159
submitted 2 months ago by BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world to c/canada@lemmy.ca
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 55 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I can blame the parent for bad parenting and call myself informed and everyone else should be ... because I know about bats carrying rabies

But I also know that most people have no clue that any of this can happen .... it's the first case of someone dying from rabies in Ontario from an infection that originated in Ontario since 1967 .... people have no clue that this is even possible in this day in age

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/rabies-death-1.7341335

About eight or ten years ago I woke up one night in my cottage to a bat flying around my place. It was dark inside and I saw this thing fluttering around in my room. I opened a window and let it out and never thought anything of it. About a year later, I happened to be reading some stuff about rabies .... the hair in the back of my neck went up and it's freaked me out since.

After that bat in my room, I never went for treatment, I never got checked out and I never thought anything of it. It's been about ten years and I keep worrying that some day I'll start feeling the effects of it. I think most people in Ontario would do the same because everyone thinks we got rid of rabies decades ago or that it is a third world disease that isn't possible here.

I feel terrible for that parent .... death from rabies is a horrible way to die and it happened to this child with their parents watching it all happen.

I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy ... let alone someone I would accuse of bad parenting.

[-] Whitebrow@lemmy.world 42 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Quick heads up that we do have effective treatments UNTIL you start exhibiting symptoms, after that you can’t really be cured anymore and would just have to live with it (and manage the symptoms until it kills you shortly after)

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 months ago

I can blame the parent for bad parenting and call myself informed and everyone else should be ... because I know about bats carrying rabies

Most provinces and the federal's health protocols no longer recommend automatic treatment for "bat in room" situations. Only if there's reasonable doubt of having been bitten. I've been there and I really had to advocate to the ER doctor that there was no way for me to know.

[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

The CDC guidelines are a bit confusing too, like is just being in a house common behavior, as in the part about keeping bats out, or a sign of rabies as in an earlier part? Should you check for physical contact or just go get tested? (And in the US, will your insurance cover the test without symptoms showing?) Should you get the fucking plague beast out of your house while avoiding contact, or try to catch it for testing?

https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/prevention/bats.html

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

I thought by the time it is detectable in tests on a person, that person is already terminal. My understanding is if you have any chance of exposure from an animal you skip the tests and go get the shots. IDK about insurance.

[-] maniii@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Get shots, pay health insurance. Dont get shots, life insurance pays your loved ones.

Macabre and sadly true.

[-] Nogami@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Or be in Canada and just get shots to be safe. It’s $250 as a precautionary shot before travel but if you have suspected exposure it will be free.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I agree and I was just being cynical about health insurance companies denying care for cruelly stupid reasons. Although I remember some old TV shows where "if the animal can be quickly caught and it tests negative for rabies, the child won't have to undergo the painful series of abdominal shots." Not sure if the treatment is still as miserable as portrayed.

[-] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago

Horrible. Understandable that a parent may not know the risk involved.

Only reason I know was when I worked at a summer camp they hammered into us that if a bat was found in a cabin we had to catch it for testing, or else everyone staying in that cabin would get rabies shots.

[-] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I assume we would be ok if it didn't bite us?

Edit: no get tested. Apparently they attack when humans are sleeping and can leave no trace.

[-] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

Yeah, state of the art may have changed since then, but since you can't see the bite and a test on a human wouldn't show anything until it's too late, the options were either have a lab test the bat or get precautionary rabies shots.

[-] folkrav@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 months ago

I try not to judge, but I’m also utterly confused as to why the parents wouldn’t immediately have brought the child in for the shot after finding the bat, visible bite or not…

[-] BCsven@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 months ago

To tell the truth I wouldn't have thought about it. A stray deranged dog or racoon would raise alarm bells, but we set bats here at night always, and didn't consider the risk. Oops

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

No scratches, no bite. Why would they?

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 13 points 2 months ago

Bats have tiny teeth and it's possible to be bitten without there being any visible mark. You should always go for treatment if you have had an interaction with a bat. Better safe than dying one of the worst ways possible.

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 6 points 2 months ago

Most commonly they bite you while you're sleeping, so you don't know

[-] Polkira@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 months ago

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

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 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 2 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 2 months ago* (last edited 2 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 2 months ago

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

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 2 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.

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 1 points 2 months ago

As soon as a rabies test comes back positive, you have a death sentence.

[-] brrt@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

How do you think the child got rabies in this situation?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Obviously they overlooked a scratch or a bite. Rabies isn't airborne.

[-] brrt@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

This you?

No scratches, no bite. Why would they?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

What do you mean? Yes. They checked the kid over and saw nothing. Obviously there was an exposure that either left no mark, left a mark that appeared normal, or the parents didn't see it.

[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Maybe it drooled into their open mouth or something. Or onto their hand and later they picked their nose.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Sounds possible. Bats are mammals, maybe it sneezed, covered, but didn't wash it's hands, gave the kid a high five, and then the kid wiped a booger out of his eye with it.

Poor kid, never had a chance.

[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Heartbreaking

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

That's literally the health institutions protocol now a days. Though for kids it depends how credible the kid is about not being exposed.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] MataVatnik@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

Little known fact groundhogs are also rabies vectors

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

He just popped out, saw his shadow, pulled out a switchblade, and then started running straight towards us

[-] Nogami@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Only a handful of people (20ish) have ever survived without getting an antiviral shot before symptoms presented.

And it’s a pretty horrific way to die (absolutely dehydrated and needing fluid but gagging and choking if offered a drink).

If I ever got it I’d want to be put in a coma while my immune system tried to knock it out and euthanized if I didn’t recover reasonably.

[-] Yezzey@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago

When I was young the fear was put into us by my parents. The Cugo movie really reinforced it.

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

A lot of people have a lot of strong opinions around here so, as someone who's been in a bat in room situation with ambiguous contact potential let me point you to Quebec's Health Ministry's Post Exposition Prophylaxis guidelines:

Vacciner les personnes ayant eu une exposition significative à une source potentiellement rabique.

Une exposition significative est une morsure, une griffure ou un contact de la salive ou du LCR d’un mammifère potentiellement rabique avec une plaie fraîche (ayant saigné ou suinté depuis moins de 24 heures) ou avec une muqueuse.

L’exposition significative se définit comme suit :

Chauve‑souris : présence des 2 conditions suivantes :

Contact physique reconnu avec la chauve‑souris; Morsure, griffure ou contact de la salive de la chauve‑souris avec une plaie fraîche (ayant saigné ou suinté depuis moins de 24 heures) ou avec une muqueuse non exclu. La PPE n’est pas indiquée en l’absence de contact physique reconnu (ex. : chauve‑souris trouvée dans la maison sans qu’on ait eu connaissance d’un contact physique avec l’animal). Si la description des faits ne peut être obtenue auprès d’une personne fiable (ex. : jeune enfant ou personne intoxiquée), il faut chercher à savoir si des éléments de l’histoire laissent croire à un tel contact, comme des cris ou des pleurs soudains ou inhabituels ou bien une lésion cutanée compatible avec une morsure de chauve‑souris (plaie punctiforme comparable à la piqûre d’une aiguille hypodermique, d’un diamètre inférieur ou égal à 1 mm, peu ou pas douloureuse).

https://www.msss.gouv.qc.ca/professionnels/vaccination/piq-vaccins/rage-vaccin-contre-la-rage/

Translation of the bold section: PPE is not indicated in the absence of known physical contact (ex: a bat found in the house without knowledge of physical contact).

See also this triage chart:

https://www.msss.gouv.qc.ca/aide-decision-app/accueil.php?situation=Rage

[-] Glitterbomb@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Pardon my slight tangent, but I was under the assumption that French to English machine translations got a leg up compared to other language pairs specifically because the Canadian government tirelessly translates and releases all of its information in both languages. All this to say, shouldn't this be available in English too?

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Can't use machine translation for medical and legal documentation for obvious reasons.

[-] Glitterbomb@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Sorry, I meant the developers of machine translation tools took the readily available mountain of manually translated texts from the Canadian government to 'train' their tools.

[-] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Aaaaaah well this document is from the provincial ministry. I'm sure very similar ones exist in English from other provinces, but I knew where that one was, for reasons previously explained.

[-] Revan343@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago

The Federal government publishes everything in both languages, but the Quebec government probably doesn't

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
159 points (98.2% liked)

Canada

7273 readers
642 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS