Ebola; Epidemic, Pandemic, or Fear Mongering. Actual Rates of Transmission.

I came across this infographic and article on gizmodo.com, and it looks at Ebola and how fast it is transmitted.

www.gizmodo.com.au...

Many people are freaking out about ebola, but the fact is that there’s no reason to panic because it spreads too slowly. Way slower than other infectious diseases. The graphic above shows it clearly: While a measles patient can infect a maximum of 18 people on average, an ebola patient can only infect two.

That’s what basic R0 means — the “maximum number of people who can catch the disease from one sick person, on average, in an outbreak” when “everyone in the population is susceptible to the disease.” This is also known as reproduction number or R nought.

Statistically, this means that the virus can easily be stopped in a highly developed country like the United States, ...

Now Ebola has a high fatality rate, but is that a good thing seeing that people are more likely to die before spreading it. In its current form it does not appear to travel that easily, and unlike a lot of African countries, there seems more efficient general practices in isolating and quarantining people. HIV, SARS, the Mumps, and the Measles are all far more infectious diseases. In its current state transmission of the disease requires one to come into close contact with body fluids like blood or vomit.

If the disease mutates and becomes airborne, yes, a very different and potentially very dangerous scenario is possible, but are we witnessing overhyped fear mongering, or is the panic that some feel justified?

Worth reading for another perspective is this article;

www.theguardian.com...

Professor Peter Piot believes it could become a pandemic, but seems of the opinion it could devastate the developing world but be brought under control much easier in developed nations like the United States.

Do you think we might be facing the beginnings of a pandemic?

There will certainly be Ebola patients from Africa who come to us in the hopes of receiving treatment. And they might even infect a few people here who may then die. But an outbreak in Europe or North America would quickly be brought under control. I am more worried about the many people from India who work in trade or industry in west Africa. It would only take one of them to become infected, travel to India to visit relatives during the virus's incubation period, and then, once he becomes sick, go to a public hospital there. Doctors and nurses in India, too, often don't wear protective gloves. They would immediately become infected and spread the virus.

The graphic above tells me I should be freaking out about other ailments more, not that I shouldn't be concerned about Ebola.

I'm sorry OP - your wonderful plea for the use of common sense is not what people want to see on ATS.

I completely agree with you, however. I've been reading about and watching a lot of documentaries regarding the current Ebola outbreak. Even in these small villages most people don't get sick. Once the victim starts feeling ill they typically hole up in their houses until either aid arrives or the pass.

In one case a man and his wife both had Ebola, but their three sons (who have very close contact with them, obviously) did not contract it. By the end of the documentary the wife was walking around and slowly getting better but the man was getting progressively worse..

And this is happening in a small village somewhere in Africa where they have probably never even seen hand sanitizer.

Here on ATS people are just looking for some doomporn. Common sense can GTFO - everything is out to get us.

I'm not saying we shouldn't take precautions - just that we shouldn't be fear mongering something that should be very manageable in any first-world country.


Be safe people. Both physically and mentally.

a reply to: TinkerHaus
I didn't consider this doom porn. I considered this a wake up call to my family about germs outside the home.

Have you read me type how surprised I was that because I read labels at the store I touch way more than I put in my cart?

I think most people are grossed out by others that have no sense of cleanliness in public, now I consider these people to be an actual threat to my families health.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: TinkerHaus
I didn't consider this doom porn. I considered this a wake up call to my family about germs outside the home.

Have you read me type how surprised I was that because I read labels at the store I touch way more than I put in my cart?

I think most people are grossed out by others that have no sense of cleanliness in public, now I consider these people to be an actual threat to my families health.

I think you're overreacting. You live in a world full of germs. There are tens of millions of bacteria on and inside you right now. You can't live in a cave forever - you will eventually have to come out and face the germ-ridden world.

Living in a constant state of fear and nervousness is probably worse for you in the long run than just accepting that the world is a dangerous place and trying to have the best time you can while you're here.

Again, I understand taking precautions. I, for example, never use my hands to open public restroom doors. I always use a towel (and if they only have dryers I will use my foot - seriously.) So I understand being aware and cautious - but you can't have a good life if you're in a constant state of hyper-nervousness.

Continue to be aware, but don't let your awareness be a driving force in your life.

a reply to: cuckooold

I think the rate at which Ebola infects is dependent so far on geography and the population density. There is a very real chance of an airborne mutation that would skyrocket infection rates. Every time Ebola infects a new person, trillions of the virus are replicated, every one of those replications provides a chance for mutation. They've described over 50 mutations that we have witnessed since the outbreak began. As Ebola is exposed to the more densely populated areas, expect the infections per person number to go up. These things start slow, in the past 3 weeks there have been more infections than the entire outbreak leading up to those 3 weeks. It is an exponential equation. We are nearing the point where this can go one of two ways.. There is a window for us to operate in and be successful in stopping this spread. Some Doctors speculate that we may have already surpassed that window but many others feel we have time to slow this down before we suffer more drastic casualties but the window is indeed closing. If this is not contained, we will face a scenario where we have to let the virus burn itself out. In other words, isolate it enough that it can run its course until all infected have died or beat the virus.

a reply to: cuckooold
Are we not vacinated against measles?

a reply to: Iamthatbish

I think most people are grossed out by others that have no sense of cleanliness in public, now I consider these people to be an actual threat to my families health.

I completely agree and have the perfect antidote from yesterday to illustrate this. It happened to my neighbor, and she was appalled, disgusted, and in disbelief afterwards.

She was at the grocery store and noticed one of those moms that allows her kid to touch, play with, and eat everything in the fruit/veggie aisle. As luck would have it, this shopper ended up behind her in the checkout lane. As her last item was rung up, the child behind her proceeded to pee on the grocery store floor. The cashier wiped up the floor with paper towels then went back to the register, touched his touchscreen, and handled the money ALL WITHOUT SO MUCH AS USING HAND SANITIZER. No sanitizing of the floor, no sanitizing of his hands...nada.

Being a first world country just means there are a thousand more opportunities during the day for germs to spread.

originally posted by: ZiggyMojo
a reply to: cuckooold

I think the rate at which Ebola infects is dependent so far on geography and the population density. There is a very real chance of an airborne mutation that would skyrocket infection rates. Every time Ebola infects a new person, trillions of the virus are replicated, every one of those replications provides a chance for mutation. They've described over 50 mutations that we have witnessed since the outbreak began. As Ebola is exposed to the more densely populated areas, expect the infections per person number to go up. These things start slow, in the past 3 weeks there have been more infections than the entire outbreak leading up to those 3 weeks. It is an exponential equation. We are nearing the point where this can go one of two ways.. There is a window for us to operate in and be successful in stopping this spread. Some Doctors speculate that we may have already surpassed that window but many others feel we have time to slow this down before we suffer more drastic casualties but the window is indeed closing. If this is not contained, we will face a scenario where we have to let the virus burn itself out. In other words, isolate it enough that it can run its course until all infected have died or beat the virus.

I disagree with a lot of what you've said here. Ebola already IS in some VERY densely populated areas (Monrovia?)

Have you ever seen Monrovia? The place is like a preschool for the destitute. If you've never seen a preschool it's like 40 kids packed into a tiny room. Everyone gets EVERYONE'S germs, and as a parent is sucks.

Some of the areas where Ebola has already been found and much more densely populated than any area in the US - and about 1000x dirtier. On top of that, many of these people don't even believe in Ebola and yet still the transmission rate remains relatively low.

The transmission rate will remain where it is because Ebola won't spread far in first-world countries.

Additionally, despite what the media tells you, virologists are very skeptical that Ebola will change it's transmission method.. Why? Because we've never seen a virus, ever, in the history of medicine change how it is transmitted. The media just likes to sell papers.

Here you can read what actual virologists (not the media) say about Ebola going airborne.

When it comes to viruses, it is always difficult to predict what they can or cannot do. It is instructive, however, to see what viruses have done in the past, and use that information to guide our thinking. Therefore we can ask: has any human virus ever changed its mode of transmission?

The answer is no. We have been studying viruses for over 100 years, and we’ve never seen a human virus change the way it is transmitted.

HIV-1 has infected millions of humans since the early 1900s. It is still transmitted among humans by introduction of the virus into the body by sex, contaminated needles, or during childbirth.

Hepatitis C virus has infected millions of humans since its discovery in the 1980s. It is still transmitted among humans by introduction of the virus into the body by contaminated needles, blood, and during birth.

There is no reason to believe that Ebola virus is any different from any of the viruses that infect humans and have not changed the way that they are spread.

Like I said, OP - ATS hates common sense. The people here, generally speaking, prefer to think that around every corner is some insidious horror just waiting to munch on their soul. If it's not Ebola it's a meteor, or ghosts, or aliens.

But history and the facts say that, for example, Enterovirus is a much larger threat to Americans (and others in first-world countries) than Ebola.

You guys are nuts to downplay Ebola, it is a threat, it is doom porn and it should be rightfully so. The more you relax and downplay the more likely there will be accidental transmissions because people don't take it seriously enough. And if it goes airborne we are in for a whole new beast:

We Can’t Stop the Ebola Epidemic Unless We Understand How It’s Spread

Michael T. Osterholm – director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota – wrote in the New York Times last month:

Viruses like Ebola are notoriously sloppy in replicating, meaning the virus entering one person may be genetically different from the virus entering the next. The current Ebola virus’s hyper-evolution is unprecedented; there has been more human-to-human transmission in the past four months than most likely occurred in the last 500 to 1,000 years. Each new infection represents trillions of throws of the genetic dice.

www.globalresearch.ca...

Watch this video to hear about the current outbreak and how it came to be:



You see that the slums, overpopulation, poor services and poor health systems in Africa makes it a boiling pot for an epidemic like this to break out. Is it as likely to gain a foothold in North America? Its not as unlikely but it's still possible. All you need is a bum or homeless person to contract it, who usually have very close contact with others whether they are sharing drinks, drugs, food, a bed, clothing, etc with each other. A slew of homeless then begging for money, interacting with drunken bar goers , etc, have a high probability of passing it on to another socioeconomic group. Once a group of bar goers comes down with the disease that the exploding start point, a person who thinks they might have a mild flu but figures they can drink it off with a few beers, early stage of symptoms and contagious... BOOM, you could easily have dozens infected in one night, or even just a few and then spread like spider webs from there.

As is mentioned the western health system, response and emergency control is far beyond Africa, and there really is nothing to worry about as long as the system works as its meant to but that doesnt always happen. I imagine an outbreak would be stopped with great effort, but it may be a reoccurring problem depending on how quickly the disease is fought and how successful. The CDC or WHO last said they believe to have control of it by summer 2015. That's a ways to go still...


And thats hoping it doesn't go airborne by then.

a reply to: boncho

boncho,

I love reading your posts and I respect your opinion, but I disagree with you that we should all be freaking out.

People keep saying "if it goes airborne..." but we have never witnessed a virus going airborne. Most of these viruses have existed in animal populations for millions of years, and have not gone airborne. Can you give any examples of viruses that humanity has ever witnessed "going airborne?"

The movie Outbreak ruined all of you. THIS IS NOT THE MOVIES.

a reply to: boncho

I'm not downplaying it, but rather addressing the question, is there too much fear mongering? I've read threads from people saying we should ban vey flight from Africa, while others believe it's some form of global population control from the illuminati, shadow government, or some other hidden entity.

Isn't it worth being aware without be becoming panicked in the sane way we're encouraged to panic over terror groups while governments ram through draconian anti-terror legislation? What's better, reasoned discussion, or people losing all sense of rationality whilst dwelling far outside the bounds of what can be considered a normal and rational response?

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
a reply to: boncho

boncho,

I love reading your posts and I respect your opinion, but I disagree with you that we should all be freaking out.

People keep saying "if it goes airborne..." but we have never witnessed a virus going airborne. Most of these viruses have existed in animal populations for millions of years, and have not gone airborne. Can you give any examples of viruses that humanity has ever witnessed "going airborne?"

The movie Outbreak ruined all of you. THIS IS NOT THE MOVIES.

Its been in the animal population and been relatively the same with an easy transmission and an easy life in its host carrier. Bats I presume. That is different than when it goes to humans and its dealing with entirely different DNA. There are thousands of examples of viruses mutating, as it happens on a daily occurrence. (I admit, not such a giant leap in mutant abilities but still...)

In any case, I respect opposing opinions.

Yes there are viral mutations to become airborne:

Five Mutations Make H5N1 Airborne
The second of the two controversial bird flu papers is published in Science, revealing that just five mutations can render the virus transmissible between ferrets.

It would not be setting a precedent. If anything it would follow a very common evolutionary point for the virus. Whether or not its likely is another matter, but the risk is not 0%

Im not saying jump out the window with a flaming bag on your head, I'm just saying a daily headline on Ebola isn't such a bad thing. Keep it in mind when you're in public and carry a bottle of hand sanitizer around. No need to duct tape your windows.





(*Buys stock in Purell-completely unrelated, I swear )

How fast it transmits is irrelevant as long as it can continue to transmit.

Normally the next argument is first world country's will slow it down.
I am sure they will to as long as they are successful in slowing it down at source to.

If they fail in that then the health systems of first world country's enter a whole new scenario of clusters of cases entering every month or week or day.

And they are not designed to deal with that.

And i do not say this out of fear if anything i am to logical.

a reply to: TinkerHaus

I understand your point. However, as a parent that had strep multiple times that my children never got themselves I think I understand carriar (spelling ) better than most.

You are entirely correct in not allowing concern to take over ones life. A bit of extra precaution doesn't hurt.

a reply to: boncho

This is an example of engineering a virus to infect a different species - this is not an example of a virus naturally mutating to "go airborne."

a reply to: cuckooold

it is not how bad it spreads that concerns me its that it kills so many people once you do get it!

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
a reply to: boncho

This is an example of engineering a virus to infect a different species - this is not an example of a virus naturally mutating to "go airborne."

Okay, well another example is any virus that is airborne. That kind of question is kind of like when creationists ask for the missing link between humans and ancestors. And why can't we show them every series in between.

For the following pubmed article in layman terms:

Airborne transmission of the flu virus can be dependent on relative humidity and temperature, with colder, dry weather enabling the spread of the virus most easily.

Not all strains of various viruses or diseases are airborne or start out that way. Some tend to go airborne while the same bits of it affecting another area are still transmitted by contact. The strength of the virus and the environment surrounding it are precursors and every time it mutates or infects a new person it has a chance to do that, especially when in environments that are helpful to that end. It's kind of a silly question, but I will still stick with the same answer:

Many common infections can spread by airborne transmission at least in some cases, including: Anthrax (inhalational), Chickenpox, Influenza, Measles, Smallpox and Tuberculosis.

www.theweathernetwork.com...

Coughing, sneezing, talking, bed-making, turning pages of books, etc. all generate microbial aerosols which are carried and dispersed by air movements. Inhalation of these particles may cause allergic responses but whether or not infectious disease ensues depends in part on the viability and infectivity of the inhaled microbes and their landing sites. Desiccation is experienced by all airborne microbes; gram-negative bacteria and lipid-containing viruses demonstrate phase changes in their outer phospholipid bilayer membranes owing to concomitant changes in water content and/or temperature. These changes most likely lead to cross-linking reactions of associated protein moieties principally at mid to high relative humidity (RH). For lipid-free viruses these reactions of their surface protein moieties occur most rapidly at low RH. Radiation, oxygen, ozone and its reaction products and various pollutants also decrease viability and infectivity through chemical, physical and biological modification to phospholipid, protein and nucleic acid moieties. The extent of damage and the degree of repair together with the efficacy of host defence mechanisms largely controls whether the causative microbes take hold and spread disease via the airborne route. At least indoors, where desiccation is the predominant stress, the general reversibility of membrane-phase changes by vapour-phase rehydration when coupled with efficacious microbial enzymatic repair mechanisms under genetic control, virtually ensures the spread of disease by the aerobiological pathway.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...