Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No Planes Safe Enough (SARS)
News 24 ^

Posted on 04/23/2003 10:51:55 AM PDT by per loin

Paris - Insurance companies said on Wednesday that no planes exist to safely repatriate severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) victims in accordance with international guidelines.

"Air transport recommendations are so drastic that there is currently no way to repatriate a person infected with Sars from abroad," said Guy Belliache, medical director for French-based insurance company Mondial Assistance. "Even a military aircraft won't do."

Belliache says that guidelines issued by the World Health Organisation and the US Centres for Disease Control include a requirement that aircraft have two ventilation systems to totally isolate the pilot's cabin from that of the patient.

"Such a plane, civilian or military, doesn't exist," said Arnaud de Courcy, medical director for Europ Assistance, the only insurance company in France to have been asked to repatriate a Sars sufferer.

In view of the contradictory guidelines, De Courcy has called for a suitable aircraft to be built.

"France and the European Union should quickly design an aircraft to comply with these criteria," agreed Belliache.

The two doctors said the need is all the more pressing as the Sars epidemic appears to still be in its ascendent phase and could lead to many more requests for repatriation.

Sars has defied health checks at airports and borders to spread to over 25 countries since it first appeared in southern China six months ago. - Sapa-AFP


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: sars

1 posted on 04/23/2003 10:51:55 AM PDT by per loin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: per loin
Can't a self-contained isolation unit be loaded onto a cargo plane? I think so.
2 posted on 04/23/2003 10:56:52 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Reckon it could, but it would be a mighty expensive way to travel.
3 posted on 04/23/2003 11:02:18 AM PDT by per loin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: per loin
France and the European Union should quickly design an aircraft to comply with these criteria,"

What a ridiculous, stupid, bureaucratic response. It is simpler to change the criteria. My guess is the idiots that developed the guidelines assumed such planes existed. Well, they don't. You could put the patients in space suits for less money than designing a plane that would rarely be used.

4 posted on 04/23/2003 11:05:47 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird
What you said. Beat me to it.
5 posted on 04/23/2003 11:18:37 AM PDT by SW6906
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: per loin
On a related note: "A NUMBER OF INSURANCE firms have started limiting their life insurance policies for travellers who might go to countries where people have contracted the SARS virus. SARS, according to the World Health Organisation, now affects 25 countries in five continents, with a a total of 3461 cases and 170 fatalities..."
Found here: http://www.who.int/csr/sarscountry/2003_04_18/en/
6 posted on 04/23/2003 12:14:37 PM PDT by Sabatier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Bird; per loin; SW6906
France and the European Union should quickly design an aircraft to comply with these criteria,"

What a ridiculous, stupid, bureaucratic response. It is simpler to change the criteria. My guess is the idiots that developed the guidelines assumed such planes existed. Well, they don't. You could put the patients in space suits for less money than designing a plane that would rarely be used.

Actually, the real problem is not in the criteria but examining reason to transport a SARS patient by airplane in the first place. The mere transport of a patient by definition spreads the footprint of the disease beyond the reach of the geographically infected areas despite the calls for stringent criteria for infection control on aircraft.

If an insurance company or any other organization is worried about the care of patient(s), they should provide the patient(s) the best possible care in the immediate locale they are in. Any attempts to relocate infected patient(s) by plane or other means of transportation will only raise the risk of spreading SARS to uninfected people and disease-free areas.

7 posted on 04/23/2003 12:34:12 PM PDT by jriemer (We are a Republic not a Democracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson