Ebola virus outbreak

BorneTobyWilde

If Ebola was to get to the point of being out of control in Sierra Leone,so out of control it was unstoppable would it make sense to drop an atomic bombs on Sierra Leone so as to save the whole world.

the_monkey

ElizaT33 wrote: »

Yes I do, as do a great amount of posters online at the min - u must be actually STUPID ! Stop bothering the discussion:mad:

Yeah im stupid, I'm not gonna worry about my son in Spain getting Ebola - in a country with ONE case !!!!

I guess he's no where near Madrid either ... makes the stats even more interesting ...

Daenarys

I'm sorry I ever watched Contagion!!

ProfessorPlum

realweirdo wrote: »

I agree they won't. I was responding to a poster however who said it can't be spread via toilet seats. In theory it probably can be.

Yes, maybe the commode in the hospital room of an late stage patient.

People are going to be panicked and irrational if we keep on with this stuff. And that will not be a good thing.

FullblownRose

Havin' said that, hindsight is 20-20- people who covered public toilet seats in tissue paper and hovered above them for fear of catching hiv, might seem paranoid now, because we know definitively how hiv is transmitted, but there are doubts around Ebola because it is new to us right now- so I dont blame anyone for taking what might seem like excessive precaution..unless it involves eclusing or avoiding people who have connections to west africa, purely because they have connections to w.a..and by all means take physical precautions during this undeniably UNCERTAIN period where Ebola has become something for Westerners to consider for the first time , instead of it being a disease confined to isolated outbreaks in distant lands ..keep taking whatever precautions make you feel safe until you are sure it is completely safe not to!

Just dont panic, what's the point in panicking? Life is too short to worry

jsd1004

the_monkey wrote: »

Yeah im stupid, I'm not gonna worry about my son in Spain getting Ebola - in a country with ONE case !!!!

I guess he's no where near Madrid either ... makes the stats even more interesting ...

I live in the south of Spain. Had a client cancel a visit today because of Ebola. God wept..

ProfessorPlum

jsd1004 wrote: »

I live in the south of Spain. Had a client cancel a visit today because of Ebola. God wept..

And the economic repercussions of panic begin.......:mad:

realweirdo

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

I don't think anyone is referring to late stage ebola sufferers traveling anywhere, are we.
Yes, you could stop flights. And would have economic consequences, delay aid from getting in and out, and still not stop people leaving. As has been pointed out, as soon as it looks like there'll be a lock down, people are likely to try and leave. Especially people who think they might be sick. And it's a very blunt tool. Are we talking obout stopping flights to the countries affected? The cities? What?

IMO the effort needs to be at a very local level, not at the national borders. That's not going to solve anything in the medium to long term and will probably make the situation worse.

I wouldn't be in favour of stopping cargo flights in with aid. If the pilots don't leave the airport or hanger while there there should be no problem. My issue is with any mass movement of people where you really don't have a clue who is infected and who isn't. And to be fair, I would say their tests are next to useless. Checking for fever and high temperature? Late stage patients will be too sick to travel so its unlikely they will even make it to airports. Early stage on the other hand could easily make it and easily make it through tests.

At this stage, there's no point restricting it, that's the point I make that people keep missing, so eager they are to play the racist card. But down the road, if it happened that a large proportion of for example the Liberian population were infected, then of course it would make sense, in the absence of credible testing, to limit and restrict people leaving the country. What wouldn't make sense is to allow anyone who wants to leave the country, not really knowing if they are infected or not.

Glad that's cleared up!

TheBeardedLady

the_monkey wrote: »

Yeah im stupid, I'm not gonna worry about my son in Spain getting Ebola - in a country with ONE case !!!!

I guess he's no where near Madrid either ... makes the stats even more interesting ...

The sarcasm is a bit unnecessary. It's her son and it's natural she's going to worry. I was very worried myself to the point of a few tears on Wednesday and I've met plenty of people here who are ****ting themselves (most people I've met are calm though). People don't think rationally when their loved ones are involved and with the media hype, it's easy to get sucked in by it all.


Edit: And as Fullblownrose says above, we don't know everything there is to know about the virus at this stage.

Doctor Jimbob

realweirdo wrote: »

In terms of isolating west africa, the nearest analagy would be a gangrenous limb.

You can cut off the gangrenous limb and save the patient, or you can keep the gangrenous limb and watch the patient slowly succumb, all limbs intact.

Tough choices will have to be made at some stage.

From just a few pages ago.

realweirdo wrote: »

I wouldn't be in favour of stopping cargo flights in with aid. If the pilots don't leave the airport or hanger while there there should be no problem. My issue is with any mass movement of people where you really don't have a clue who is infected and who isn't. And to be fair, I would say their tests are next to useless. Checking for fever and high temperature? Late stage patients will be too sick to travel so its unlikely they will even make it to airports. Early stage on the other hand could easily make it and easily make it through tests.

At this stage, there's no point restricting it, that's the point I make that people keep missing, so eager they are to play the racist card. But down the road, if it happened that a large proportion of for example the Liberian population were infected, then of course it would make sense, in the absence of credible testing, to restrict people leaving the country.

Glad that's cleared up!

realweirdo

jsd1004 wrote: »

Oh yes.. The old bush meat and shagging monkeys bit..

Ah yes the old "throw shagging monkeys into the mix" when no-one mentioned shagging monkeys bit. Talk about putting words in people's mouths.

You clearly are the only person in the world who thinks ebola and hiv didn't come from bush meat by the way when there is virtually universal scientific agreement that both did.

jsd1004

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

From just a few pages ago.

If it is that virulent we are all fecked anyway. I don't think border controls will stop it.

ProfessorPlum

My point is we can't hang about and wait to see how it goes out there, and then close the borders when it gets really bad. We need to get in there now, not just with cargo planes of aid, what they need most of all is people. Liberia had 51 doctors in the entire country before this. Most of them are dead now. There's nobody to treat the sick, to isolate them and their contacts. Isolation needs to be done in the towns and villages. Not at the national borders.

realweirdo

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

From just a few pages ago.

Restricting air travel. Stop taking things out of context!

jsd1004

realweirdo wrote: »

Ah yes the old "throw shagging monkeys into the mix" when no-one mentioned shagging monkeys bit. Talk about putting words in people's mouths.

You clearly are the only person in the world who thinks ebola and hiv didn't come from bush meat by the way when there is virtually universal scientific agreement that both did.

I am am I.. Use google. It's pretty easy. Or else source medical journals..which is a bit harder.

the_monkey

Can everyone who thinks the world is about to end please read this :

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/09/ebola-highly-contagious-virus-myths-outbreak-epidemic


Now go back to worrying about those men in white vans driving around the country trying to abduct our kids ...

realweirdo

jsd1004 wrote: »

I am am I.. Use google. It's pretty easy. Or else source medical journals..which is a bit harder.

So where did ebola come from? I'd prefer to hear your theory as opposed to going off googling it, if that's ok, because I wouldn't "find" the article you agreed with.

WakeUp

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

A bit of perspective needed lads...

Asymptomatic persons or patients with very early symptoms will have low viral loads, so unless you go into the loo after a bloke who febrile, pucking and oozing blood from orifices, the chances of catching it like that is negligible.
We're back to the toilet seat/HIV panicking

every single person on this thread to a man or woman calling for calm is right. all of them. because panicking or losing the head is about the worst thing anyone could do. that said, we still need to know what is going on I agree perspective is needed but this is ebola it isnt like other viruses and cant be compared to them. all we need is a handful of cases and we have problems. for example speaking hypothetically of course, a paramedic team answers a call and transfer a suspected ebola case to hospital. that first responder team is now out of action and placed in quarantine. and so are any other medical people who came in contact without protection. thats one case. then perhaps another case shows up. same chain of events. thats two cases. another possible case. same thing happens. that is three cases so on so forth. how many ambulance crews operate at any one time in lets say Dublin for example. not that many. which is why among other reasons is why I think we need to be extra careful we dont have the resources I would think to cope with any serious amount of cases. then these people who might need treating, we dont have enough IC units and probably equipment to treat more than a certain number of people. and all of that under strict isolation and quarantine. its why we need to be really careful without over reacting. thats what I think anyways. and why we need to know what is going on. actually what is going on.

EBOLA VICTIMS WITHOUT SYMPTOMS CAN STILL BE CONTAGIOUS
German doctors show CDC wrong about spread of disease

NEW YORK – A group of German medical doctors in a peer-reviewed medical journal article published by Oxford University Press have challenged a key assumption regarding the Ebola virus repeatedly asserted by Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

The researchers found that a patient showing no symptoms of the disease can still transmit a virus like Ebola by air if droplets containing the virus are transmitted to another person by a sneeze or cough.

Dr. Norman M. Balog, D.O., a board-certified family doctor practicing in Silver Spring, Maryland, brought the research of the German medical team to the attention of WND as evidence that the CDC’s Frieden could not prove his assertion air travel was safe as long as a person infected with Ebola were not showing symptoms. An infected person can go as long as 21 days in an incubation period before being infected.

“Dr. Freiden is either completely uninformed of this research,” Balog explained to WND in an exclusive telephone interview, “or he is deliberately lying because he does not want to panic the general public.”
http://www.wnd.com/2014/10/ebola-victims-without-symptoms-could-still-be-contagious/

BorneTobyWilde

If you calculate the time it takes to destroy a city and move on,

we're looking at the worldwide destruction of every major city

in the next 36 hours.

realweirdo

the_monkey wrote: »

Can everyone who thinks the world is about to end please read this :

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/09/ebola-highly-contagious-virus-myths-outbreak-epidemic


Now go back to worrying about those men in white vans driving around the country trying to abduct our kids ...

Each patient in the current Ebola outbreak is infecting on average two healthy people (this figure, known as the R0 value, can be reduced with appropriate precautions). The Sars outbreak of 2002-03 had an R0 of five, mumps 10 and measles a huge 18. Ebola could be much more infectious than it is.

This has already been shown to be a logical fallacy earlier in this thread. The R value is pretty much irrelevant and misleading. HIV has an R value of 4 and Ebola has an R value of 2. But that's 2 in a couple of days and each one of those can infect 2 more. So by the end of a month the R value or equivalent would be exponentially larger, probably around 30.

So in this case the guardian writer is himself spreading a myth.

The only thing worse than alarm and panic is not taking it seriously.

Doctor Jimbob

realweirdo wrote: »

Restricting air travel. Stop taking things out of context!

I'm not intentionally, I'm just having difficultly understanding the point you're trying to make. You said sealing off the most badly hit countries would have to be considered. Then get annoyed at people for calling you racist over it - fair enough, maybe you genuinely have no racist intent. Then you say there's no point restricting air travel. And somehow tie that into the racist thing, despite it being a separate issue. I don't think anyone would claim restricting air travel is remotely racist.

Spring Onion

Richard D James wrote: »

There was a guy on Sky news earlier from a Pharma company that are furiously working on a vaccine for this Ebola
The interviewer pointed out that Ebola has been in Africa since the 1970's
If black people are dying thats one thing, but once white people start dying its a different story

That point was made a few days ago and it's absolutely valid. Coverage = Hype and Big Pharma share prices are rising as fast as the hype especially when it arrived in Texas. Similar to swine flu, Big Pharma will rush a vaccine through testing and approval and make billions selling it to panicky governments. Watch out for the side effects though...

http://www.thejournal.ie/pandemrix-narcolepsy-link-study-1447040-May2014/

GSK will probably be the big player, I think they are the pharma that did the illegal vaccine testing in the mother and baby homes.
.

ProfessorPlum

realweirdo wrote: »

This has already been shown to be a logical fallacy earlier in this thread. The R value is pretty much irrelevant and misleading. HIV has an R value of 4 and Ebola has an R value of 2. But that's 2 in a couple of days and each one of those can infect 2 more. So by the end of a month the R value or equivalent would be exponentially larger, probably around 30.

So in this case the guardian writer is himself spreading a myth.

The only thing worse than alarm and panic is not taking it seriously.

No it hasn't, and it isn't.

jsd1004

realweirdo wrote: »

So where did ebola come from? I'd prefer to hear your theory as opposed to going off googling it, if that's ok, because I wouldn't "find" the article you agreed with.

Where did it come from? No one knows. Where did HIV come from? No one knows. You can hypothesise as much as you want but it is like asking where flu originated from. Viruses have been with us for millions of years and continue to mutate and acquire new names as they progress.

realweirdo

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I'm not intentionally, I'm just having difficultly understanding the point you're trying to make. You said sealing off the most badly hit countries would have to be considered. Then get annoyed at people for calling you racist over it - fair enough, maybe you genuinely have no racist intent. Then you say there's no point restricting air travel. And somehow tie that into the racist thing, despite it being a separate issue. I don't think anyone would claim restricting air travel is remotely racist.

I don't really have time or inclination for word games with you. I'm glad you don't think I'm racist however and I'm also glad you have come around to the view ebola victims should be isolated.

ProfessorPlum

WakeUp wrote: »

EBOLA VICTIMS WITHOUT SYMPTOMS CAN STILL BE CONTAGIOUS
German doctors show CDC wrong about spread of disease

NEW YORK – A group of German medical doctors in a peer-reviewed medical journal article published by Oxford University Press have challenged a key assumption regarding the Ebola virus repeatedly asserted by Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

The researchers found that a patient showing no symptoms of the disease can still transmit a virus like Ebola by air if droplets containing the virus are transmitted to another person by a sneeze or cough.

Dr. Norman M. Balog, D.O., a board-certified family doctor practicing in Silver Spring, Maryland, brought the research of the German medical team to the attention of WND as evidence that the CDC’s Frieden could not prove his assertion air travel was safe as long as a person infected with Ebola were not showing symptoms. An infected person can go as long as 21 days in an incubation period before being infected.

“Dr. Freiden is either completely uninformed of this research,” Balog explained to WND in an exclusive telephone interview, “or he is deliberately lying because he does not want to panic the general public.”
http://www.wnd.com/2014/10/ebola-victims-without-symptoms-could-still-be-contagious/

Your link is to a crank conspiracy theory type website, and the link in that to the peer reviewed medical paper is to a blog.

However, one thing a medical student learns early on (as most of the exams are negative marking MCQ's) if there's a choice of an 'always' or 'never' answer in medicine, the right answer is probably not that one.

Spring Onion

miss no stars

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

No it hasn't, and it isn't.

It's irrelevant when not taken in the context of the period for which the infected victim can pass on infection. It's useful when you put it in temporal context. That's the point I'm trying to make for the third time. Simply saying "oh but it's R number is 2 which is only half of that of HIV" is useless without considering the time over which those infections occur.

Doctor Jimbob

realweirdo wrote: »

I don't really have time or inclination for word games with you. I'm glad you don't think I'm racist however and I'm also glad you have come around to the view ebola victims should be isolated.

I'm not trying to play word games. Your posts are just confusing me. I accept this could be down to me being an idiot, it wouldn't be the first time. Could you maybe clarify instead of throwing a huff over it?

BorneTobyWilde

Obama has just releases a statement

Good morning.

In less than an hour,

aircraft from here will join others from around the world.

And you will be launching the largest aerial battle on Sierra Leone in the history of mankind.

Mankind. That word should have new meaning for all of us today.

We can't be consumed by our petty differences any more.

We will be united in our common interest. To wipe out Ebola.
We must act now to prevent further spread of the virus

Perhaps it's fate that today is the 9th Oct

And you will once again be fighting for our freedom.

Not from tyranny, oppression or persecution.

But from annihilation by a virus that turns the insides of its host into jelly.

We're fighting for our right to live.

To exist.

And should we win the day,

the 9th of Oct will no longer be known as just another day

but as the day when the world declared in one voice,

"We will not go quietly into the night!"

"We will not vanish without a fight!"

"We're going to live on!"

"We're going to survive!"

Today, we celebrate our Independence Day