US Ebola patient Thomas Duncan dies in hospital

[MW72]

An interesting article on the BBC web site for those still worried about flying.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29636355

There is too much hysteria going around. Yes it is a serious outbreak and it needs to be contained but there seems to be a bit too much panic and fear being spread around. Oxfam are talking about it being the biggest humanitarian disaster of this generation. They would say that wouldn't they? They want governments to give them as much money as possible to allow them to continue to do the good work that they do. Putting things in perspective though it is not quite the humanitarian disaster of this generation just yet. Almost 5,000 dead over a 10 month period. The 2004 boxing day tsunami killed around 250,000 in a few hours and perfectly preventable diseases and malnutrition are killing hundreds if not thousands every day.

[JDGRUEN]

An interesting article on the BBC web site for those still worried about flying.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29636355

There is too much hysteria going around. Yes it is a serious outbreak and it needs to be contained but there seems to be a bit too much panic and fear being spread around. Oxfam are talking about it being the biggest humanitarian disaster of this generation. They would say that wouldn't they? They want governments to give them as much money as possible to allow them to continue to do the good work that they do. Putting things in perspective though it is not quite the humanitarian disaster of this generation just yet. Almost 5,000 dead over a 10 month period. The 2004 boxing day tsunami killed around 250,000 in a few hours and perfectly preventable diseases and malnutrition are killing hundreds if not thousands every day.

I find it perplexing and puzzling that some interpret the actions and words of others in relation to the Ebola Epidemic in West Africa as panic and fear - when mostly what is being discussed is just trying to understand what is going on, what is happening, what is the extent of it, what can be done to prevent the spread of Ebola, Etc.

What is being discussed on these several Ebola TVF topic threads is simply Who, What, When, Where, Why, How and How Much - How Many. Which is entirely prudent and reasonable. Being Proactive instead of being Reactive is not panic and fear - it is acting out of wisdom and experience as done by the various members. What is being done on these Ebola threads is attempts to become educated so as to become more aware of what the situation is and what might happen next - all from learning about what is actually going on with the Ebola outbreaks and epidemics.

I suggest that you go back up this thread and read the post I made referencing reports from WHO - the World Health Organization ... and then look around at their entire web site ... What is found there - done by professionals of the subject matter does not reflect your nonchalant manner about Ebola.

[JDGRUEN]

Here is some information that shows just how much the U.K. is becoming concerned about the Ebola Epidemic in parts of Western Africa... Seems the current attitude there is not shared much by some here on this TVF thread...

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/768270-ebola-crisis-huge-disruption-expected-at-heathrow-as-screening-begins/page-3#entry8555761

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Well, I hope the deputy simply has the flu or ate something bad. If he has ebola, he has already come in contact with many people that day and days after. Now THAT worries the heck outta me.

I will download I am Legend to feed my paranoia.

"28 days later" is more scary.

[JDGRUEN]

Well, I hope the deputy simply has the flu or ate something bad. If he has ebola, he has already come in contact with many people that day and days after. Now THAT worries the heck outta me.

I will download I am Legend to feed my paranoia.

"28 days later" is more scary.

'28 days' How about up to 42 days...

WHO - World Health Organization... Ebola situation assessment - 14 October 2014...

Recent studies conducted in West Africa have demonstrated that 95% of confirmed cases have an incubation period in the range of 1 to 21 days; 98% have an incubation period that falls within the 1 to 42 day interval. WHO is therefore confident that detection of no new cases, with active surveillance in place, throughout this 42-day period means that an Ebola outbreak is indeed over.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/14-october-2014/en/

Edited October 19, 2014 by JDGRUEN

[MW72]

An interesting article on the BBC web site for those still worried about flying.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29636355

There is too much hysteria going around. Yes it is a serious outbreak and it needs to be contained but there seems to be a bit too much panic and fear being spread around. Oxfam are talking about it being the biggest humanitarian disaster of this generation. They would say that wouldn't they? They want governments to give them as much money as possible to allow them to continue to do the good work that they do. Putting things in perspective though it is not quite the humanitarian disaster of this generation just yet. Almost 5,000 dead over a 10 month period. The 2004 boxing day tsunami killed around 250,000 in a few hours and perfectly preventable diseases and malnutrition are killing hundreds if not thousands every day.

I find it perplexing and puzzling that some interpret the actions and words of others in relation to the Ebola Epidemic in West Africa as panic and fear - when mostly what is being discussed is just trying to understand what is going on, what is happening, what is the extent of it, what can be done to prevent the spread of Ebola, Etc.

What is being discussed on these several Ebola TVF topic threads is simply Who, What, When, Where, Why, How and How Much - How Many. Which is entirely prudent and reasonable. Being Proactive instead of being Reactive is not panic and fear - it is acting out of wisdom and experience as done by the various members. What is being done on these Ebola threads is attempts to become educated so as to become more aware of what the situation is and what might happen next - all from learning about what is actually going on with the Ebola outbreaks and epidemics.

I suggest that you go back up this thread and read the post I made referencing reports from WHO - the World Health Organization ... and then look around at their entire web site ... What is found there - done by professionals of the subject matter does not reflect your nonchalant manner about Ebola.

I apologise if my post insinuates that what is being posted on TVF is spreading panic and fear. I should have made it plain that I refer to sensational tabloid journalism or events like the guy in the US trying to board a plane in a haz mat suit. I am all for people sharing info and becoming more educated hence the link I posted. There was a post a few days back asking if people would feel safe flying so I am passing on some info that could allay any fears that some may have.

I believe that governments in the developed world are starting to take action on this only because of the huge public reaction (partly caused by ignorance and fear) and the fear of the disease spreading to their own countries. I don't believe for a minute that they are taking action to help prevent Africans dying. Just pointing out that thousands die every day of preventable things and our governments do nothing.

I don't mean to come across as being nonchalant. I'm just trying to provide a bit of perspective. There are a lot of things out there than can kill you. The question is, which ones have the highest risk? Ebola comes pretty low down on the scale.

Edited October 19, 2014 by MW72

[Chicog]

Don't apologise, it does need caution and management, just not panic and knee jerk reactions from point-scoring politicians and their gullible acolytes.

[bkkcanuck8]

Well, I hope the deputy simply has the flu or ate something bad. If he has ebola, he has already come in contact with many people that day and days after. Now THAT worries the heck outta me.

I will download I am Legend to feed my paranoia.

"28 days later" is more scary.

'28 days' How about up to 42 days...

WHO - World Health Organization... Ebola situation assessment - 14 October 2014...

Recent studies conducted in West Africa have demonstrated that 95% of confirmed cases have an incubation period in the range of 1 to 21 days; 98% have an incubation period that falls within the 1 to 42 day interval. WHO is therefore confident that detection of no new cases, with active surveillance in place, throughout this 42-day period means that an Ebola outbreak is indeed over.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/14-october-2014/en/

42 days is the number that they use to determine if a country is ebola free (2 x estimated incubation period maximum). The standard is to use 2x maximum incubation period because of potential hidden vectors.

Don't know if they specify the incubation period based on a 95% bell curve or not (and thus the estimate of 2 - 21 days). I do know that they recommend ebola survivors use condoms when having sex for 3 months I believe.

[MJP]

Ebola crisis: Spanish nurse tests negative for virus

The Spanish nurse who became the first person to contract Ebola outside West Africa has now tested negative for the virus, the Spanish government says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29683616

Hooray!!! Good news.

[bkkcanuck8]

That only leaves the US as the only western country affected (that I know of).

Although expect the number of "suspected" cases to rise during flu season as people panic..... (flu season usually kills between 3,000 and 49,000 people annually in the US).

[MJP]

That only leaves the US as the only western country affected (that I know of).

Although expect the number of "suspected" cases to rise during flu season as people panic..... (flu season usually kills between 3,000 and 49,000 people annually in the US).

That's quite a spread there.

[bkkcanuck8]

Depends on the dominant strain during the flu season - how recent was the last occurance of that one etc.

[MJP]

Depends on the dominant strain during the flu season - how recent was the last occurance of that one etc.

I get an annual flu jab. All is does is make me ill.

[hawker9000]

I see the advent of flu season as a real problem. And not just in the U.S. Flu season is something public-facing medical staff understand and have endless experience with. But what happens when these folks, in everything from small, local neighborhood clinics to large metro hospitals, now suddenly have to work with the possibility that every flu patient complaining of headache & fever, typical flu symptoms, is an Ebola candidate? What happens when the media gets hold of reports of EITHER Ebola victims being sent home with an aspirin OR flu victims sent into quarantine because they'd traveled, or knew someone who'd traveled, or was related to someone who traveled, or to a caregiver somewhere, or was on the same bus or airplane with, or.......??? And sitting at home how much information can we expect federal authorities to truthfully share?

And what happens in airports when screeners, who as I understand it aren't really medical professionals of any description, begin commonly encountering these flu carriers? Will it all come down to what anybody who happens to have a fever says during an interview by when of these people who're more than anything else just following a script?

[bkkcanuck8]

^ If you have visited African nations were the ebola is active (10+ cases) in the last month (or there are local cases of ebola) - assume it is ebola until there is a proven otherwise.

Otherwise it is the flu (especially if they are sneezing/coughing which are not symptoms of ebola).

What I am worried about mostly is people swamping emergency medical services for a few flu symptoms....

I was reading of cases in the US where people that had visited Africa more than 42 days ago, in countries 1000 km+ away from the epidemic.... have shown up at emergency afraid it is ebola....

Edited October 19, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[Scott]

Is there a reasonably easy test for determining either Ebola or the antibodies for Ebola?

How long does it take to confirm whether someone has Ebola?

[bkkcanuck8]

I have not seen the speed at which a test can be run, currently it is done through laboratory testing - which may or may not be inhouse at the hospital. I have read that the test takes 48 - 72 hours to complete.

There is however an experimental machine that is almost instantaneous (10 minutes or so) that the Dallas Hospital had but it apparently is not allowed to be used for diagnosis (only experimental use) (FDA - legal issues) Don't know why they don't use it for initial testing and still do the laboratory testing - but I am not the FDA

Not sure this is the same equipment as in this story.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/10/14/colorado-test-for-ebola-could-speed-up-diagnosis-to-10-minutes/

Edited October 19, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[JDGRUEN]

Is there a reasonably easy test for determining either Ebola or the antibodies for Ebola?

How long does it take to confirm whether someone has Ebola?

World Health Organization

WHO recommendations for testing for Ebola virus disease and confirming a case

WHO is alarmed by media reports of suspected Ebola cases imported into new countries that are said, by government officials or ministries of health, to be discarded as “negative” within hours after the suspected case enters the country. Such rapid determination of infection status is impossible, casting grave doubts on some of the official information that is being communicated to the public and the media.

• For early detection of Ebola virus in suspected or probable cases, detection of viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) or viral antigen are the recommended tests.

• Laboratory-confirmed cases must test positive for the presence of the Ebola virus, either by detection of viral RNA by RT-PCR, and/or by detection of Ebola antigen by a specific Antigen detection test, and/or by detection of immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies directed against Ebola.

• Two negative RT-PCR test results, at least 48 hours apart, are required for a clinically asymptomatic patient to be discharged from hospital, or for a suspected Ebola case to be discarded as testing negative for the virus.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/ebola/14-october-2014/en/

(This is more than a few lines posted but WHO's publications are meant for public use on such an important subject)

Edited October 20, 2014 by JDGRUEN

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

[attrayant]

Ebola crisis: Spanish nurse tests negative for virus

The Spanish nurse who became the first person to contract Ebola outside West Africa has now tested negative for the virus, the Spanish government says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29683616

Hooray!!! Good news.

That's great. Now we can get on with apparently less pressing matters:

Source

[hawker9000]

Ebola crisis: Spanish nurse tests negative for virus

The Spanish nurse who became the first person to contract Ebola outside West Africa has now tested negative for the virus, the Spanish government says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29683616

Hooray!!! Good news.

That's great. Now we can get on with apparently less pressing matters:

Source

'Wonder if the average "man in the street" in Monrovia, say, shares your priorities...

See, the whole point of the thing is to sort o' try & prevent what's going on right now in three, no doubt relatively obscure to you, West African nations, from going on all over the world... One doesn't want to be looking at a chart like the above in 2020 showing Ebola with a big fat 'M' next to it on that vertical axis. Should we just "let nature take its course", chill out, & wait until 2020 to get concerned? Maybe Ebola will be more "pressing" by then.

[JDGRUEN]

Ebola crisis: Spanish nurse tests negative for virus

The Spanish nurse who became the first person to contract Ebola outside West Africa has now tested negative for the virus, the Spanish government says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29683616

Hooray!!! Good news.

That's great. Now we can get on with apparently less pressing matters:

Source

'Wonder if the average "man in the street" in Monrovia, say, shares your priorities...

See, the whole point of the thing is to sort o' try & prevent what's going on right now in three, no doubt relatively obscure to you, West African nations, from going on all over the world... One doesn't want to be looking at a chart like the above in 2020 showing Ebola with a big fat 'M' next to it on that vertical axis. Should we just "let nature take its course", chill out, & wait until 2020 to get concerned? Maybe Ebola will be more "pressing" by then.

The article referred to above says the Nurse in Spain was CURED and now tests Ebola free... not that she didn't have in the first place - which she did.

[Asiantravel]

Ebola crisis: Spanish nurse tests negative for virus

The Spanish nurse who became the first person to contract Ebola outside West Africa has now tested negative for the virus, the Spanish government says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29683616

Hooray!!! Good news.

That's great. Now we can get on with apparently less pressing matters:

Source

'Wonder if the average "man in the street" in Monrovia, say, shares your priorities...

See, the whole point of the thing is to sort o' try & prevent what's going on right now in three, no doubt relatively obscure to you, West African nations, from going on all over the world... One doesn't want to be looking at a chart like the above in 2020 showing Ebola with a big fat 'M' next to it on that vertical axis. Should we just "let nature take its course", chill out, & wait until 2020 to get concerned? Maybe Ebola will be more "pressing" by then.

" 'Wonder if the average "man in the street" in Monrovia, say, shares your priorities..."

If he doesn't...........maybe he should....................... (based on the concerns of some experts)

"I see the reasons to dampen down public fears," Russell said. "But scientifically, we're in the middle of the first experiment of multiple, serial passages of Ebola virus in man.... God knows what this virus is going to look like. I don't."

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ebola-questions-20141007-story.html#page=1

[bkkcanuck8]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus (SARS, MERS) mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

Edited October 21, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[hawker9000]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

"The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others."

The 70% mortality rate might have something to do with it as well...

[bkkcanuck8]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

"The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others."

The 70% mortality rate might have something to do with it as well...

How dangerous a virus (to someone not infected) is is a combination of the likelihood of contracting it along with it's mortality. Avoiding contact with those that are not visibly sick with ebola and the likelihood goes way down as such it is much less dangerous than SARS (mortality rate of 20%). In addition based on treatment in a western country (limited cases) the mortality of ebola is running at closer to that of SARS.

Although it is still early, it also looks as though transfusion of plasma (blood antibodies) from someone infected (requires blood type matching - which Duncan unfortunately did not match at this early stage) has an affect on lowering the mortality rate.

Edited October 21, 2014 by bkkcanuck8

[hawker9000]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

"The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others."

The 70% mortality rate might have something to do with it as well...

How dangerous a virus (to someone not infected) is is a combination of the likelihood of contracting it along with it's mortality. Avoiding contact with those that are not visibly sick with ebola and the likelihood goes way down as such it is much less dangerous than SARS (mortality rate of 20%). In addition based on treatment in a western country (limited cases) the mortality of ebola is running at closer to that of SARS.

Although it is still early, it also looks as though transfusion of plasma (blood antibodies) from someone infected (requires blood type matching - which Duncan unfortunately did not match at this early stage) has an affect on lowering the mortality rate.

You're talking about two different things and mixing them up. Fear OF a disease, its symptoms & mortality rate, is one thing. Fear of GETTING a disease (exposure) is another. I'm much more afraid of not surviving Ebola if I get it, than I am (at the moment) of actually getting it. I can't apparently do much about the one, but want to continue to be able to control my risk WRT the other.

[ukrules]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus (SARS, MERS) mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

This type of mutation is not likely, not any time soon anyway. Ebola will have existed in one form or another for millennia, most likely undetected in animals which it doesn't kill, like bats.

Bats are the usual culprit for the most deadly viruses known to man : Ebola, Rabies, Marburg and SARS are all linked to bats which seem to be able to handle the virus and live with it, bats appear to be the natural reservoir for Ebola.

In all of medical history to date there has never been a virus which has changed the way it's transmitted that we know of while we've known about it. I suspect changes like this would take many rare and successful mutations over tens of thousands of years so they will happen as everything changes over huge periods of time.

We're talking about massive evolutionary changes over a similarly massive timescale. Not a tiny mutation between one person and another - to think that this could happen in a few years is laughable.

[hawker9000]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus (SARS, MERS) mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

This type of mutation is not likely, not any time soon anyway. Ebola will have existed in one form or another for millennia, most likely undetected in animals which it doesn't kill, like bats.

Bats are the usual culprit for the most deadly viruses known to man : Ebola, Rabies, Marburg and SARS are all linked to bats which seem to be able to handle the virus and live with it, bats appear to be the natural reservoir for Ebola.

In all of medical history to date there has never been a virus which has changed the way it's transmitted that we know of while we've known about it. I suspect changes like this would take many rare and successful mutations over tens of thousands of years so they will happen as everything changes over huge periods of time.

We're talking about massive evolutionary changes over a similarly massive timescale. Not a tiny mutation between one person and another - to think that this could happen in a few years is laughable.

Emm, if that's true, why do I have to get a new flu shot every year?

[ukrules]

The likelihood of ebola mutating into an airborne strain is much less than the risk of a flu virus or coronavirus (SARS, MERS) mutating into something with a much higher mortality rate. There are scientists that worry about that on an ongoing basis, so having scientists worrying about ebola mutating - is not a surprise.

The symptoms of ebola are something out of nightmares many people have (visually) which is probably why people are more likely to panic than with the others.

This type of mutation is not likely, not any time soon anyway. Ebola will have existed in one form or another for millennia, most likely undetected in animals which it doesn't kill, like bats.

Bats are the usual culprit for the most deadly viruses known to man : Ebola, Rabies, Marburg and SARS are all linked to bats which seem to be able to handle the virus and live with it, bats appear to be the natural reservoir for Ebola.

In all of medical history to date there has never been a virus which has changed the way it's transmitted that we know of while we've known about it. I suspect changes like this would take many rare and successful mutations over tens of thousands of years so they will happen as everything changes over huge periods of time.

We're talking about massive evolutionary changes over a similarly massive timescale. Not a tiny mutation between one person and another - to think that this could happen in a few years is laughable.

Emm, if that's true, why do I have to get a new flu shot every year?

That's a good question because this year there is no difference in 'the flu shot'. The content of the vaccine (flu shots) for the 2014/2015 flu season is identical to the 2013/2014 flu season vaccine which many people had last year.

The WHO made this decision back in February. This is not not normally the case but it is this year and there's no change to the vaccine.

Draw your own conclusions as to why you 'need' the same shot this year as last year.

A small change in a virus can happen all the time and like I said we have never observed any virus change it's method of infection, not since we've been looking at viruses (some 100 years) - this is because such a change would require an evolutionary jump which is lots and lots of subsequent mutations over time.