Ebola Patient in Atlanta Hospital

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Yes, his wife and two children flew back to the US for a family wedding on July 20, if memory serves.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I know I harp on this, but have you read anything definitive that states the disease can be tested for, before symptoms appear? Every instruction I find for testing also says follow-up after testing. The reason is possibly false negatives or inability to have reliable presymptomatic results.

Any help finding accuracy data on testing results, timelines, etc. is appreciated. We have a major testing problem which in and of itself creates the risk of the disease spreading and an inability to swiftly test suspected cases. I hope someone is focusing on this or the world's population could end up waiting in mass quarantines, if ebola spreads throughout other countries.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: DancedWithWolves


ETA: False negatives are more common with this than false positives, aren't they?

False negatives are quite common with many other types of tests.

Don't know why this would be any different. But we hope not..............

Sorry, yes I meant false negative but didn't get it corrected before your reply Lucidity. Positively I meant negative. Long day...

To much bouncing around at work today...clearly.

Yes, the disease will show up on a test usually 2 days after contracting it. That test takes 8 hours to complete and if it comes back negative you take it again 24 hours later.

a reply to: DancedWithWolves

a reply to: raymundoko
With no private testing lab facilities and only two public facilities capable of Ebola results in the US, that line when flu season starts could back up quickly.

If you wouldn't mind sharing sources of testing timelines and that two days after contracting threshold, it would be much appreciated. Thank you in advance for the information.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: DancedWithWolves

Hmm. They moved to Liberia? As in lived there? I didn't realize this.

ETA: False negatives are more common with this than false positives, aren't they? Need to read up more on that soon. But, you know what I've read also produces a lot of false positives and false negatives? Many of the reportedly engineered viruses, particularly the ones that wreak havoc on the autoimmune system.

Not to derail this thread---your ETA observations should probably go to the other thread ---but they caught my attention because just last night I was talking with a gal pal whose step-daughter works at a private lab that does contract work for the state when the state lab gets overwhelmed. They don't test for ebola or any virus, the tests they run concern contamination with bacteria but their false positive rate is about 30% while the false negative rate is close to 10%. She says this is pretty standard in the industry. Not sure what the standard is for viral tests like flu virus. Perhaps someone who knows about viral tests will chime in.
I have heard docs on radio speaking about engineered viruses and their "seeming" ability to mutate more quickly.

On topic---I'm very pleased to see that the doc is recovering. He's a very special sort of person.

does any body remember the movie World World Z of last year.
We are living a dejavu of that movie.
We are in the beginning of the movie now.
sick people chasing healthy people for their blood maybe (or flesh) and the healthy soon become zombie (infected).

How that movie presdicted so much of current epidemic , its like they knew how it's going to happen.

Omenous.
This thread might become the best of ats and the last

I

a reply to: DancedWithWolves

I was wrong, it's two days after symptoms...

www.cdc.gov...

originally posted by: reletomp
does any body remember the movie World World Z of last year.
We are living a dejavu of that movie.
We are in the beginning of the movie now.
sick people chasing healthy people for their blood maybe (or flesh) and the healthy soon become zombie (infected).

How that movie presdicted so much of current epidemic , its like they knew how it's going to happen.

Omenous.
This thread might become the best of ats and the last

You can't really chase anyone if you have ebola so... yeah.

if the person knows have ebola then he can (remember Suyer)

like if he was bitten but symptoms did not apper yet (few days) he will be chasing for dear life

originally posted by: reletomp
if the person knows have ebola then he can (remember Suyer)

like if he was bitten but symptoms did not apper yet (few days) he will be chasing for dear life

So people with ebola are gonna bite me?

they will only attack recovered persons who survived the disease. the 10%ers

the people who know they got infected because of being bitten or tested positive will not chase regulars among them because the regulars in close proximity of the zombies (symptoms just started but stll healthy to chase for a while) are already infected.

it is the regulars who will be quarantining people to see who will survivr to harvest their blood.




if they truelly know what is best for them all three groups should stay in hiding the infected because there is a 10% chance of recovery, the non infected so that they never bump in people who are normal or recovered (the recovered will infect him so then he will have to suck them once he see them when they find him ). the recovered can not possibly trust anybody.
they should all lie down hiding and wait it out , but that is not gonna happen.

if every body now lay down for 3 months no air travel.
then it wont spread.
the population movement is the unraveling of

but considering people wont believe untill they see with own eyes.

the best preventive practices now:

stay dormant at home or whatever for 20 days , no A/C or heating so not to bring air from infected outside.

not toucing face with fingers (eyes and lips and nose). washing hands with water every few hours just merely running water for short time few seconds to wash away viruses. every few hours.
face mask if had to if working in hospitals not only to filter the air (wet mask is better at catching smaller droplets of 0.2 micron water love water.
but also to prevent your self from touching face. eye glasses.

storing food for 20 days to be able to stay dormant (water too).

garlic.
break a garlic by your nose. garlic have a virus killer.

spray alcohol mist in air suspected of having cough mist like next to a patient. spray iodine tencture also on the air . or use it around to wipe with it direct and indirect contact.

originally posted by: raymundoko
I

a reply to: DancedWithWolves

I was wrong, it's two days after symptoms...

www.cdc.gov...

Thanks. The link is saying 3-10 days after the onset of symptoms the virus can be confirmed. That's the equivalent of an early pregnancy test telling you, yes you are pregnant after the baby is born. Yes, we have a testing problem.

So essentially quarantine anyone exposed for as much as 31 days? And if they have and survive ebola it is several months that they can carry (secrete) the virus.

* crap*

Thanks for the help with the timeline part of the question. Not the answer I had hoped for, but the one I expected.

Ebola virus is detected in blood only after onset of symptoms, most notably fever. It may take up to 3 days post-onset of symptoms for the virus to reach detectable levels. Virus is generally detectable by real-time RT-PCR from 3-10 days post-onset of symptoms, but has been detected for several months in certain secretions. Specimens ideally should be taken when a symptomatic patient reports to a healthcare facility and is suspected of having an EVD exposure; however, if the onset of symptoms is

ebola is detected indirectly by body reaction to it (elisa) two days after exposure (when ebola enter the body).
patient exposed (not knowing he is exposed till the test) keep infecting other people untill symptoms appear when he stops infecting other people for a short while of the symptoms. after his death the first few hours become very infecting to surroundings and should be bagged carefully (not washing him, but in tight bag)burried deep.

In case he survived (little chance) he will infect people for quite a while depending on incubation period.a reply to: DancedWithWolves

a reply to: DancedWithWolves

I haven't really read anything definitive and have been wondering about this too. Not enough coffee yet, so bear with me here. I'm not a doc or virologist, just logic-ing it out from what we've been told.

There' a little information out there about how they were/are actually testing, how long results take, and exactly what they are/were using testing in Africa to this point. But we can speculate a little and maybe some medical experts can say yes or no that's the right path.

From what I understand, when this outbreak first started, surfacing early this year (or by some accounts late last year), they first tested people with tests that looked for known human antibodies (the antibodies a human produces when naturally trying to fight the diseease) against know strains of marburg and ebola and sometimes got a hit on one ebola or another. It's always hit or miss with new strains and the body's reaction to same.

In April, when they identified the Guinea strain as having the genetic characteristics of 98% Zaire, I believe, plus bits to of two (I think it was two) other strains plus some variants, they were able to start fine tuning the testing and developing more definitive testing. So depending on which test was used, how well it was developed and what it encountered might explain away the false results.

Researchers identify a new variant of Ebola virus in Guinea

So it is only after they identify it that they can start developing more definitive tests, as well as vaccines and treatments targeted to the specific strain, which is typical with all viral outbreaks, even things like the flu, and which is trick given the way viruses can combine, adapt, mutate, what have you. How good and how fast the "test" is just depends.

It seems to a lot of people that even after it was identified that there wasn't a lot of effort thrown this way until people other than Africans started coming up with it. But I'm sure this wasn't true. They were. It just that it takes time for development and and time for testing, which is in short supply when you have a pandemic brewing. Now a lot more companies are rushing to develop better and faster testing, with samples from the people in Atlanta, as well.

The FDA authorized a test they had in development/reserve that they think works or might work under something called an emergency-use provision (in other words, they fast-tracked it for use before it was really thoroughly tested and ready (see above). And, again, viruses adapt and change, so...

US authorises emergency use of Ebola test to battle virus outbreak

The test, called DoD EZ1 Real-time RT-PCR Assay, is designed for use on individuals who have symptoms of Ebola infection, who are at risk for exposure or who may have been exposed. It can take as long as 21 days for symptoms to appear after infections.

The agency can evoke emergency authorization for a medical product it has not approved when there are no adequate alternatives.

So anyway, now there are many more companies working on it and much more fast tracking of investment and research and experimental release.

FDA authorizes emergency use of military-developed Ebola test

Which just continues to beg the question. How many false negatives or positives are we getting? Maybe not that many, as the Guinea outbreak is primarily Zaire and other ebolas and they know what markers to look for as well as what the body is producing in response.

(I'll read this later and call it sloppy, but I hope you get the jist....)

a reply to: DancedWithWolves

No worries. I'm so groggy I'm not sure all my thoughts above came out clear either. Ha.

originally posted by: diggindirt

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: DancedWithWolves

Hmm. They moved to Liberia? As in lived there? I didn't realize this.

ETA: False negatives are more common with this than false positives, aren't they? Need to read up more on that soon. But, you know what I've read also produces a lot of false positives and false negatives? Many of the reportedly engineered viruses, particularly the ones that wreak havoc on the autoimmune system.

Not to derail this thread---your ETA observations should probably go to the other thread ---but they caught my attention because just last night I was talking with a gal pal whose step-daughter works at a private lab that does contract work for the state when the state lab gets overwhelmed. They don't test for ebola or any virus, the tests they run concern contamination with bacteria but their false positive rate is about 30% while the false negative rate is close to 10%. She says this is pretty standard in the industry. Not sure what the standard is for viral tests like flu virus. Perhaps someone who knows about viral tests will chime in.
I have heard docs on radio speaking about engineered viruses and their "seeming" ability to mutate more quickly.

On topic---I'm very pleased to see that the doc is recovering. He's a very special sort of person.

Interesting about the 10% number. I'd say it was a lot higher for some things, but this is just personnel observation on my part after my 23 years off fighting Lyme and all the false negatives and false positives my test results come back with from it for other similar auto-immune "disorders" (MS, Lupus, fibromyalgia, CFS, to name a few) and how they really can't definitively diagnose it or cure and also watching the way that HIV, West Nile, and other things that cause s which I think are our autoimmune system responses to something that was engineered and released...be it from experiments gone wrong or via vaccines or what have you. If they can't explain or find it, I sure can't. All they can do is just try to explain and treat the symptoms. But at least they are doing that now. Used to be they just called you crazy.

They can't transfer it easily if they survive. It's basically a STD at that point.

a reply to: DancedWithWolves

The air isn't infected...run the ac all you want.

You obviously know nothing about Ebola. Please go to the conjecture thread Druid42 started.

a reply to: reletomp