UN health worker dies of Ebola in Germany: hospital

"The Ebola patient died during the night in the St Georg Clinic in Leipzig," said a statement from the clinic in the eastern city.

"Despite intensive medical care and the best efforts by medical staff, the 56-year-old UN worker succumbed to the serious infection."

Yahoo News

Another story from the Independen tsaid.

The clinic said in a statement: "The patient sick with Ebola fever died during the night in St. Georg Clinic in Leipzig.

"Despite intensive medical measures and maximum efforts by the medical team, the 56-year-old UN employee succumbed to the serious infectious disease."

Just goes to show--- no matter what Officials claim about modern health care being the answer to this outbreak... even the best hospitals on the planet still are unable to save everyone... Still 2 out of 3 isn't bad.... 33.333% compared to WHOS 70% mortality rate...

Where are you getting the 70% mortality rate from?

To date 8,900+ have been confirmed as contracting Ebola with 4,700+ dying. This gives you a mortality rate of just under 50%.

Someone else claimed 70% mortality rate today, can you please provide a link to this figure.

Even in West Africa, Doctors are puzzled by why some people die and others live.

a reply to: HardCorps

Modern medicine with ONE case. What happens when there are 200 or 2000?

Western countries will not "weather the storm" any better than third world countries. Once our facilities are inundated it's game over.

a reply to: HardCorps

IMO, part of the problem with doing everything to extend life as long as possible is like playing Russian Roulette with Ebola isn't it, sorta?

The CDC was reconsidering these life extending procedures because of the Dallas case. Have they made any announcement about that? I know the efforts to save life are the utmost concern. With Ebola that doesn't really matter, does it.

If you got it you are either going to die or not. In the late stages of organ failure preceding imminent death, those other procedures just make the dying part even worse for the patient and more dangerous for those working with them.

IMO

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
Where are you getting the 70% mortality rate from?

To date 8,900+ have been confirmed as contracting Ebola with 4,700+ dying. This gives you a mortality rate of just under 50%.

Someone else claimed 70% mortality rate today, can you please provide a link to this figure.

Even in West Africa, Doctors are puzzled by why some people die and others live.

always glad to comply...

WSJ

ZURICH—The Ebola virus is killing 70% of the people who contract the disease, the World Health Organization said Tuesday, and as many as 10,000 new cases a week could be reported by early December.

Dr. Bruce Aylward, the WHO assistant director-general in charge of the organization’s response to the epidemic, said the Ebola virus is “still moving geographically, still escalating” in some bigger cities. He expressed concern the disease could spread to countries that share borders with Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia, the epicenters of the current outbreak, singling out Côte d’Ivoire as particularly vulnerable.

Dr. Aylward pushed for adoption of the WHO’s goal to safely bury 70% of the people killed by Ebola and treat 70% those with the disease within 60 days, a plan it’s dubbed 70-70-60, to help prevent the spread of the disease

See I wasn't just making those numbers up... though I wish I were... would be a lot less worrisome if I had

The WHO’s latest numbers indicated 8,914 suspected or confirmed Ebola cases and 4,447 deaths from the disease. Based on those numbers, the mortality rate is just under 50%. (EDS: 49.88%). But Dr. Aylward said that when patients can be monitored throughout the course of their disease the mortality rate is actually 70% in the affected countries.

a reply to: HardCorps

And didn't they originally estimate the mortality rate at 40-50% for this outbreak? Either way the first world hospitals would be clogged if it spread.

a reply to: HardCorps

Thanks for that, very interesting, because the figures they released today do not equate to 70% mortality rate.

Someone is lying somewhere, which just adds to the confusion, which kind of emphasises the BS surrounding this whole outbreak.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

what their really lying about is that they claim to understand anything at all about this virus...

Look I've said this time and time again... Ebola has been around for 40 years now right...
so why is it only now that anyone gives a damn about it...

money... it's only now that it threatens wealthy western nations that it got pharmacons and researchers racing for answers and a cure... now that there's a profit to be made that is... and it's no longer on some academic's curiosity list of oddities...

It's only now anyone's taking a serious look at what Ebola really is capable of... and it only stands to reason everything they state now as fact... will change again in tomorrows headlines...

An old surgeon once gave me a little story, which I recall every time I hear of a health worker dying from Ebola:

A drunken hobo would often go to the emergency department complaining of a headache for the past month. The emergency officers would scan his brain and find a new collection of blood. Presumably, he would fall, hit his head, and blood would leak into the skull. Well, he'd have the blood cleared in the operating theatre, then sod right back off to his drinking and falling. Very often so much blood is resorbed naturally that there wouldn't even need to be an operation to remove it.

One day he was brought in as soon as he lost consciousness. He was drunk and dehydrated and the emergency officers rightfully gave him intravenous fluid. Being rehydrated, his brain would expand, and since there wasn't enough space from the new bleed, the brain squashed itself.

Moral of the story: Sometimes its better to stay out of hospital, prostrate and dehydrated in a cold dark alley.
Corollary: Sometimes its better to have a village Ebola epidemic fizzle out rather than intervene and end up spreading it around the world.

The death rate went up to 70% today by WHO it has been in many news today. We don´t know much about this patient who died and how severe were the symptoms when he was admitted in hospital in Germany. We know that he was 56 years old UN worker from Sudan and he was given experimental Ebola medication which did not help.

Statistics as they are now is worrisome, the previous one was only an estimation in current situation. Now that more people have got the disease and how many of those infected have died it was obvious that 50% rate was too low, more patients more accurate is the rate.

If the patient is very sick there is no point to bring them in Europe or US to get medical treatment like the spanish priest which were in very poor condition, those who have been in good condition have survived.

Ebola will be and have been a big SLAP on the face of those who decide how and where to treat these patients, it has shown how TPTB have been overlooking the whole situation.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Well your math is a little off. That's over 50%. Secondly, the cases are growing logarithmically, and death is the end result. You can be a "case" for a while before perishing. That puts the number in the 60-70% range.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: HardCorps

Thanks for that, very interesting, because the figures they released today do not equate to 70% mortality rate.

Someone is lying somewhere, which just adds to the confusion, which kind of emphasises the BS surrounding this whole outbreak.

Yes, the affected families are lying because they want to do their death preparations like always so they are bribing officials to list cause of death as something other than Ebola.

The Wall Street Journal reports that retrieval teams are accepting bribes from families of Ebola victims to issue death certificates that say their loved ones died of other causes, allowing them to keep their bodies for a traditional burial.

news.yahoo.com...

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Well your math is a little off. That's over 50%. Secondly, the cases are growing logarithmically, and death is the end result. You can be a "case" for a while before perishing. That puts the number in the 60-70% range.

Yes I typed in the incorrect number of people that have died, it should have been 4,400+, not 4,700+. Maths was never my strong point.

Let's see where this leads, at the moment I'm not buying into the panic that others are, but I'll know when to start to.