Delete

[tankstaah]

..

 

[Clean7795]

Are you licking up the CSF from the floor or something? Wear gloves, don't put it in your mouth, and you'll be fine.

 

[guytakingboards]

The incidences are so low and if you practice proper barrier precautions the risks are even lower. I dunno the exact percentages but at some point you're talking chance of getting struck by lightning or contracting HIV from a random needle stick.

I've done at least two CJD taps in the last couple of years and the keys are technique and a sedated patient.

If you're really worried about the contamination stuff, stop putting your bag in the work room next door and wear booties in the area. Is there even evidence to suggest disease transmission from random environmental contact?

 

[Clean7795]

lol see this is the general consensus from the way people behave, but the literature seems way more concerning. Doesn’t it?

Are you a radiologist/rad resident?

 

[Clean7795]

Yes.

Prions exist in the soil anywhere it is endemic, which probably includes where you are considering you see a greater than normal number of cases. A bit of CSF on the floor is no different.

The fact that you're taking precautions at work means that you're much less likely to contract it there than by 'sporadic' causes.

Anecdotally the docs who did their LPs without gloves or any other PPE back in the day are still walking around now. If there is a risk at work, it's unlikely to be any different from the background risk of exposure to prions in the environment.

 

[MadRadLad]

This is a good example of statistical significance vs clinical significance.

In theory yes it's an issue. In practicality there are probably 1000+ ways you're more likely to be harmed before prions are an issue.

 

[Ho0v-man]

Are you going to stop doing your job because of this “risk”?

If the area you live has a technically but not significantly increased risk of being struck by lightning, are you just going to stop going outside?

 

[Ho0v-man]

You’re right. And no I love my job and am “reasonable” enough to never do something like that. But it would be nice to not worry about this so that’s why I’m trying to get a better understanding of the risk.

I get that. But you’ve cited data in the OP and basically don’t believe it. So I’m sure you’ve looked at more than just those and are also still unsatisfied.

It seems like if you’re presented with data that is reassuring you probably won’t care and if you get data that confirms or is even worse than your deepest fears then you’ll be even more anxious. And neither result will change what you ultimately do.

Pretty sure you’re the one who’s asked this a bunch recently on Reddit, too. I don’t think you’re ever going to get answer you’ll like.