Ebola virus outbreak

The_Valeyard

Sixty days....according to the UN.

marco_polo

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

Actually, I read somewhere today that the Ebola virus can survive on surfaces for longer in colder weather.

Might have be referring to the fact that UV light kills it, so it can't last long in direct sunlight?

gladrags

Duck's hoop wrote: »

Imo the most dangerous bit of this thing is not necessarily the virus itself but the panic in general population it could very well engender.

Panic buying, mob law, pogroms targeting Africans could all lead to a very messy wee world. Combined with even a few hundred cases in a major city and there's a very large law and order problem.

Or it may not live up to your expectations.

The virus has been around since 1976

Straight Talker

Do we need to brace ourselves for the arrival of this virus in the country by christmas?Would there be a medium or high risk of infection to the general populace?Surely any case of Ebula outbreak in Ireland should be treated in an isolated location.The Matter hospital one of the busiest hospitals in the country right in the centre of Dublin is hardly that.Ebola + the HSE.Those two things have the makings of a disastrous combination.

youtube!

Why are the WHO saying they expect 10000 new cases a week by Xmas? I mean lets face it 10000 a week by then will be 50000 a week 6 months later this is really frightening.

CaliforniaDream

*Since you can't get the virus again once you've had it (not sure about different strains), can they just teach all the survivors how to treat people and have them take care of new cases?
As more and more survive there'll be less to infect as all the 'doctors' have no chance of getting it again. I've just solved the problem!

*This post is not to be taken seriously.

gozunda

gladrags wrote: »

Or it may not live up to your expectations.

The virus has been around since 1976

It is likley that the virus has been around a hell of a lot longer than that.

It is known to exist in wild animal populations. The first recognised human outbreak of Ebola was first identified in 1976. Many epidemics such as the Black Death caused by the Yersinia pestis bacterium remain active in wild animal populations and periodically appear to spread to humans. The fact that there was an Ebola epidemic in 1976 etc means nothing in terms of when the disease will return or how serious any such epidemic may be.

realweirdo

nyarlothothep wrote: »

How is it feasible to enforce a military perimeter over tens of thousands of miles of borders?

Difficult but possible but it will start with restricting flights. Restricting its spread is not an option its a must. Otherwise the future of humanity is at risk.

fryup

realweirdo wrote: »

Difficult but possible but it will start with restricting flights. Restricting its spread is not an option its a must. Otherwise the future of humanity is at risk.

the world is over-populated, maybe this is a blessing in disguise

Creative Juices

realweirdo wrote: »

Difficult but possible but it will start with restricting flights. Restricting its spread is not an option its a must. Otherwise the future of humanity is at risk.

And the people that survive won't be human?

realweirdo

Straight Talker wrote: »

Do we need to brace ourselves for the arrival of this virus in the country by christmas?Would there be a medium or high risk of infection to the general populace?Surely any case of Ebula outbreak in Ireland should be treated in an isolated location.The Matter hospital one of the busiest hospitals in the country right in the centre of Dublin is hardly that.Ebola + the HSE.Those two things have the makings of a disastrous combination.

Indeed..the biggest problem is that individuals or governments in the west won't take this seriously. There's certainly a racist element to that. The majority in the west rarely care when Africans die. When the threat becomes imminent to them only then do they care. Added to the fact no vaccine has been created yet, another element of racism.

A lot of people won't pay this any heed until it comes rolling up on their doorstep. Only then it will be far far too late. And people shouted down now by the usual mindless mob will have been proved right.

realweirdo

Creative Juices wrote: »

And the people that survive won't be human?

What on earth is that supposed to mean?

realweirdo

fryup wrote: »

the world is over-populated, maybe this is a blessing in disguise

Maybe it is...are you prepared to take your chances? Probably not!

nyarlothothep

fryup wrote: »

the world is over-populated, maybe this is a blessing in disguise

The surviving peasants were able to move up the social ladder after the black death and some argue feudal society was irrevocably changed as a result but it was a terrible price to pay. As for enforcing borders I'm all for it but it would involve a vast amount of money, resources, logistics etc and would require most major powers to agree to work in a unified capacity but since it's not the terrifying threat it may yet become nobody is going to do anything about it because it's not 'tangible' yet. Kind of like putting studying off for an exam until the last moment or tax returns etc.

Turtwig

realweirdo wrote: »

Difficult but possible but it will start with restricting flights. Restricting its spread is not an option its a must. Otherwise the future of humanity is at risk.

Oh sweet divine mercy.

The virus hasn't even wiped out a million people. Liberia and other nations preliminary infected lost control of their outbreaks month's ago. There hasn't been an actual legitimate threat to the majority population of any western society as of yet. Heck, even Africa is mostly unscathed. A lot of people will die there from Ebola, but it won't even be the biggest killer of humans in those regions this year.

Ebola for all it's achievements is still killed by soap and it's not really that contagious. Highest risk are those in impoverished areas (nightmare: being an shanty town/slum/urban deprived area infected) and frontline health workers, particularly those with less experience of viruses of that nature. Odds are most people in the world who die within the next decade won't die from ebola.

There's a lesson here for public health officials. Swine Flu, actually had more potential it affected the same demographics that ebola did whereas all ebola has going for it is supposed 50% fatality rate (but we have no idea how higher standards of care may impact that). Yet, I guess, as if by a self fulfilling prophecy of the mythical status of this virus people are terrified over ebola and were extremely naive over H1N1. One of them seems to be achieving it's potential - may even surpass it, the other, thankfully, didn't even come close.

realweirdo

Creative Juices wrote: »

Everything in this post is the "absolute truth" you say above? I would like to break it down if you don't mind.

1. "Once ebola becomes endemic in africa its game over, sooner or later."

I am not even sure what that means. What game is over and when/how will it become endemic in Africa?

2. "There won't be pograms against Africans but if the rest of the world wants to avoid it there will in time need to be restrictions on people leaving Africa."

So there will be pograms if we do not close the borders on the whole continent?

3. "If only a handful of these had ebola there could be serious consequences in Europe."

Five people with ebola will have what consequences in Europe exactly? Can you back it up?

4. "Ebola is a major symptom of 3rd world poverty which will come back to haunt the west."

Sorry but as I already replied, this is just meaningless waffle.

If I thought you were intelligent enough I'd continue this discussion but I don't think you are.

Here's a very basic equation for you to mull over if you are able. There are over 7 billion people in the world. The population of the current affected area is roughly 35 million perhaps less. That represents 0.5 % of the worlds population.

And you want to jeopardise the other 99.5% with your approach? Seriously?

Tell us how this can be stopped pal otherwise its you who are indulging in unrestrained waffle.

fryup

fryup wrote: »

the world is over-populated, maybe this is a blessing in disguise

realweirdo wrote: »

Maybe it is...are you prepared to take your chances? Probably not!

oh no i don't want it on my doorstep...as long as it happens over there i'm fine with that

realweirdo

Turtwig wrote: »

Oh sweet divine mercy.

The virus hasn't even wiped out a million people. Liberia and other nations preliminary infected lost control of their outbreaks month's ago. There hasn't been an actual legitimate threat to the majority population of any western society as of yet. Heck, even Africa is mostly unscathed. A lot of people will die there from Ebola, but it won't even be the biggest killer of humans in those regions this year.

Ebola for all it's achievements is still killed by soap and it's not really that contagious. Highest risk are those in impoverished areas (nightmare: being an shanty town/slum/urban deprived area infected) and frontline health workers, particularly those with less experience of viruses of that nature. Odds are most people in the world who die within the next decade won't die from ebola.

There's a lesson here for public health officials. Swine Flu, actually had more potential it affected the same demographics that ebola did whereas all ebola has going for it is supposed 50% fatality rate (but we have no idea how higher standards of care may impact that). Yet, I guess, as if by a self fulfilling prophecy of the mythical status of this virus people are terrified over ebola and were extremely naive over H1N1. One of them seems to be achieving it's potential - may even surpass it, the other, thankfully, didn't even come close.

Another example of someone who just doesn't get it. One of the more frightening aspects of this outbreak is the number of people who don't grasp its seriousness. I seem to be the only one who does!

Turtwig

realweirdo wrote: »

Another example of someone who just doesn't get it. One of the more frightening aspects of this outbreak is the number of people who don't grasp its seriousness. I seem to be the only one who does!

Pretty sure I wrote months ago on this website that this was really serious for the affected regions just not to the globe, or humanity, as a whole.

realweirdo

fryup wrote: »

oh no i don't want it on my doorstep...as long as it happens over there i'm fine with that

Your view would probably typify a lot. As long as its over there its not my problem etc...

Streetwalker

realweirdo wrote: »

Another example of someone who just doesn't get it. One of the more frightening aspects of this outbreak is the number of people who don't grasp its seriousness. I seem to be the only one who does!

I think people are in denial. Hope they are right.

ceadaoin.

realweirdo wrote: »

Another example of someone who just doesn't get it. One of the more frightening aspects of this outbreak is the number of people who don't grasp its seriousness. I seem to be the only one who does!

Plenty of people here understand how serious it is but there's no need to get hysterical just yet. There is a middle ground between head in the sand and outright panic, that's probably where we should be right now.

nyarlothothep

10,000 cases a week though. Is that by December?

realweirdo

The most likely way ebola will eventually spread to countries like India or the continent of Asia will be via air travel. If it gets into the slums of India, Bangladesh, etc longterm you could probably write off large parts of those countries. These are not rich countries, impoverished mostly with very weak healthcare systems in parts especially for the poor. Its not just Africa that is dirt poor. In fact something like 2 billion people live on less than 2 dollars a day and have all the conditions necessary for the rapid spread of ebola.

Still, we shouldn't be worried...according to some!

Canis Lupus

realweirdo wrote: »

The most likely way ebola will eventually spread to countries like India or the continent of Asia will be via air travel. If it gets into the slums of India, Bangladesh, etc longterm you could probably write off large parts of those countries. These are not rich countries, impoverished mostly with very weak healthcare systems in parts especially for the poor. Its not just Africa that is dirt poor. In fact something like 2 billion people live on less than 2 dollars a day and have all the conditions necessary for the rapid spread of ebola.

Still, we shouldn't be worried...according to some!

Relax, if it spreads to India etc it'll probably become worth it for the drugs company to come up with a cure. Everyone benefits.

realweirdo

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Relax, if it spreads to India etc it'll probably become worth it for the drugs company to come up with a cure. Everyone benefits.

Yeh a real win-win alright.

buried

realweirdo wrote: »

Another example of someone who just doesn't get it. One of the more frightening aspects of this outbreak is the number of people who don't grasp its seriousness. I seem to be the only one who does!

In fairness though, I think that has a lot to do with the frequent hyped media overkill of 'potential' pandemics such as SARS/Bird Flu etc from the last decade. Many people just figure this is another one. But your right, this is the serious one.

youtube!

I ask again why are the WHO predicting 10,000 a week by Xmas and if that does come to pass how in the hell are we gonna deal with it given the fact that it will be a runaway train by that point?

nyarlothothep

youtube! wrote: »

I ask again why are the WHO predicting 10,000 a week by Xmas and if that does come to pass how in the hell are we gonna deal with it given the fact that it will be a runaway train by that point?

Vaccine or cure, it's the only way. Science will save us! (joking). It's already a runaway train.

up for anything

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Relax, if it spreads to India etc it'll probably become worth it for the drugs company to come up with a cure. Everyone benefits.

That is pretty cold even for AH.