Ebola virus outbreak

nyarlothothep

ScumLord wrote: »

No but you're at the other extreme promoting worst case and extreme scenarios. Just because it's possible for this virus to survive for a long time under controlled lab conditions doesn't mean it can survive for anything close to those times in the variable conditions of the real world.

Your also highlighting what would be seen as poor hygiene locally as a method of transfer for a disease that is thousands of miles away from ireland. Whereas it's next to nonexistent hygiene that allows it to spread in Africa.

The fact this disease is running rampant in African countries does not mean it will be able to do the same thing in Ireland. They're two very different environments.

If ebola can make it too this country we can begin to panic, but we've already combated disease here on a national level and we won. In many ways Ireland's small population makes it much easier for us to combat these things.

It could definitely reach Ireland, you're right that its small population size will help immeasurably but I would say it's 50/50. There is a 50% chance it will reach the UK by the end of this month, note this month! That's not an isolated individual being treated, but an infectious person potentially spreading it to others. It's literally heads or tails. It will reach France, 75% probability, unless the French government responds proactively, I haven't seen anything being done lately though, unbelievably.

littlemac1980

realweirdo wrote: »

This is just laughable. The west african counties have similar populations to Ireland but far less movement around. We have highly developed infrastructure. You can travel anywhere in 3 hours and so can Ebola. Not to mention flights all over Europe. In addition to connections to west africa.

In my view its only a matter of time before its in Ireland. We can either hope it doesn't get here, or we can start seriously preparing which includes training hospital workers and setting up isolated units now.

You're wasting your time Realweirdo - there are people on here who have decided for whatever reason that Ebola isn't a threat and they won't change their minds until their next-door neighbour drops dead on their lawn.

It really a matter of probability and mathematics. I suspect that most of the people who recognise the threat this disease poses were honors maths students in school or have a natural aptitude for maths. I don't mean to say that with the intention of insulting anyone. But I think an ability to rationalise this situation quickly in your head in terms of numbers and probabilities makes it much easier to understand the potential for it getting totally out of control.

I've taken to just updating this thread with the most recent reports from reputable news sources - and let people decide for themselves what to make of them. When someone jumps in and says its not a threat - or its not contagious - or it should be compared with HIV, malaria or the flu - I just chose to ignore those comments. You can't convince someone of something simple that they can't appreciate by themselves anyway.

In relation to this Countries own efforts to prepare - I think the task is equally futile. This Country couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery, it a waste of energy suggesting we should do anything as a nation to prepare for whats potentially going to happen if the Ebola problem becomes a European or Global problem. We could have a paint-by-numbers procedure sent to us from Germany from their top engineers and medical specialists and we'd still mess up implementing it.

My own focus has shifted to deciding what I will do to prepare for the situation where Ebola arrives in Ireland, that seems to be the logical next step in terms of preparation. Forget the idea that our HSE and government could ever do anything to prevent its spread. They'd be well meaning enough - but sure you'd have to be fairly certain they'd only do something to make things worse.

ceadaoin.

ScumLord wrote: »

No but you're at the other extreme promoting worst case and extreme scenarios. Just because it's possible for this virus to survive for a long time under controlled lab conditions doesn't mean it can survive for anything close to those times in the variable conditions of the real world.

Your also highlighting what would be seen as poor hygiene locally as a method of transfer for a disease that is thousands of miles away from ireland. Whereas it's next to nonexistent hygiene that allows it to spread in Africa.

The fact this disease is running rampant in African countries does not mean it will be able to do the same thing in Ireland. They're two very different environments.

If ebola can make it too this country we can begin to panic, but we've already combated disease here on a national level and we won. In many ways Ireland's small population makes it much easier for us to combat these things.

I don't think I'm 'promoting' worse case scenario. I'm just of the opinion that it's best to be aware of all the facts and possibilities rather than burying your head in the sand.

I feel that your posts actually put forward some good arguments as to why ebola isn't that much of a threat to the West and Ireland in particular. You have obviously done some research and come to that conclusion. Some people think that our hospitals are fabulous pristine zones where no disease ever spreads and just blindly quote that there is no risk. I think the poor management of the cases outside Africa so far show that we aren't really prepared for this. As long as the disease is running rampant in Africa we are going to see clusters of infections in the rest of the world. How many cases can a country handle at any one time before the healthcare system starts to feel the strain?

realweirdo

wildefalcon wrote: »

It's not highly contagious - yet.


It is only contactable by fluid contact. Washing the dead is a big part of West African funeral ritual, inadvertently spreading the disease to close family, so lots of people have it in West Africa.

A sense of perspective is advisable (I know - asking a lot in AH!). This disease has killed less people than the 'flu. It's a horrible disease, and there's no cure, but it's not a major killer, yet.

What scares me is that it could combine with the 'flu and become infectious by airborne particles.

That's brown trousers time!

You are probably asking the whole of West Africa not to have any physical contact with each other. Where you have families living in close contact, open sewers, shared toilet facilities, several children to a bed, etc etc, this is a recipe for the rapid spread of the disease. By the time some people realise they are infected, they have already spread it. You also have poor education, superstition, and now hospitals turning away people.

I'm all for perspective but people need to open their eyes too.

ScumLord

realweirdo wrote: »

It is. It is often spread before people know they are even infected. It is also spread through contact with deceased victims.

That's generally how viruses work.

It is spread in lots of different ways. By any stretch, it is highly contagious.

In relation to something like Influenza it's not that contagious at all, it only spreads through direct contact with the bodily fluids of the infected. So unless the sick are traveling around the country licking peoples faces it's not going to find it too easy to spread in a country where in general people have their own private bed in their own private room to sleep in.

They are now talking about potentially 1 million victims in West Africa.

The media are talking, they're about as trustworthy as the drunk in the corner of the pub who shouts about the dangers of queers.


I'm the mod of the zombie forum for gods sake, I obsess about diseases wiping out humanity but in all my research I've actually found it's pretty difficult for any disease to have a major impact on humanity, at least in western societies. We're just too aware of the problem to let something like this get the better of the most developed societies.

realweirdo

littlemac1980 wrote: »

You're wasting your time Realweirdo - there are people on here who have decided for whatever reason that Ebola isn't a threat and they won't change their minds until their next-door neighbour drops dead on their lawn.

It really a matter of probability and mathematics. I suspect that most of the people who recognise the threat this disease poses were honors maths students in school or have a natural aptitude for maths. I don't mean to say that with the intention of insulting anyone. But I think an ability to rationalise this situation quickly in your head in terms of numbers and probabilities makes it much easier to understand the potential for it getting totally out of control.

I've taken to just updating this thread with the most recent reports from reputable news sources - and let people decide for themselves what to make of them. When someone jumps in and says its not a threat - or its not contagious - or it should be compared with HIV, malaria or the flu - I just chose to ignore those comments. You can't convince someone of something simple that they can't appreciate by themselves anyway.

In relation to this Countries own efforts to prepare - I think the task is equally futile. This Country couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery, it a waste of energy suggesting we should do anything as a nation to prepare for whats potentially going to happen if the Ebola problem becomes a European or Global problem. We could have a paint-by-numbers procedure sent to us from Germany from their top engineers and medical specialists and we'd still mess up implementing it.

My own focus has shifted to deciding what I will do to prepare for the situation where Ebola arrives in Ireland, that seems to be the logical next step in terms of preparation. Forget the idea that our HSE and government could ever do anything to prevent its spread. They'd be well meaning enough - but sure you'd have to be fairly certain they'd only do something to make things worse.

I agree totally and I do think probability and perhaps some form of maths and computer modelling will play a part in this. People say that luckily only about 50% of infected people have died in this outbreak. My understanding is that the low mortality rate is one of the main reasons why it is spreading so radidly. People are surviving that bit longer or fighting it off better and spreading it to more people, or something along those lines.

Containing it within west africa is the best hope. Once it gets out of west africa, then its anyones guess whether the west will deal with it any better or if it will actually spread even faster. The worst case scenario would be if it become airborne someway eg someone coughing on a tube train and spreading it. Lets hope that doesn't happen.

realweirdo

ScumLord wrote: »

That's generally how viruses work.


In relation to something like Influenza it's not that contagious at all, it only spreads through direct contact with the bodily fluids of the infected. So unless the sick are traveling around the country licking peoples faces it's not going to find it too easy to spread in a country where in general people have their own private bed in their own private room to sleep in.

The media are talking, they're about as trustworthy as the drunk in the corner of the pub who shouts about the dangers of queers.


I'm the mod of the zombie forum for gods sake, I obsess about diseases wiping out humanity but in all my research I've actually found it's pretty difficult for any disease to have a major impact on humanity, at least in western societies. We're just too aware of the problem to let something like this get the better of the most developed societies.

Or kissing someone goodbye or goodnight? It spreads through sweat too you know. So a handshake can spread it, especially in warm countries where people sweat a lot. A sneeze probably could spread it. Possibly reusing a bar of soap. Possibly using the same door handle as an infected person, maybe even reusing a towel.

When it comes down to it, its actually not that easy to limit its spread. And so far there's no widely available cure. I think its safe to say we should be prepared for this, well our government should be. But it looks like they have more important things to worry about such as which crony to apoint to which board.

wildefalcon

We need Iodine Pills! No, wait, that was for Selafield, wasn't it?

littlemac1980

realweirdo wrote: »

I agree totally and I do think probability and perhaps some form of maths and computer modelling will play a part in this. People say that luckily only about 50% of infected people have died in this outbreak. My understanding is that the low mortality rate is one of the main reasons why it is spreading so radidly. People are surviving that bit longer or fighting it off better and spreading it to more people, or something along those lines.

Containing it within west africa is the best hope. Once it gets out of west africa, then its anyones guess whether the west will deal with it any better or if it will actually spread even faster. The worst case scenario would be if it become airborne someway eg someone coughing on a tube train and spreading it. Lets hope that doesn't happen.

Jaysus - I wouldn't say that's a low mortality rate - Thats 1 in every 2 people (and there have been posts on here as to why its actually a good deal higher - like 2 out of 3), and all the specialist care and medicine the world won't help - becuase as yet there is no cure.

I think the main problem with it spreading is the upto 3 week incubation period. If it was 1-2 days max, then many people wouldn't get far enough to spread it before being noticed.

And then noticing it is another problem - It first manifests as a Flu/Cold - that leads to two issues:

1. It's difficult to immediately spot it where there is no definite link to contact with a carrier. Its assumed to be a common cold or flu - particularly disadvantageous in a Country where flus and colds are so common. And at that stage its contagious.

2. It leads to lots of false alarms which clog up the limited resources of specialised repsonse teams, even in First-World countries.

Here are links to 5 false alarms that took place in the US and Canada following the Dallas case:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/10/03/d-c-hospital-evaluating-patient-who-has-ebola-like-symptoms/

http://www.wsvn.com/story/26708865/west-african-child-hospitalized-locally-amid-ebola-concerns

http://globalnews.ca/news/1598325/toronto-hospital-patient-kept-in-isolation-tests-negative-for-ebola/

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/cobb-co-jail-inmate-being-tested-ebola/nhbYB/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-04/vomiting-man-removed-from-flight-in-newark-on-ebola-fear.html

realweirdo

wildefalcon wrote: »

We need Iodine Pills! No, wait, that was for Selafield, wasn't it?

We need a strategy. If it doesn't come here great. But if it does come here, we can't be making it up as we go along, or trying to catch up.

Red Pepper

What's that behind you!? :eek:

WakeUp

nyarlothothep wrote: »

The nurse must have got infected due to complacency/a mistake. However out of all the cases that have been brought back, this has been the only one where an infection has occurred. If anything it's beneficial to bring people back and treat them as we can study the virus in greater detail but the stringency of the procedures must be enforced with total fascism/pedantry basically, there can be no room for error whatsoever. (I am not advocating for fascism incidentally, just incredibly strict/OCD observance of containment/disinfectant procedures). The solution is through scientific research. I agree though that generally no one should be allowed in or out of these countries. I'm still baffled that the Obama administration is 'considering' stricter screening at airports for people coming from these infected zones, I mean wtf?! considering? Stricter screening? Seriously?! As I said it's almost like it's being given every opportunity to spread, which is strange in itself, can a storm really be that perfect? It's starting to resemble a 12 Monkeys scenario with the plane flight, I really want to be wrong on this.

from what Im reading this nurse caught the virus even though she was suited up and procedures were supposedly in place. so how did she catch it. the staff in that hospital are not happy. that hospital wasnt equipped properly to be dealing with this. we dont fully understand this outbreak nor do they fully understand the transmission vectors of this strain. how are all these professionals becoming infected. to say this isnt easy to catch is just wrong as clearly it is. what is going on in unprecedented this is new territory we are in. we dont need to bring patients back to study this. the moral/ethical argument to this appears to be well we should bring them back because its the right thing to do or if it was one of your family members you would want the same thing to happen. but the flip side of that is, is it moral or ethical to be putting other people at risk to treat one person? or the wider population, why should other people be put at risk? I think the ethics involved with bringing infected people back need to be looked at. doesnt matter how strict the procedures are until we understand exactly and categorically what it is we are dealing with there is always a risk of something going wrong. and now its happened. stricter screening probably wont work because of the incubation period of the virus. are the professionals 100% sure that people cant spread this whilst asymptomatic. im not sure they are. the American response to the Duncan case has been bungled there has been a number of human errors. and that is just one case just one and look at what its done. all you need is a handful of cases to cause major problems. and this why I believe strict controls need to be in place. certain epidemiologists are staring to speak out and calling for a travel ban from these infected countries. I agree with this. until this is brought under control. and stop moving people to countries that dont already have the virus. that is putting other people at risk in my opinion that is a morally and ethically wrong thing to be doing. to get this under control in Africa harsh measures are going to be required I wonder do people realise this yet.

wildefalcon

realweirdo wrote: »

We need a strategy. If it doesn't come here great. But if it does come here, we can't be making it up as we go along, or trying to catch up.

First time for everything!

ScumLord

realweirdo wrote: »

Or kissing someone goodbye or goodnight?

Just don't kiss random strangers anymore. :P

It spreads through sweat too you know. So a handshake can spread it,

As long as you stick your fingers in your mouth after shaking an infected persons hand.

especially in warm countries where people sweat a lot.

We don't have to worry about that here.

A sneeze probably could spread it. Possibly reusing a bar of soap. Possibly using the same door handle as an infected person.

Possible but unlikely. You won't find bars of soap in any public bathrooms.

When it comes down to it, its actually not that easy to limit its spread.

It's not easy, it's damned expensive but we've already done that preparation work over the last century.

I think its safe to say we should be prepared for this, well our government should be. But it looks like they have more important things to worry about such as which crony to apoint to which board.

The politicking of the government as little effect on the boards and systems put in place to deal with these problems. If the virus pops up here our emergency services won't wait for enda to give them the go ahead.

The fact is there are high educated people working with highly intelligent people from around the world preparing for these eventualities for decades now. For a lay person with only the media as a source of information to assume they know better and assume that the people in charge are doing nothing is just unfair and naive.

The fact is we don't have the information or skill set to make any kind of valid speculations on what will happen.

ProfessorPlum

The R number (or reproduction number - which tells us how many people each case will infect) for ebola is estimated a 2, so each person infected with ebola will infect 2 more people. Compared to HIV (R4) or Measles (R18), it is not highly infectious. However, the CDC estimate that without significant measures being taken, cases in Liberia and Sierra Leone will reach 1.4 million by January, and the WHO admits that it is only a matter of time before ebola is imported to european countries by air travel (the 75% risk in France, 50% Uk numbers). That was before the nurse in Spain was diagnosed. They also are very concerned that the virus will become endemic in West Africa and continue to provide a reservoir for sporadic outbreaks in Europe and elsewhere.
Also, the 'death rate' is estimated at 70% for this outbreak

So while it's important not to be scaremongering, it's equally important that we all have our eyes open regarding the very real risks.

Peist2007

ScumLord wrote: »

It's not.

Seriously. A nurse dressed in safety gear and who was in the room with the infected person twice has caught it. I call that highly contagious. Imagine one of us in the same room as an ebola sufferer in our civvies?

Egginacup

realweirdo wrote: »

Lies, statistics and all that.

HIV/AIDS has been around for decades and been spreading slowly. It has had much longer to spread than Ebola which on the otherhand is spreading rapidly.

The ultimate problem with Ebola is you reach a crunch point where the numbers are so many that its no longer possible to treat people. 5000 cases, that's relatively easy to treat. But when it reaches 50,000 cases, what then? How exactly do you stop it spreading then? You can't really. It becomes impossible.

You understand the seriousness of it now? You probably don't.

I read your alleged expertise as if you yourself know what you're talking about. Are you some kind of epidemiologist because if this disease has been around for so long then how come it hasn't put us all in the grave yet?
TB is/was much more contagious than Ebola and it has been treated and contained in more primitive times with orders of magnitude of more people affected.

As for your lies/statistics comment. Are you saying that the chart is fallacious and if so then could you prove it. It is from the WHO.

ScumLord

Peist2007 wrote: »

Seriously. A nurse dressed in safety gear and who was in the room with the infected person twice has caught it. I call that highly contagious. Imagine one of us in the same room as an ebola sufferer in our civvies?

Are you implying that the virus can somehow make it's way through the suit?

She more than likely didn't put the suit on properly or there was some sort of lapse in precaution measures. The virus can't get through one of those suits.

Bacchus

TheBunk1 wrote: »

The chances of Ebola mutating to become airborne are extremely unlikely. There is no known virus that has ever changed its mode of transmission and viruses have been mutating and evolving for millions of years.

Wrong. I've seen Outbreak, I think I know a thing or two about mutating viruses.

What are people stocking up on? Remember, all the tinned food in the world won't help you if you don't have a tin opener.

FlashR2D2

The location is what determines the Ebola fatality rate.

According to World Health Organisation

The average fataility rate is 53%, ......anyway no one in Ireland has to worry about Ebola, there a big difference between living in the war torn hole of western Africa where you can't even get a glass of clean water and that of modern day Europe. FACT!

So ye can all stop getting yere knickers in a twist. This time next year Ebola won't be even on the media radar. Ye'll probably be all back hiding under the stairs cause Kim Ding Dong is going to fire nukes at us all.

realweirdo

ScumLord wrote: »

Just don't kiss random strangers anymore. :P
As long as you stick your fingers in your mouth after shaking an infected persons hand.

Where do you come up with this stuff? I don't know whether to laugh or not at what you are saying.

Read this as a typical example of how someone got infected. No kissing, no shaking hands and sucking on their fingers after.

http://news.sciencemag.org/africa/2014/10/ebola-survivor-i-senga-omeonga-every-day-i-m-still-thinking-when-was-i-contaminated

I would imagine however the patients family members had much closer interactions. Put it this way if you share a room with an infected person, there's a good chance you will catch it. That seems to be the general rule of thumb at the moment according to some.

And tell us one comparable disease to Ebola we in Ireland dealt with in the last century. Just one.

blackwave

The way some posters on this thread are going on makes this video very relevant imo. Yes Ebola is a extremely serious disease but I think people are overstating how contagious it is compared to other diseases.

FlashR2D2

Bacchus wrote: »

What are people stocking up on?.

Weapons, haven't you seen The Walking Dead? I got a rocket launcher, I'm gonna come blow you out of your bunker when it all goes to sh*t......steal your cans of beans and powdered milk.

realweirdo

Egginacup wrote: »

I read your alleged expertise as if you yourself know what you're talking about. Are you some kind of epidemiologist because if this disease has been around for so long then how come it hasn't put us all in the grave yet?
TB is/was much more contagious than Ebola and it has been treated and contained in more primitive times with orders of magnitude of more people affected.

As for your lies/statistics comment. Are you saying that the chart is fallacious and if so then could you prove it. It is from the WHO.

The disease or rather the current outbreak hasn't been around that long. There is also a question over whether it is a new strain and if it is mutating which causes further problems. There is also the high mortality rate which put it into a whole new realm. You can survive for decades with a HIV infection, and there are drugs to slow it down and stop it being transmitted to babies for example. To catch HIV would require sleeping with an infected person or sharing needles. Ebola spreads through shaking hands or even touching an infected person. Some models carried out by experts as opposed to the "drunks on a barstool" referred to by Scumlord say as many as 1 million could be infected by early next year if measures aren't taken. That's 0-1 million infections in a year. That sort of trumps HIV unfortunately.

RobertKK

Bringing Ebola patients back to non infected countries is not the best way to stop the spread.

Now in Spain it has spread.

FullblownRose

Bacchus wrote: »

Wrong. I've seen Outbreak, I think I know a thing or two about mutating viruses.

What are people stocking up on? Remember, all the tinned food in the world won't help you if you don't have a tin opener.

Use a knife.

ScumLord

Bacchus wrote: »

What are people stocking up on? Remember, all the tinned food in the world won't help you if you don't have a tin opener.

You don't need a tin opener. Rub the top of the can on concrete, it will act like an abrasive cutting through the can allowing you to take the top off.

Zombie survival 101.

realweirdo wrote: »

Where do you come up with this stuff? I don't know whether to laugh or not at what you are saying.

Read this as a typical example of how someone got infected. No kissing, no shaking hands and sucking on their fingers after.

No kissing just handling a patient with what he describes as inadequate protection. That's not at all typical for anyone who's not a medical professional in Africa.

realweirdo

Something I read in the article which is probably the most worrying and certainly changes this outbreak from previous ones where they had a reasonably good handle on infections.

http://news.sciencemag.org/africa/2014/10/ebola-survivor-i-senga-omeonga-every-day-i-m-still-thinking-when-was-i-contaminated

Q: What will happen now in Liberia?

A: Right now, with the Monrovia situation, contact tracing, just forget about it. They’re already lost. There’s a lot of contact in the community we don’t even know. The patients are going to the treatment centers and because there’s a lack of beds, they go back to the community and continue infecting people. We’re overwhelmed. Nobody is doing the contact tracing.

When they came to me and did the tests, nobody asked me for my contacts. I’m a doctor. I had a lot of patients I treated. There are too many cases and they don’t know the contacts. They’re out there in the community going to market and schools and whatever.

We just hope with the help of the international community, the U.S. government, and other governments and NGOs [nongovernmental organizations], this will be controlled. If we have to depend on the Liberian government, the situation is getting worse and worse and it will be disastrous. There are not enough human resources and financial resources.

To me it looks like they are on the verge of losing the fight in Liberia. Infected people being sent home because of a lack of resources. Previous outbreaks, they could handle the small numbers in ICUs. But not this time.

FlashR2D2

FullblownRose wrote: »

Use a knife.

A knife? ....fool! This is the end of the world we're talking about.

Get a cattle prod and blow it open, useful for keeping the infected at bay too, spark them up!

PucaMama

realweirdo wrote: »

Something I read in the article which is probably the most worrying and certainly changes this outbreak from previous ones where they had a reasonably good handle on infections.

http://news.sciencemag.org/africa/2014/10/ebola-survivor-i-senga-omeonga-every-day-i-m-still-thinking-when-was-i-contaminated



To me it looks like they are on the verge of losing the fight in Liberia. Infected people being sent home because of a lack of resources. Previous outbreaks, they could handle the small numbers in ICUs. But not this time.

if it continues like this, at some stage we will have to shut down liberia and let the virus burn itself out.