for a period not to exceed one calendar year if it determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the limitation is reasonably necessary to prevent or limit the conveyance of tuberculosis to others. The court order shall specify the period of time the limitation is to be continued and shall provide for automatic termination of the order upon written determination by the State Health Director or local health director that the quarantine or isolation is no longer necessary to protect the public health. In addition, where the petitioner can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that quarantine or isolation was not or is no longer needed for protection of the public health, the person quarantined or isolated may move the trial court to reconsider its order extending quarantine or isolation before the time for the order otherwise expires and may seek immediate or expedited termination of the order. Before the expiration of an order limiting the freedom of movement of a person with tuberculosis, the State Health Director or local health director may move to continue the order for additional periods not to exceed one calendar year each. (1957, c. 1357, s. 1; 1983, c. 891, s. 2; 1987, c. 782, s. 15; 2002‑179, s. 5; 2004‑80, s. 2.)
N.C. official: Swine flu cases suspected
Raleigh, N.C. — The state's health director said Monday afternoon that there are suspected cases of swine flu in North Carolina, but declined to say how many cases or where they were located.
Dr. Jeffrey Engel said Monday evening that officials are involuntarily isolating patients who may have the virus. He declined to specifically say how many suspected cases were in the state, noting that the number is always changing, and he declined to say where they were located.
"We're working very closely with providers, and they are investigating cases on a daily basis," Engel said. "It's a very fluid situation and there will be suspect cases. People travel all the time."
Investigators were gathering specimens and hope to know whether the cases are "probable" some time Tuesday and will seek confirmations by Wednesday.
Federal health officials have confirmed 40 cases in the United States – in New York, Ohio, Kansas, Texas and California. Of those, only one person has been hospitalized and all have recovered. That's in contrast to Mexico, where the suspected death toll was at 149, with more than 1,600 cases reported.
Track swine flu cases across the globe.
Engel said the suspected cases are related to travel, mostly to Mexico. He said nobody has been hospitalized and that the suspected cases have been ordered to in-home isolation.
Along with the travel history, Engel said the suspected cases involve patients with severe flu symptoms. The state is encouraging providers to only report more severe cases – people with higher fevers or more prominent respiratory problems.
Engel said he expects the number of suspected cases to increase. "This is dynamic," he said.
At a news briefing Monday morning, Engel said the state is "better prepared" than ever to handle any potential outbreak of the virus in North Carolina. The state has a stockpile of 660,000 doses of treatment for the flu, if necessary.
He urged residents to take precautions by staying at home if they present with flu-like symptoms, wash their hands frequently with soap and water for at least 15 seconds, and see a doctor if flu symptoms become serious.
"To ward off any potential, just be prudent as you would during normal flu season," he said.
But, Engel said, there's one thing people don't have to stop doing in order to avoid the swine flu: eating pork.
"You can't catch the flu through eating any food item," he said.
That announcement was welcome news for those who profit from pork such as restaurants and grocery stores. "That would affect our business" if people were afraid to eat pork, said Worth Westbrook, co-owner of McCall's Bar-B-Que & Seafood in Clayton.
"I am not too concerned, because I love barbecue," said McCall's customer Glenn Hines, who filled up his plate at the buffet while updates on the swine flu played on television screens.
Gov. Bev Perdue, in a statement Monday morning, also advised people to be careful and take proper preventative measures and that she is confident in the state's readiness to handle a potential pandemic.
"North Carolina is equipped with a full supply of antiviral medications and personal protective supplies such as face masks," Perdue said. "We have public health teams ready to deploy to any community in our state that needs assistance."
Local hospitals, meanwhile reviewed emergency plans, many of which were put in place after the SARS epidemic in 2003 that infected more than 8.000 people and caused 74 deaths worldwide.
"We all have plans on how to deal with that," Dr. David Weber, an infectious diseases expert at UNC Hospitals. "The hospital has detailed 20-page plan."
Weber said it includes how to protect staff treating patients. He also said the hospital has enough protective gear to last up to six months.
"We have ability for rapid communications and to expand the number of both beds within the hospital and clinic availability, if wee need, too,' he added.
On the higher-education level, UNC System President Erskine Bowles asked universities to review their emergency plans and distribute basic information on flu prevention.
At the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, students preparing for final exams said they were concerned about the swine flu because of the number of people in the college environment who travel.
"I guess there are a lot of people coming in and out, so it could be more likely to happen here," sophomore Jill Zartman said.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5034385/
Related legal....
(a) The State Health Director and a local health director are empowered to exercise quarantine and isolation authority. Quarantine and isolation authority shall be exercised only when and so long as the public health is endangered, all other reasonable means for correcting the problem have been exhausted, and no less restrictive alternative exists.
(b) No person other than a person authorized by the State Health Director or local health director shall enter quarantine or isolation premises. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to restrict the access of authorized health care, law enforcement, or emergency medical services personnel to quarantine or isolation premises as necessary in conducting their duties.
(c) Before applying quarantine or isolation authority to livestock or poultry for the purpose of preventing the direct or indirect conveyance of an infectious agent to persons, the State Health Director or a local health director shall consult with the State Veterinarian in the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
(d) When quarantine or isolation limits the freedom of movement of a person or animal or of access to a person or animal whose freedom of movement is limited, the period of limited freedom of movement or access shall not exceed 30 calendar days. Any person substantially affected by that limitation may institute in superior court in Wake County or in the county in which the limitation is imposed an action to review that limitation. The official who exercises the quarantine or isolation authority shall give the persons known by the official to be substantially affected by the limitation reasonable notice under the circumstances of the right to institute an action to review the limitation. If a person or a person's representative requests a hearing, the hearing shall be held within 72 hours of the filing of that request, excluding Saturdays and Sundays. The person substantially affected by that limitation is entitled to be represented by counsel of the person's own choice or if the person is indigent, the person shall be represented by counsel appointed in accordance with Article 36 of Chapter 7A of the General Statutes and the rules adopted by the Office of Indigent Defense Services. The court shall reduce or terminate the limitation unless it determines, by the preponderance of the evidence, that the limitation is reasonably necessary to prevent or limit the conveyance of a communicable disease or condition to others.
If the State Health Director or the local health director determines that a 30‑calendar‑day limitation on freedom of movement or access is not adequate to protect the public health, the State Health Director or local health director must institute in superior court in the county in which the limitation is imposed an action to obtain an order extending the period of limitation of freedom of movement or access. If the person substantially affected by the limitation has already instituted an action in superior court in Wake County, the State Health Director must institute the action in superior court in Wake County or as a counterclaim in the pending case. Except as provided below for persons with tuberculosis, the court shall continue the limitation for a period not to exceed 30 days if it determines, by the preponderance of the evidence, that the limitation is reasonably necessary to prevent or limit the conveyance of a communicable disease or condition to others. The court order shall specify the period of time the limitation is to be continued and shall provide for automatic termination of the order upon written determination by the State Health Director or local health director that the quarantine or isolation is no longer necessary to protect the public health. In addition, where the petitioner can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that quarantine or isolation was not or is no longer needed for protection of the public health, the person quarantined or isolated may move the trial court to reconsider its order extending quarantine or isolation before the time for the order otherwise expires and may seek immediate or expedited termination of the order. Before the expiration of an order issued under this section, the State Health Director or local health director may move to continue the order for additional periods not to exceed 30 days each. If the person whose freedom of movement has been limited has tuberculosis, the court shall continue the limitation for a period not to exceed one calendar year if it determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the limitation is reasonably necessary to prevent or limit the conveyance of tuberculosis to others. The court order shall specify the period of time the limitation is to be continued and shall provide for automatic termination of the order upon written determination by the State Health Director or local health director that the quarantine or isolation is no longer necessary to protect the public health. In addition, where the petitioner can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that quarantine or isolation was not or is no longer needed for protection of the public health, the person quarantined or isolated may move the trial court to reconsider its order extending quarantine or isolation before the time for the order otherwise expires and may seek immediate or expedited termination of the order. Before the expiration of an order limiting the freedom of movement of a person with tuberculosis, the State Health Director or local health director may move to continue the order for additional periods not to exceed one calendar year each. (1957, c. 1357, s. 1; 1983, c. 891, s. 2; 1987, c. 782, s. 15; 2002‑179, s. 5; 2004‑80, s. 2.)