Ebola: Facts, Opinions, and Speculations.

a reply to: joho99

Now there's an eye-opener.

As of Wednesday, roughly $155 million has so far been delivered, with funds coming from countries, global agencies, private companies, individuals and other entities, according to data collected by the Financial Tracking Service (FTS), which records all reported international humanitarian aid.

According to FTS’s most recent data, another $183.5 million has been pledged—meaning the donations have been promised but not yet delivered—and on Tuesday, the Obama Administration committed an additional $500 million. If every dollar pledged so far is delivered, $838 million will have been donated to fight the ongoing Ebola crisis.

a reply to: soficrow


I thought so to.
Am going to be keeping a eye on it.
Total Humanitarian Funding per Donor in 2014

I've updated the Ebola charts with the data published by WHO on September 16, 2014. Here is a link to the start of the updated charts:

First post in the latest series of Ebola chart updates

Since the WHO reports have been running further behind and are sometimes missing major chunks of current data (like the hundreds of new cases reported by the government of Liberia after September 9th), I've filled in missing details with Situation Reports from the governments of Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, Senegal, and Sierra Leone. By doing that I've been able to update the charts with the official data through September 13, 2014.

Is there any way some discussions can be put into this thread? Like many of you...I have been following the Ebola outbreak since the beginning of the year and thats what prompted me to create an account on this website...because I know it's a discerning group of people (long time follower..I consider this website a place to find out whats really going on in the world). But do we need to have another string for every headline? I so so appreciate the senior members....and such knowledgeable people who put a lot of time into tracking down facts and figures and present them so professionally. I can't say enough about that. But this is getting really hard to follow with so many threads....sorry...maybe I'm just ranting - but in no way complaining!

a reply to: CatLady3912
It could be labor-intensive to keep up with all the Ebola threads, true. I like the setup though. Think about like this: with many threads, you can skip a lot of reading that isn't that important or priority to whatever is piquing your interest of the Ebola crisis, at the moment. Maybe later, if time allows, you can then read up on all the 'filler' Ebola threads, or not.

Works for me.

I've updated the Ebola charts with the latest data that was released by WHO on September 18, 2014. Here's a link to the first of the charts:

Updated Ebola Charts

www.pmnewsnigeria.com... ebola-lagos-clears-last-suspect-affirms-sept-22-resumption-date/

"...I am glad to report to you that the last person under surveilance was cleared this morning. He tested negative and that means there is no more Ebola in Lagos.
“Now that the disease has been successfully contained, schools can resume for normal academic session,” he said.

If true this is a huge win.

A very long article about the type of breathing filters that should be used by health care workers. I actually feel vindicated in that potential transmission via inhalation of aerosols (sneeze, cough, etc) cannot be ruled out by the current observed risk factors or the current knowledge of the infection process.

www.cidrap.umn.edu...

What do we know about Ebola transmission?

No one knows for certain how Ebola virus is transmitted from one person to the next. The virus has been found in the saliva, stool, breast milk, semen, and blood of infected persons.8,9 Studies of transmission in Ebola virus outbreaks have identified activities like caring for an infected person, sharing a bed, funeral activities, and contact with blood or other body fluids to be key risk factors for transmission.10-12

On the basis of epidemiologic evidence, it has been presumed that Ebola viruses are transmitted by contaminated hands in contact with the mouth or eyes or broken skin or by splashes or sprays of body fluids into these areas. Ebola viruses appear to be capable of initiating infection in a variety of human cell types,13,14 but the primary portal or portals of entry into susceptible hosts have not been identified.

Some pathogens are limited in the cell type and location they infect. Influenza, for example, is generally restricted to respiratory epithelial cells, which explains why flu is primarily a respiratory infection and is most likely aerosol transmissible. HIV infects T-helper cells in the lymphoid tissues and is primarily a bloodborne pathogen with low probability for transmission via aerosols.

Ebola virus, on the other hand, is a broader-acting and more non-specific pathogen that can impede the proper functioning of macrophages and dendritic cells—immune response cells located throughout the epithelium.15,16 Epithelial tissues are found throughout the body, including in the respiratory tract. Ebola prevents these cells from carrying out their antiviral functions but does not interfere with the initial inflammatory response, which attracts additional cells to the infection site. The latter contribute to further dissemination of the virus and similar adverse consequences far beyond the initial infection site.

The potential for transmission via inhalation of aerosols, therefore, cannot be ruled out by the observed risk factors or our knowledge of the infection process. Many body fluids, such as vomit, diarrhea, blood, and saliva, are capable of creating inhalable aerosol particles in the immediate vicinity of an infected person. Cough was identified among some cases in a 1995 outbreak in Kikwit, Democratic Republic of the Congo,11 and coughs are known to emit viruses in respirable particles.17 The act of vomiting produces an aerosol and has been implicated in airborne transmission of gastrointestinal viruses.18,19 Regarding diarrhea, even when contained by toilets, toilet flushing emits a pathogen-laden aerosol that disperses in the air.20-22

Experimental work has shown that Marburg and Ebola viruses can be isolated from sera and tissue culture medium at room temperature for up to 46 days, but at room temperature no virus was recovered from glass, metal, or plastic surfaces.23 Aerosolized (1-3 mcm) Marburg, Ebola, and Reston viruses, at 50% to 55% relative humidity and 72°F, had biological decay rates of 3.04%, 3.06%. and 1.55% per minute, respectively. These rates indicate that 99% loss in aerosol infectivity would occur in 93, 104, and 162 minutes, respectively.23

What you posted is common knowledge and has been covered in depth. If you are within 3 feet of an infected person and they cough or sneeze you are in an area of potential infection via droplet transmission. That doesn't make it an airborne pathogen though.

a reply to: 727Sky

Yes, pretty much any modern country would be able to contain it very easily. It is a very inefficient virus when it comes to transmission.

a reply to: Richn777

a reply to: CatLady3912

Here's a link to the Disease and Pandemic Forum, which is a handy way of keeping track of all the Ebola threads.

I have it as a favorite forum in MyATS, which allows me to view the 5 latest threads, off to the left, and all my subscribed threads off to the right.

IMHO, MyATS is the easiest way to track the topics and threads you are interested in.

originally posted by: raymundoko
Yes, pretty much any modern country would be able to contain it very easily. It is a very inefficient virus when it comes to transmission.

a reply to: Richn777

If that was really the case we would not be getting the reaction we are now from the modern country's governments.

Actions speak far louder than words.

originally posted by: joho99

originally posted by: raymundoko
Yes, pretty much any modern country would be able to contain it very easily. It is a very inefficient virus when it comes to transmission.

a reply to: Richn777

If that was really the case we would not be getting the reaction we are now from the modern country's governments.

Actions speak far louder than words.

What actions? extremely slow and late responses of a call to arms? that's all I've seen so far, which is a shame.

a reply to: clenz

I am referring more to the present they are starting to throw money and people and equipment at it.

Probably because up till now they actually believed that it would not be a real problem for them.

Like a lot of people in modern country's.

a reply to: raymundoko


I'm beginning to agree. In its current form, I don’t see Ebola causing a threat to the first world. With proper contact reporting and isolation/supervision, Ebola can be controlled as it has seemed to be in Nigeria. I also believe that people that say the US/Europe is dirty/filthy have never actual been to a third world country and witnessed the realities of life under those conditions. When a good portion of a population in an area have never taken a shower in their lives and have never used a flushing toilet, its understandable that these types of viruses thrive.

Ebola is still a monster and there is still the threat of airborne mutation, but despite the trends I’m beginning to be less scared of a global pandemic. I really hope this outbreak can be contained/controlled and West Africa can recover. It will be a long time before that happens though.

a reply to: Richn777

Ironically a flushing toilet would help spread it.

More so in public toilets that do not have lids.

A study of lid-less toilets in hospitals confirms that toilets are little volcanoes of bacteria

a reply to: joho99

I bet it’s still beats not having running water in a dense population area. Interesting read, also reminded me of reading that humans weren’t designed to poop while sitting. It’s healthier to squat and poop. It aligns your intestines better or something.

a reply to: Richn777

It is more a question of how do they contact trace everyone who uses a public toilet.
That is presuming they make the connection in the first place.


Or imagine it is from a night club.
I used to work the doors and some of the toilets are disgusting at the end of the night.

What i am saying is we are safe up to a point but then it breaks down given sufficient numbers.

Do not even get me started on the amount of people who are sick and some poor sod has to clean it up lol

In case people missed it, Bloomberg and other news sources around the world are reporting a leaked CDC projection of 550,000 Ebola cases by the end of January 2015. This represents a worst case scenario if efforts to slow the spread are not effective in time. Bloomberg noted the projection numbers may change before the CDC report is published this next week.

It's a big enough news leak that the White House responded:

Asked about the CDC projection, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the U.S. commitment of $1 billion for the response to Ebola will have the effect of spurring other nations to increase their assistance.

“The projections you’re citing are long-term projections,” Earnest said yesterday. “That’s why the president was demonstrating a sense of urgency” when he spoke about the outbreak earlier this week.

SOURCE: Bloomberg

So it's not official, but the White House has acknowledged the projection.

I've updated the Ebola projection charts with the leaked CDC projection so people can compare the projections. The charts are in one large graphic. Click the graphic if you want to view it larger. If your browser automatically downsizes large graphics, you may have to click it a second time once the graphic loads to view it full-sized [1217(w) x 2928(h)].

I hope the trend can be changed. It looks bad to me, but draw your own conclusions.

See more details in this post on the Ebola Charts thread

I just saw the transcript of an interview with Laurie Garret on NPR (National Public Radio). There's audio too, but I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet. Some of you might recall I posted info from Laurie Garrett before in this thread. Suffice it to say the credentials with which she was introduced on NPR are an understatement:

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

We're joined now by Laurie Garrett who's a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. Of course, she won a Pulitzer for her coverage of the Ebola outbreak in Zaire in 1995. Laurie, thanks so much for being with us.

SOURCE: NPR (National Public Radio)

You can read more about her credentials here in a previous post of mine. Suffice it to say she is one of the most knowledgeable experts on Ebola in the world and she moves in the circles of the movers and shakers in the world. Every word she said during her interview on NPR should be taken quite seriously, but I have bolded some things that really stood out to me:

GARRETT: I would never have imagined an Ebola epidemic going at this pace...

...Ebola now represents a national security threat for every nation on Earth.

SIMON: Help us begin to grasp the consequences of what happens if it can't be contained.

GARRETT: Well, this, Scott, is my biggest concern - that we're coming very late to the game. Even the U.S. military, which is the fastest mobilizing operation I know of, tells me directly in my meeting with the Joint Chiefs of Staff that it's going to take 50 to 100 days to mobilize the different elements that they've promised to commit. We're so far behind the virus that I'm quite fearful that we won't catch up. And what are the consequences of that? So if we conservatively - and this is considered a conservative guesstimate - say these three countries have a cumulative 15,000 cases, and you say, as it was announced, it's doubling every 15 to 21 days - so that means by the end of September, it will be 30,000, by the end of October, 120,000. And by the time we all gather around our Christmas trees, it'll be over 400,000.

So she's saying that by the time the US military can mobilize to provide the newly promised military assistance against Ebola there will conservatively be between 120,000 and 400,000 cases already. And she's saying no one she knows of can mobilize help faster.

I've been trying to stay optimistic, even while watch the numbers go up at an exponential rate as I update the charts. But that's bad. Really, really bad. Because...

Alessandro Vespignani, a professor of computational sciences at Northeastern University who has been involved in the computer modeling of Ebola’s spread, said that if the case count reaches hundreds of thousands, “there will be little we can do.”

SOURCE: New York Times