Ebola virus outbreak

Rightwing

I know 1 thing about ebola. No one knows f*ck all about it.

Spring Onion

Ebola is not highly contagious.

charlie_says

This isn't likely to be the end of the world. Ebola is not very infections according to it's R0 value, it's at the lower end of the scale.

If it was airbonrne then we'd be fecked though.

Doctor Jimbob

Rightwing wrote: »

I know 1 thing about ebola. No one knows f*ck all about it.

But if you know one thing, how can no one not know nothing?

realweirdo

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

God, I'd have to have a good trawl thru the paper. Busy trying to get through to these two about the difference between contagiousness and risk, or seriousness or something. I'm sure there's some merit in the research, but generally research that can't (or hasn't) been replicated doesn't get much attention. Maybe it'll get a bit more of a look in now we have this latest outbreak.

I read a bit about R value just now and it was stated that its pretty irrelevant in the actual field, as its based on mathematical models as opposed to real life observations.

A better way of measuring contagiousness is the speed of spread.

A HIV person might infect 1 new person every ten years on average. An ebola victim might infect 2 new people in a week.

In other words ebola (unchecked) always spreads more rapidly than HIV.

Do you at least agree with this statement?

ProfessorPlum

realweirdo wrote: »

To put it bluntly, yes ebola, particularly this version is highly contagious. The temporal issue is still the key, but somehow I doubt you will ever grasp this concept and I'm wasting my time explaining it to you.

As for measles, its not in the same ballpark as ebola, it too is irrelevant. SARs might be a better comparision, but my understanding the fatality rate with SARs was something like 10%.

Another point is, people have an assumption that unless something is airborne such as via a sneeze or cough, its not highly contagious.

The only good way to look at ebola is that people don't really become contagious until they are at a late stage. And when they are at a late stage, most people have the sense not to go near them. However all indications are it is still spreading exponentially in Africa.

To put it bluntly, you're clearly confusing yourself.

realweirdo wrote: »

I read a bit about R value just now and it was stated that its pretty irrelevant in the actual field, as its based on mathematical models as opposed to real life observations.

A better way of measuring contagiousness is the speed of spread.

A HIV person might infect 1 new person every ten years on average. An ebola victim might infect 2 new people in a week.

In other words ebola (unchecked) always spreads more rapidly than HIV.

Do you at least agree with this statement?

Statistics generally have little relevance in the field. I still don't know why you're latched on to HIV. Yes I agree ebola spreads faster than HIV.
But it's still not a highly contagious disease!!!!
If it wasn't for the fact that it was so deadly, it wouldn't be a Level 4 agent, and nobody would be bothering with hazmat suits. But that has nothing to do with its level of contagiousness.

ProfessorPlum

charlie_says wrote: »

This isn't likely to be the end of the world. Ebola is not very infections according to it's R0 value, it's at the lower end of the scale.

If it was airbonrne then we'd be fecked though.

Oh God, don't do it. Leave now while you can:eek:

realweirdo

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

To put it bluntly, you're clearly confusing yourself.



Statistics generally have little relevance in the field. I still don't know why you're latched on to HIV. Yes I agree ebola spreads faster than HIV.
But it's still not a highly contagious disease!!!!
If it wasn't for the fact that it was so deadly, it wouldn't be a Level 4 agent, and nobody would be bothering with hazmat suits. But that has nothing to do with its level of contagiousness.

Ok you know what this is just contradictory! Would you treat an ebola victim without a hazmat suit? Of course you wouldn't! You've just underlined how contagious it is. Good night!

ProfessorPlum

realweirdo wrote: »

Ok you know what this is just contradictory! Would you treat an ebola victim without a hazmat suit? Of course you wouldn't! You've just underlined how contagious it is. Good night!

No, I've just underlined how deadly it is (where is that brick wall again:( )

GreeBo

realweirdo wrote: »

Ok you know what this is just contradictory! Would you treat an ebola victim without a hazmat suit? Of course you wouldn't! You've just underlined how contagious it is. Good night!

Yawning is contagious
Cancer is deadly

The two are unrelated

If you get a contagious, deadly thing it's a problem.

ceadaoin.

Here is an interesting illustration detailing the measures needed to stop the epidemic in west Africa

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/ebola-by-the-numbers/1366/

It's going to be a long road by the looks of things.

Meglamonia

What are the chances of it mutating and becoming airborne?

WakeUp

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 ...

I dont think the world is going to end but I wonder how long this James Ball chap has been studying the virus. he looks about 12. and from what I can see has no medical qualifications. he isnt qualified to be making such statements. in August he declared the outbreak to be linear, among other things, and not exponential. he got that wrong. and you dont need to be a virologist nor an epidemiologist to know and spot an exponential curve. Im sure he had a look at some charts. or maybe he didnt. didnt matter anyway.

__________________________________________________________________

If I may interject into the "r" discussion. they are based on mathematical models as people have pointed out. for them to be "accurate" you need accurate information on the ground. and I dont think we have that at the moment. this might be of interest to some.

As increasing numbers of outbreak generations were used, best fit R0 estimates and estimates of d declined (Figure 1). We identified no abrupt surges in d that simulations suggest are indicative of multi-wave outbreaks 1 . There was a range of combinations of R0 and d that provided approximate fits to observed case counts, but RMSD was lowest, by an order of magnitude, for R0 values close to 1.8, and d values close to 0.01 (Figure 2). Our best fit model identified Ro as 1.78, and d as 0.009. Cumulative model case counts were projected to be 2435 as compared to 2473 observed cases (Figure 3).

Based on these parameter values, and in the absence of increase in d as a result of intervention, the outbreak would be projected to have caused over 25,000 infections by the end of 2014. A peak in the epidemic would not occur until April 2015, and continue until mid-2016, with a final size greater than 140,000 cases. However, epidemic size and duration are projected to be extremely sensitive to incremental increases in the size of d. For example, a September 2014 increase in d by 0.005 (to 0.014 rather than 0.009) would diminish the projected epidemic size to < 10,000 cases, with incidence steadily diminishing rather than increasing in the coming months.

Using a simple, two-parameter mathematical model, we find that the initial growth characteristics of the 2014 West African Ebola epidemic to be similar to those associated with prior Ebola outbreaks. Concerning is the lack of control evident, with epidemic processes growing in an essentially uncontrolled exponential manner, particularly in Liberia. While further data will permit model validation or re-calibration in the coming months, our findings indicate that this epidemic represents a public health emergency which has the potential to grow to extraordinarily destructive dimensions. We hope our model will add support to those voices already calling for an extraordinary international cooperative effort to control this epidemic.

http://currents.plos.org/outbreaks/article/obk-14-0036-early-epidemic-dynamics-of-the-west-african-2014-ebola-outbreak-estimates-derived-with-a-simple-two-parameter-model/

until we start getting accurate information on the ground its hard to fully know what is going on or which way its going to go.

DarkyHughes

The Republican party of America say they have a plan to defeat Ebola. They say we should bomb west Africa & then send large troop numbers in after to police the situation & do some airstrikes around the rest of Africa to stop Ebola from spreading.

Turtwig

Meglamonia wrote: »

What are the chances of it mutating and becoming airborne?

About the same as aids doing so. Possible, but an asteroid hitting your home is also possible.

ceadaoin.

The fact is, it doesn't really matter what the R0 is, it could be 2 or 10, either way the epidemic will keep spreading unless it drops below 1. If the worse case projections are accurate, there will 1.4 million infections by January. If each of those is infecting 2 people on average then that's a huge number of infections and we will start seeing more and more cases outside Africa. If it does get to that stage then I really don't know what else can be done besides closing borders.

Adamantium

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmhGrJJjI7E

Turtwig

Oh for Christ sake God help the internet if we ever face an actual pandemic. Least it's not the Armageddon president speech. Team of hot shot saw mill workers sent in to the save the world of Ebola by cutting their way through extreme jungles to plant a nuke in the virus's hot zone.

masonchat

What is the right thing to do in a situation like this?

If stopping travel into/out of africa is a consideration in the future, then surely it should have been one of the first things done? it would seem a bit like closing the gate after the horse is bolted now.

Morally i understand people wanting to go there and help BUT did they help or just facilitate worldwide cases , which may turn out to be not so bad but could end up very bad.

We are just lucky so far that it seems not to be passed too easily

AngryHippie

Meglamonia wrote: »

What are the chances of it mutating and becoming airborne?

0<P<1

If n ==140,000 http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92550777&postcount=1244

Then there is a serious probability that this is going to go sideways at some point in time.

I'd be of the opinion that "Big Pharma" fast-tracking vaccines will probably make the situation worse, as opposed to better, especially in terms of mutations and generations of the virus.

It's not zombie apocalypse time yet, but the situation on the ground in Western Africa needs to be secured and there definitely needs to be some staged planning for air travel to reduce the probability of the outbreak re-starting in fresh populaces.

In the meantime, I'd expect the Western media to continue to use it as a convenient distraction from the usual human rights abuses, corporate thievery and political skullduggery as they are led by the nose.

Keep calm, Carry on, and wash your hands for everyone outside of West Africa, and if your that way inclined, pray for those inside it. They need all the help they can get.

ceadaoin.

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Ohh hold on there - major shifting of goal posts!

You said that R number was useless when talking about how contagious a disease was, and despite it's R number of 2, that Ebola was a highly contagious disease. Which it's not.
Now you're bringing in mortality, which has nothing what so ever to do with contagiousness. Nothing.
And assessing risk - nope, you hadn't mentioned that either.

Nobody is saying Ebola isn't a highly dangerous disease - that just wasn't your argument in the first place.

Is there not a slight difference between contagious and infectious? Ebola isn't very contagious because it's not airborne. However, it is very infectious because it only takes a small amount of virus to enter your body to make you sick. So once you do come into contact with infected material it's easier to become infected than with other viruses.

nokia69

Meglamonia wrote: »

What are the chances of it mutating and becoming airborne?

very little

but the the virus is now changing/evolving faster than ever, so who knows what could happen

if it changed and took longer to kill people that would be just as bad as becoming airborne

this needs to be stopped as soon as possible

sturdyhairy

You can only get Ebola from:
Touching the blood or body fluids of a person who is sick with or has died from Ebola.
Touching contaminated objects, like needles.
Touching infected animals, their blood or other body fluids, or their meat.



Be safe everyone!

JONJO THE MISER

nokia69 wrote: »

very little

but the the virus is now changing/evolving faster than ever, so who knows what could happen

if it changed and took longer to kill people that would be just as bad as becoming airborne

this needs to be stopped as soon as possible

Exactly, but some on here would have you think that this is not possible, ignorant.

GreeBo

sturdyhairy wrote: »

You can only get Ebola from:
Touching the blood or body fluids of a person who is sick with or has died from Ebola.
Touching contaminated objects, like needles.
Touching infected animals, their blood or other body fluids, or their meat.



Be safe everyone!

Which is fine, but imagine a single mother in the US Living in high rise working in a hospital.
She gets infected because the hospital dealt with someone infected and sent him home.
She infects her kids who go to school sick, she infects her neighbours, quickly you have a hotbed of Ebola in a poor area where people can't afford medical treatment. Sick, contagious people stay in the community too long and you get an outbreak.

NIMAN

GreeBo wrote: »

Which is fine, but imagine a single mother in the US Living in high rise working in a hospital.
She gets infected because the hospital dealt with someone infected and sent him home.
She infects her kids who go to school sick, she infects her neighbours, quickly you have a hotbed of Ebola in a poor area where people can't afford medical treatment. Sick, contagious people stay in the community too long and you get an outbreak.

How is all this passing on done though? Is it easily done?

How does a sick child pass it to his school mates. Where is the bodily fluid contact? How much contact is needed and what amount of fluids must pass from one person to another? Is it guaranteed 100% of the time if you pass fluid to someone else that they will get Ebola from you, or is it hit and miss?

GreeBo

NIMAN wrote: »

How is all this passing on done though? Is it easily done?

How does a sick child pass it to his school mates. Where is the bodily fluid contact? How much contact is needed and what amount of fluids must pass from one person to another? Is it guaranteed 100% of the time if you pass fluid to someone else that they will get Ebola from you, or is it hit and miss?

Have you ever been near a sick young child?
There are fluids everywhere.

If one infected person can typically infect 4, it doesn't take much to get an outbreak.
It's not like your eyes start bleeding immediately, it starts out like a flu, people carry on with normal life with the flu. Sneezing in lifts fit example. The sick child's teacher will likely come info contracts with fluids abd help to pass it to other kids in the class. Then it reaches other classes.

Streetwalker

When it reaches Ireland I think closing down the schools until it has cleared will have to be a priority. Classrooms are one of the easiest places for a virus to spread.

VinLieger

So the HSE have decided to not do any screening AT ALL at Irish airports cus apparently it's more effective to do it when someone's leaving a country the Virus is present in.....

http://www.thejournal.ie/ebola-ireland-guidelines-1716135-Oct2014/

What the actual ****? I get that it's hard to spot but this is ****ing ridiculous, it's already spread to countries outside of Africa due to extremely lax exit protocols in the countries it's present in, what the **** are the HSE smoking?

AudreyHepburn

FionnK86 wrote: »

Africa is not just Liberia, and western states. Are you seriously suggesting closing the borders South Africa, Kenya, Egypt and Morocco to Europe/US/Asia?? That's like closing Ireland's borders for the outbreak in Spain!! Get over the idea that Africa is one big country. :mad:

Dear god, are you reading what I said at all?

I know Africa is a continent I'm not stupid. I just think the only real way to contain the Ebola and stop it going global is to close off borders with affected countries and if that means most countries in Africa, some in Europe and US then so be it.

I'd rather limit travel then see this become a global pandemic.