159

Child dies from rabies after bat found in room, Canada officials say. (www.cbsnews.com)

submitted 7 months ago by BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world to c/canada@lemmy.ca

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Polkira@lemmy.ca 7 points 7 months ago

My thinking would be why risk not getting checked out? Unfortunately worst case scenario happened this time :(

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The indication for testing according the CDC is a bite.

The rabies test is cheap. Could have tested the kid or the bat, but again why would they do it if there's no indication for exposure. This was the first case in the province of someone being infected with rabies inside their own home since 1967.

When you hear hoofbeats you don't think it's zebras.

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 8 points 7 months ago

You can't test the kid, only the bat. So if they didn't catch it testing is a no go.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

There's like eleven kinds of blood tests for rabies. None of them work on people, or is it by the time they work it's too late?

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 months ago

By the time it's detectable it's too late.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Okay that's sort of what I thought.

So the protocol, from like an insurance coverage decision-tree standpoint, in this situation, would have been to test the bat if possible and if not possible administer the vaccine?

I was under the impression that the vaccine is pretty awful and a health ordeal in itself, and that while the dose wasn't expensive, the aftercare is.

And that is why, as I understand, the CDC protocol is only seek medical attention if there's a visible bite.