As above, there have always been airborne strains of Ebola. The difference between these and those transmitted by bodily fluid exchange are that the airborne strains are nowhere near as virulent.
You're probably talking about the incident in Reston (funnily enough, about two miles from where my company has a co-lo site ))
Lots of misinformation about this out there. I think this turned out to be as a result of monkeys from Asia infected with an unknown strain of virus with the same origins as Ebola, but from a completely different part of the world. No evidence that it was airborne, and of the people who were tested for signs of infection, only a few of them showed low levels of the virus in their blood - with none of them becoming seriously ill. So, basically, it is possible that they had the milder, airborne strain of Ebola (though by no means certain that this was the case), and in any case, the strain they had - although fatal to at least some of the monkeys, wasn't dangerous to humans. The worrying aspect of this is that it confirms Ebola is 'out there' in the wild in other parts of the world than West/Central Africa.
@Leroy Ambrose based on your knowledge of the virus and by the sounds of it your profession, what are our chances with a vaccine/treating the disease. Why did the British doctor (can't remember his name) survive while others like the priests die?
As above, there have always been airborne strains of Ebola. The difference between these and those transmitted by bodily fluid exchange are that the airborne strains are nowhere near as virulent.
You're probably talking about the incident in Reston (funnily enough, about two miles from where my company has a co-lo site ))
Lots of misinformation about this out there. I think this turned out to be as a result of monkeys from Asia infected with an unknown strain of virus with the same origins as Ebola, but from a completely different part of the world. No evidence that it was airborne, and of the people who were tested for signs of infection, only a few of them showed low levels of the virus in their blood - with none of them becoming seriously ill. So, basically, it is possible that they had the milder, airborne strain of Ebola (though by no means certain that this was the case), and in any case, the strain they had - although fatal to at least some of the monkeys, wasn't dangerous to humans. The worrying aspect of this is that it confirms Ebola is 'out there' in the wild in other parts of the world than West/Central Africa.
@Leroy Ambrose based on your knowledge of the virus and by the sounds of it your profession, what are our chances with a vaccine/treating the disease. Why did the British doctor (can't remember his name) survive while others like the priests die?
Totally not my profession. I come from a scientific background originally, and have a strong interest in science in general. I've always been fascinated by viruses - they're amazing little things. Perfectly designed.
There are serious efforts under way to produce a cure and a vaccine. A vaccine is some way off, but there's already an extremely promising 'cure' (in fact, to answer the second question, that's why the British nurse (not doctor) survived - he was given an experimental drug (called 'Zeemapp') which - despite not yet having undergone proper clinical trials, has proven to be 100% effective on the patients it's been given to. Unfortunately, the production of this drug is slow and at present, very small scale. If Ebola becomes a global pandemic, it will take ages to ramp production up enough to even touch the surface of what will be required. It's a brutal scenario if it ever escalates that far.
As above, there have always been airborne strains of Ebola. The difference between these and those transmitted by bodily fluid exchange are that the airborne strains are nowhere near as virulent.
You're probably talking about the incident in Reston (funnily enough, about two miles from where my company has a co-lo site ))
Lots of misinformation about this out there. I think this turned out to be as a result of monkeys from Asia infected with an unknown strain of virus with the same origins as Ebola, but from a completely different part of the world. No evidence that it was airborne, and of the people who were tested for signs of infection, only a few of them showed low levels of the virus in their blood - with none of them becoming seriously ill. So, basically, it is possible that they had the milder, airborne strain of Ebola (though by no means certain that this was the case), and in any case, the strain they had - although fatal to at least some of the monkeys, wasn't dangerous to humans. The worrying aspect of this is that it confirms Ebola is 'out there' in the wild in other parts of the world than West/Central Africa.
@Leroy Ambrose based on your knowledge of the virus and by the sounds of it your profession, what are our chances with a vaccine/treating the disease. Why did the British doctor (can't remember his name) survive while others like the priests die?
A long way from a vaccine because relatively little research has been done into Ebola because although it has a very high kill rate of up to 90% it effects relatively few people and certainly not thus far where it matters in the west.
It's unclear why some die and some survive the disease but it's fairly obvious that someone treated in a western hospital and having available everything that modern medicine can provide would have a better survival chance than someone in a village in West Africa.
There are two vaccines available for testing but development is bogged down in all manner of problems. GSK is one of the pharmas involved but the sums of money required to scale up production of a vaccine that may not work and with an unknown shelf life are enormous. The US govt may be willing to fund but who pays up if it goes badly wrong?
Viruses are clever little buggers - but you could argue that Ebola is not a very efficient one.
It has a very high mortality rate and it kills people before they have a chance to pass it on to a great number of other people.
If it did become airborne it would probably also mutate to either become less deady or at least not kill the hosts so quickly.
Scary stuff nonetheless.
It does transfer through the air already, and has done since the 1930's, but mutates into an influenza
Ebola didn't emerge until 1976.
I think that was when it was first identified as a separate virus. No doubt it had quietly been killing Africans long before that.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
As above, there have always been airborne strains of Ebola. The difference between these and those transmitted by bodily fluid exchange are that the airborne strains are nowhere near as virulent.
You're probably talking about the incident in Reston (funnily enough, about two miles from where my company has a co-lo site ))
Lots of misinformation about this out there. I think this turned out to be as a result of monkeys from Asia infected with an unknown strain of virus with the same origins as Ebola, but from a completely different part of the world. No evidence that it was airborne, and of the people who were tested for signs of infection, only a few of them showed low levels of the virus in their blood - with none of them becoming seriously ill. So, basically, it is possible that they had the milder, airborne strain of Ebola (though by no means certain that this was the case), and in any case, the strain they had - although fatal to at least some of the monkeys, wasn't dangerous to humans. The worrying aspect of this is that it confirms Ebola is 'out there' in the wild in other parts of the world than West/Central Africa.
Leroy, what on Earth do you think you're doing?
This isn't the place for well thought-out, fact-based, detailed and honest analysis of the situation. If we all descended to this ridiculous idea of "telling the truth" where are we going to get any decent, proper, old-fashioned panic from?
I suggest you go back and edit some of your posts. It's almost as if you want people to stop with the anxiety attacks.
Viruses are clever little buggers - but you could argue that Ebola is not a very efficient one.
It has a very high mortality rate and it kills people before they have a chance to pass it on to a great number of other people.
If it did become airborne it would probably also mutate to either become less deady or at least not kill the hosts so quickly.
Scary stuff nonetheless.
It does transfer through the air already, and has done since the 1930's, but mutates into an influenza
Ebola didn't emerge until 1976.
I think that was when it was first identified as a separate virus. No doubt it had quietly been killing Africans long before that.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
Viruses are clever little buggers - but you could argue that Ebola is not a very efficient one.
It has a very high mortality rate and it kills people before they have a chance to pass it on to a great number of other people.
If it did become airborne it would probably also mutate to either become less deady or at least not kill the hosts so quickly.
Scary stuff nonetheless.
It does transfer through the air already, and has done since the 1930's, but mutates into an influenza
Ebola didn't emerge until 1976.
I think that was when it was first identified as a separate virus. No doubt it had quietly been killing Africans long before that.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
Not as Ebola it wasn't.
It's likely that Ebola had been around for much longer than the outbreak which alerted the scientists who 'discovered' it. It's particularly virulent, and would probably have killed almost everyone who contracted it back when it was confined to small, isolated villages. No exaggeration to say that it's possible it even pre-dates humanity
Viruses are clever little buggers - but you could argue that Ebola is not a very efficient one.
It has a very high mortality rate and it kills people before they have a chance to pass it on to a great number of other people.
If it did become airborne it would probably also mutate to either become less deady or at least not kill the hosts so quickly.
Scary stuff nonetheless.
It does transfer through the air already, and has done since the 1930's, but mutates into an influenza
Ebola didn't emerge until 1976.
I think that was when it was first identified as a separate virus. No doubt it had quietly been killing Africans long before that.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
Not as Ebola it wasn't.
It's likely that Ebola had been around for much longer than the outbreak which alerted the scientists who 'discovered' it. It's particularly virulent, and would probably have killed almost everyone who contracted it back when it was confined to small, isolated villages. No exaggeration to say that it's possible it even pre-dates humanity
No guesses as to what would be your specialist subject on Mastermind, Leroy.
Viruses are clever little buggers - but you could argue that Ebola is not a very efficient one.
It has a very high mortality rate and it kills people before they have a chance to pass it on to a great number of other people.
If it did become airborne it would probably also mutate to either become less deady or at least not kill the hosts so quickly.
Scary stuff nonetheless.
It does transfer through the air already, and has done since the 1930's, but mutates into an influenza
Ebola didn't emerge until 1976.
I think that was when it was first identified as a separate virus. No doubt it had quietly been killing Africans long before that.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
Not as Ebola it wasn't.
It's likely that Ebola had been around for much longer than the outbreak which alerted the scientists who 'discovered' it. It's particularly virulent, and would probably have killed almost everyone who contracted it back when it was confined to small, isolated villages. No exaggeration to say that it's possible it even pre-dates humanity
I'm being pedantic but Ebola was named after the Ebola River in Congo when it was first recognised as a disease in 1976. I have little doubt that the actual virus was around for some time before but whatever it was it wasn't Ebola.
Viruses are clever little buggers - but you could argue that Ebola is not a very efficient one.
It has a very high mortality rate and it kills people before they have a chance to pass it on to a great number of other people.
If it did become airborne it would probably also mutate to either become less deady or at least not kill the hosts so quickly.
Scary stuff nonetheless.
It does transfer through the air already, and has done since the 1930's, but mutates into an influenza
Ebola didn't emerge until 1976.
I think that was when it was first identified as a separate virus. No doubt it had quietly been killing Africans long before that.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
Not as Ebola it wasn't.
It's likely that Ebola had been around for much longer than the outbreak which alerted the scientists who 'discovered' it. It's particularly virulent, and would probably have killed almost everyone who contracted it back when it was confined to small, isolated villages. No exaggeration to say that it's possible it even pre-dates humanity
No guesses as to what would be your specialist subject on Mastermind, Leroy.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29559444
Starting to think it's a bag of bollocks and I should just read the experts on CL!
There are serious efforts under way to produce a cure and a vaccine. A vaccine is some way off, but there's already an extremely promising 'cure' (in fact, to answer the second question, that's why the British nurse (not doctor) survived - he was given an experimental drug (called 'Zeemapp') which - despite not yet having undergone proper clinical trials, has proven to be 100% effective on the patients it's been given to. Unfortunately, the production of this drug is slow and at present, very small scale. If Ebola becomes a global pandemic, it will take ages to ramp production up enough to even touch the surface of what will be required. It's a brutal scenario if it ever escalates that far.
It's unclear why some die and some survive the disease but it's fairly obvious that someone treated in a western hospital and having available everything that modern medicine can provide would have a better survival chance than someone in a village in West Africa.
Fed up of reading the papers and the away they are reporting this. Let us just hope that continued help/assistance into West Africa will help.
Anyway, regarding the airport screening programmes. Tropical virus guy on BBC this morining said they were pointless.
In the States, they've had 5 kids die with a virus called EV-D68 which has affected people in 43 states this year, West Nile Fever has killed 1100 people and has been seen in every state except Maine and god knows what else there is.
Of course, they'd prevent hundreds of thousands of premature deaths if they screened Americans for overeating.
Has severe coughing, where hes coughing up blood. Told us he had diarrhea and was sweating all through the night along with painful headaches.
Where telling him to get the f*ck home and go straight to NHS no messing about.
Might just be a nasty flu but concerned.
This isn't the place for well thought-out, fact-based, detailed and honest analysis of the situation. If we all descended to this ridiculous idea of "telling the truth" where are we going to get any decent, proper, old-fashioned panic from?
I suggest you go back and edit some of your posts. It's almost as if you want people to stop with the anxiety attacks.
Not as Ebola it wasn't.
We know he's not got Ebola. But he adebola - boom tish