クルーズ船「ダイヤモンド・プリンセス」から下船した米国市民が、チャーター機で帰国した中に新型コロナウイルスの陽性が14人いたことで、米国トランプ大統領が激怒したそうです。
下船時に、検査結果が陰性だったのか？症状はあったのか？情報錯綜しています。すこし感情的なコメントもあるよう。
どういう経緯だったのか、気になったので調べてみた。😊
簡単に３行で書くと。
- 下船までに、後に感染が確認された米国人に、陽性あるいは陰性の検査結果は出ていない。
- 下船する時に、全員が、米国政府が派遣した医師たちによって、発熱その他の症状が無いことが確認されている。
- 下船した後の、移動中のバスの中で、日本政府からの陽性という結果を受け取った。下船時に症状は無かった。
米国政府から、クルーズ船「ダイヤモンド・プリンセス」の米国市民の本国送還に関する上級管理職３人(*1)へのインタビュー（特別説明会）の内容が公開されています。
アメリカ政府は今月17日、「ダイヤモンド・プリンセス」に乗っていたアメリカ人乗客のうち、300人以上をチャーター機で帰国させましたが、このうち14人については、下船して羽田空港行きのバスに乗ったあとに新型コロナウイルスへの感染が知らされ、国務省は、機内で隔離することで、ほかの乗客への感染を防ぐことができると判断し、帰国させることにしたとしています。
【新型コロナウイルス】 クルーズ船から下船した米国人１８人で陽性を確認 - CDC （追記 2/24） - pelicanmemo
Ads by Google
www.state.gov
（注：記事中の人数に微妙に違う部分がある。勘違いだろう。末尾で修正がされている）
米国国務省 医療局のDr.ウィリアム・ウォーカーズ (William Walters)(*)らによると、
クルーズ船から下船する時に、すべての米国市民は、米国政府の医師と看護師と上級看護師(NP)による評価を受けています。その際に、新型コロナウイルスの陽性が混じっているとは認められなかった。
下船した後は、日本政府が用意したバス10台で羽田空港へ移動（博士の話では約15台）。
その移動中に、日本政府から陽性の結果を受け取った。感染者たちも、下船時に、発熱や咳、下気道感染症や身体の痛みなど、ウイルスに感染していると判断できる兆候は無かった。
（coronavirus-positive but asymptomatic with no symptoms of diseaseという表現を使っている。（引用していない部分））
陽性の結果が出た乗客たちは、２〜３日前に検体が採取され、検査結果を待っていた。
もし４時間前、下船する前に検査結果を受け取っていたなら、他の感染者と同じように対応されていた（日本の病院へ入院していた）だろう。しかしすでに輸送計画が進行中で、次に行うことは隔離措置だった。
ロバート・カドレック 米国保健福祉省（HHS）危機管理担当次官補(**)へ、輸送計画を実行するか問い合わせたところ、答えはイエス。
トランプ大統領が、オレに事前の相談が無かったと激怒。←いまここ。😔
(*)Dr. William Walters, Executive Director and Managing Director for Operational Medicine for the Bureau of Medical Services at the U.S. Department of State;
(**)Robert Kadlec, Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services (Preparedness and Response
When – the way this unfolded, we had – every one of the evacuees had been evaluated by a medical officer, or a nurse, or nurse practitioner from the U.S. Government prior to disembarking from the ship. There were no known coronavirus-positive personnel mixed into that evacuee population. So we had a group of people, in this case 338 [2], that had – that were – there was no reason to believe they had a positive lab test, and they had been evaluated, and they did not have any symptoms of disease.
We disembarked them from the ship. When they left that ship into the evacuation process that was being managed by the government, they were an evacuee. They were in the process. They were loaded onto buses, and those – roughly 15 buses, and those buses were moved as a package, escorted by Japanese security and police. And it was only once they were loaded onto the buses, and the buses were in motion that we were made aware that these positive results had come back from the Government of Japan.
But at the end of the day, when we received the results, these people were already on a bus, and they were already in the pipeline, and the next step was to move them to an isolation area. And frankly, once they were in the isolation area, it was safest to keep them in the isolation area and complete the evacuation.
(*1)Dr. Robert Kadlec, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services;
Dr. William Walters, Executive Director and Managing Director for Operational Medicine for the Bureau of Medical Services at the U.S. Department of State; and
Carl Risch, Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Consular Affairs at the Department of State.
あとは、米国政府内の手続きの話とか、そのほか、クルーズ船「ウエステルダム（Westerdam）」の方の米国市民の話とか、いろいろ。
When the bus – and it was a direct line. When the buses arrived at the aircraft, those people that were identified during that process as being coronavirus-positive but asymptomatic with no symptoms of disease were taken off the bus, were moved onto the aircraft into that dedicated isolation area, which was the safest place for them to get them away from the rest of the passengers and give us time to make some decisions.
I contacted Assistant Secretary Kadlec. We had a conversation, and the conversation was this: We have a protocol that we have used on all preceding flights for passengers that develop symptoms – or, in this case, new information – that put them at a higher risk. And that protocol is to move them to the isolation area for the remainder of the evacuation.
Then the question was simply this: Are these evacuees? And do we follow our protocol? And the answer to that was yes on both accounts. Yes, these are evacuees. We have taken – we have put them into the evacuation pipeline, we have a plan. Should we execute the plan? And the answer was yes.
And so they were put into the isolation area to give room for decision-making, and then they were kept in the isolation area because they fit the profile of the people that go into that isolation area, and in the isolation area they pose no additional risk to passengers or crew.
Dr. Kadlec, I don’t know if you have anything to add.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY KADLEC: Yeah, I just want to add one thing. Because of the extraordinary nature and the uncertainty associated with both the virus and this particular group, or cohort, particularly for their age and pre-existing medical diseases, ASPR supplemented the State medical team with two infectious disease doctors, one from the University of Nebraska, one from Mass General Hospital in Boston, who were very experienced in managing not only SARS virus cases during the 2003 outbreak, but also the Ebola cases that – there have been several since.
So we had additional expertise and experienced eyes on these people and monitoring through the flight, not only during the flight, but evaluated them on the boat, and then basically monitored them through the flight. So we felt like we had very experienced hands in evaluating and caring for these patients.
