ebola

[hardincap]

I agree with you and hope you don't feel singled out by my comments. I just meant that people here are starting to sound panicky about the spread of Ebola -- especially since it is not an airborne disease.

 

per cdc:

"if a symptomatic patient with Ebola coughs or sneezes on someone, and saliva or mucus come into contact with that person’s eyes, nose or mouth, these fluids may transmit the disease"

[nodnub]

Most concerns in media are overblown,  but it does seem the index case in Texas was grossly mismanaged. 

 

76 hospital staff had contact with him.  That seems irresponsible from a containment and planning perspective. Why not have a dedicated staff and equip and train them properly?    I predict workers comp lawsuits over this Texas incident.

 

Apparently they also sent his blood samples without additional sealing through the hospital pneumatic tube system, potentially contaminating that as well, and the exterior of every sample that goes through that system. 

 

[merkhet]

I agree with you and hope you don't feel singled out by my comments. I just meant that people here are starting to sound panicky about the spread of Ebola -- especially since it is not an airborne disease.

 

per cdc:

"if a symptomatic patient with Ebola coughs or sneezes on someone, and saliva or mucus come into contact with that person’s eyes, nose or mouth, these fluids may transmit the disease"

 

That is not what it means to be airborne. The Ebola would be living in the fluid droplets and not the air itself. That's a big difference in terms of transmission.

 

Also, your chances of coming into contact with a symptomatic Ebola patient are slim assuming you're not medical worker.

[yadayada]

if you have ebola, how many ebola parts do you have? So if you take like one drop of blood or saliva, what are the odds ebola is in it?

[hardincap]

I agree with you and hope you don't feel singled out by my comments. I just meant that people here are starting to sound panicky about the spread of Ebola -- especially since it is not an airborne disease.

 

per cdc:

"if a symptomatic patient with Ebola coughs or sneezes on someone, and saliva or mucus come into contact with that person’s eyes, nose or mouth, these fluids may transmit the disease"

 

That is not what it means to be airborne. The Ebola would be living in the fluid droplets and not the air itself. That's a big difference in terms of transmission.

 

Also, your chances of coming into contact with a symptomatic Ebola patient are slim assuming you're not medical worker.

 

If someone with ebola sneezes next to you, you have a real chance of becoming infected. That is not a controversial statement. That warrants significant precaution. And maybe a minor panic isn't such a bad idea, if it means we do a better job containing the virus.

[ERICOPOLY]

if you have ebola, how many ebola parts do you have? So if you take like one drop of blood or saliva, what are the odds ebola is in it?

 

There are literally billions of ebola virus particles in a single drop of blood. 

[Fat Pitch]

Apparently Ebola can be spread around via the air http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7547435#

[merkhet]

If someone with ebola sneezes next to you, you have a real chance of becoming infected. That is not a controversial statement. That warrants significant precaution. And maybe a minor panic isn't such a bad idea, if it means we do a better job containing the virus.

 

It is, in fact, a pretty controversial statement because of the things that you have inadvertently left out:

 

(1) It is unlikely that a person who is symptomatic with ebola is next to you. This is because people with 102+ degree fevers who are vomiting everywhere probably aren't on public transport and/or taking a nice little jaunt to the mall. They are at home. Vomiting.

 

(2) Asymptomatic ebola infections do occur, but they occur because the levels of ebola in their system aren't quite high enough to make them feverish and vomiting. As a result, it is unlikely that asymptomatic person is going to end up getting anyone sick -- maybe if you have an asymptomatic person who happens to also have the flu. I suppose that's possible though it has a low probability.

 

(3) Try not to let anyone cough or sneeze directly into your mouth. Especially if you have just seen them vomit next to you.

 

Apparently Ebola can be spread around via the air http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7547435#

 

The problem with that study is that it's literally a lab environment where the monkeys were enclosed with the aerosol for over 10 minutes. This is different than an airplane because the airplane is not a lab environment -- it is more hazardous and/or less sterile. This is actually more important than most people realize.

 

At the end of the day, if ebola was transmittable by air, we would see a much higher rate of infection on par with something like the flu. The fact that we don't see that is pretty damn conclusive for me.

[Ross812]

but if you sneeze the virus could be in your saliva right? And your basicly catapulting the saliva potentially in someone elses mouth? Or are the drops too small to carry the virus.

 

I believe the virus cant live for too long once outside a host. But, in an Airplane, every body is close to each other and air conditioning. Who knows.

 

BTW, the way we are discussing is how panic starts.

 

Ebola has been studied at length since the 80's. They know quite well how it is spread and it is extremely virulent, i.e. takes very little virus to cause an infection, but is only extremely contagious during the latter part an infection. Someone in the latter stages of the virus is shedding tremendous amounts of the virus through bodily fluids.  It primarily is spread to family members and healthcare workers who take care of someone suffering from the virus or to people who incorrectly handle a corpse.

 

They study the virus with monkeys who stay in cages next to each other and they purposely have to infect the monkeys. They don't pass it from sneezing or throwing crap around.

 

Two cases is hardly alarming. The CDC has had to isolate hanta virus which is just as scary.

[rkbabang]

merkhet, I dont understand why you're getting so defensive about this. your points are such exaggerations they don't warrant responding to.

 

i agree its nowhere near a flu in terms of its ability to spread, but its not a bad idea to be overcautious about a virus that has a 70% death rate.

 

70% death rate in Africa where the healthcare is inadequate. No one knows what the death rate will be in the US if a large number of cases appear.  Hopefully we don't need to find out, but I suspect it would be less than 70%.

 

[Vish_ram]

I'm more worried about Asian countries that have much higher population densities and poor hygiene (India in particular). Its a question of time before it turns up in places like New Delhi and others. They need to contain it in Africa first.

 

Hope we find a cure fast enough.

[rkbabang]

I'm more worried about Asian countries that have much higher population densities and poor hygiene (India in particular). Its a question of time before it turns up in places like New Delhi and others. They need to contain it in Africa first.

 

Hope we find a cure fast enough.

 

Yes India is like the worse case scenario.  Huge population with poor healthcare facilities.  That is scary as hell.

 

Coincidentally I just checked my email and saw a spam message which said "Read this or your family might die!", nothing like spreading fear to sell a $7 book.  Hopefully no one here orders this and supports this guy, otherwise I'd feel terrible about posting it, but the pitch is a funny read.

 

https://3percenterreport.com/landing/reports/ebola-guide/index.php

 

 

[yadayada]

haha all these scammy pages that try to pander some self help guide have the same layout and style.

[Palantir]

Yeah, Ebola is not an airborne disease, and is only spread through contact with bodily fluids. The people who are usually in trouble are healthcare workers and caregivers. Saliva doesn't have a high viral load, so I personally would not worry.

[merkhet]

merkhet, I dont understand why you're getting so defensive about this. your points are such exaggerations they don't warrant responding to.

 

i agree its nowhere near a flu in terms of its ability to spread, but its not a bad idea to be overcautious about a virus that has a 70% death rate.

 

70% death rate in Africa where the healthcare is inadequate. No one knows what the death rate will be in the US if a large number of cases appear.  Hopefully we don't need to find out, but I suspect it would be less than 70%.

 

hardincap, what happened to your post?

 

The fact of the matter remains that it's pretty unlikely and/or difficult to get infected with Ebola if you're not a healthcare worker in direct contact with an Ebola patient. (And even then, I suspect that someone missed a checklist item at that hospital which is why two nurses have now been infected.)

 

When you say stuff like "If someone with ebola sneezes next to you, you have a real chance of becoming infected," it's pretty close to saying "If you buy a winning lottery ticket, you have a real chance of becoming a millionaire."  Well... I suppose so, but the pre-conditions and/or assumptions that you are using have to be seen in the context of the full universe of possibilities.

 

I don't know why you think I'm "getting so defensive about this." I am trying to inject some rationality into a discussion where rationality seems to be extremely lacking. If you want to call that "getting defensive," then by all means, please go ahead.

[Palantir]

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the US with this.  One thing I saw said that 15-30% of Africans might have an immunity to this due to the fruit they eat, or through secondary contact with animals there.  That is their body has had a very small exposure that they developed antibodies against. 

 

This is not true.  Ebola has been a very rare illness, what you are thinking of is Malaria.

[yadayada]

how easily can some isis maniac get ebola and break into water supply?

[cobafdek]

At the end of the day, if ebola was transmittable by air, we would see a much higher rate of infection on par with something like the flu. The fact that we don't see that is pretty damn conclusive for me.

 

Probably correct, but the wild card is viral mutation.

 

There is a "dumb virus" theory held by some virologists.  A virus with a case-fatality rate of 90-100%, while extremely virulent, is also dumb in the sense that if it kills off all its early hosts, it diminishes its chance of spreading.  The Ebola virus was discovered in the 1970s and was observed to have those case-fatality rates.  Around 2006, a new strain was found in Uganda in the Bundibugyo district, hence called the Ebola-Bundibugyo variant.  It had a case-fatality rate of 30-40%.  Another different strain was identified in the Sudan, with an 50% rate.  Both of these rates are extremely high, but what's important to note is that it is also much lower than previous strains.  One hypothesis is that the viral RNA underwent a successful mutation that allowed easier transmission and/or better host survivability.  This is one consideration that has the experts worried.

 

On the other hand, a mutation enabling airborne transmission is still probably unlikely.  Here's a good article by an MD (although it is from that well-known medical journal called Forbes):

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottgottlieb/2014/09/03/can-ebola-go-airborne/

 

Stay tuned.

 

 

 

 

[Ross812]

how easily can some isis maniac get ebola and break into water supply?

 

Super easy! and they will dechlorinate all the water! and add enough virus to be virulent when diluted millions of times! and the virus will mutate and people will happen to get infected through ingestion!

[merkhet]

Viral mutation is less of a wild card than the media makes it out to be -- the article cobafdek linked to makes a very good point about that:

 

Of the 23 known viruses that cause serious disease in man, none are known to have mutated in ways that changed how they infect humans.

 

Our air is really quite good for us as a species, but it's pretty terrible for whole swaths of other organisms out there. A lot of organisms find our air kind of toxic.

[yadayada]

how easily can some isis maniac get ebola and break into water supply?

 

Super easy! and they will dechlorinate all the water! and add enough virus to be virulent when diluted millions of times! and the virus will mutate and people will happen to get infected through ingestion!

I guess i stick to drinking beer then

[hardincap]

merkhet, I dont understand why you're getting so defensive about this. your points are such exaggerations they don't warrant responding to.

 

i agree its nowhere near a flu in terms of its ability to spread, but its not a bad idea to be overcautious about a virus that has a 70% death rate.

 

70% death rate in Africa where the healthcare is inadequate. No one knows what the death rate will be in the US if a large number of cases appear.  Hopefully we don't need to find out, but I suspect it would be less than 70%.

 

hardincap, what happened to your post?

 

The fact of the matter remains that it's pretty unlikely and/or difficult to get infected with Ebola if you're not a healthcare worker in direct contact with an Ebola patient. (And even then, I suspect that someone missed a checklist item at that hospital which is why two nurses have now been infected.)

 

When you say stuff like "If someone with ebola sneezes next to you, you have a real chance of becoming infected," it's pretty close to saying "If you buy a winning lottery ticket, you have a real chance of becoming a millionaire."  Well... I suppose so, but the pre-conditions and/or assumptions that you are using have to be seen in the context of the full universe of possibilities.

 

I don't know why you think I'm "getting so defensive about this." I am trying to inject some rationality into a discussion where rationality seems to be extremely lacking. If you want to call that "getting defensive," then by all means, please go ahead.

 

deleted it. socializing over this topic is certainly entertaining, but not very profitable :P. how about them gm shares?

[Parsad]

I agree with you and hope you don't feel singled out by my comments. I just meant that people here are starting to sound panicky about the spread of Ebola -- especially since it is not an airborne disease.

 

per cdc:

"if a symptomatic patient with Ebola coughs or sneezes on someone, and saliva or mucus come into contact with that person’s eyes, nose or mouth, these fluids may transmit the disease"

 

That is not what it means to be airborne. The Ebola would be living in the fluid droplets and not the air itself. That's a big difference in terms of transmission.

 

Also, your chances of coming into contact with a symptomatic Ebola patient are slim assuming you're not medical worker.

 

If someone with ebola sneezes next to you, you have a real chance of becoming infected. That is not a controversial statement. That warrants significant precaution. And maybe a minor panic isn't such a bad idea, if it means we do a better job containing the virus.

 

I would agree with that sentiment.  The fact that most governments have taken a completely lackadaisical view of it till this point, is why it has become the worst case of Ebola infection in history.  They should be pouring all the resources they can to put the fire out now!  Otherwise, this gets a lot worse over the next three to five years.  Cheers! 

[Kiltacular]

"Frontline"  @ www.pbs.org ...recently aired a decently interesting episode on Ebola.