- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 33,522
- Reaction score
- 10,826
- Location
- Between Athens and Jerusalem
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The difference in the maps shows how the virus has spread. FWIW, the average daily figures for confirmed, probable, and suspected worldwide ebola cases for the last 3 weekly periods is below:
7-Day Period Ending:
October 5: 122 per day
October 12: 138 per day
October 19: 134 per day
What are your qualification in medicine?
Also, some strains of ebola have indeed spread through the air, and with the rapid rate of spread its increasingly likely it will happen again. Note that things like increased mobility from outbreak locations makes this even more likely and potentially more deadly.
From Pigs to Monkeys, Ebola Goes Airborne | HealthMap
Wrong DS.....one can even spread it when Cured.
“Sperm can contain the virus for a period of three to six months even after a person has been cured of EVD. The 21-day quarantine period remains ambiguous and we need more research to conclusively establish its basis,” added Dr Srivastava......snip~
For a so-called professional you like to scaremonger. That's not airborne, it's aerosol.
For a so-called professional you like to scaremonger. That's not airborne, it's aerosol.
Also, some strains of ebola have indeed spread through the air, and with the rapid rate of spread its increasingly likely it will happen again. Note that things like increased mobility from outbreak locations makes this even more likely and potentially more deadly.
From Pigs to Monkeys, Ebola Goes Airborne | HealthMap
Good point. I should have been clearer, as I was referring to the doctor's case. He couldn't spread it before he became symptomatic. Once one has come down with Ebola, the virus lingers in one's semen for an extended period of time.
OMG! Nooooooo! Well, take his damned credentials away, he clearly is not as qualified as you to speak on the matter...
As it happens, for once you're correct, he isn't.
I absolutely am. Now slip into some wine and read New Yorker magazine.
While the study provided evidence that transmission of Ebola between species is possible, researchers still cannot say for certain how that transmission actually occurred. There are three likely candidates for the route of transmission: airborne, droplet, or fomites.
....
Author Dr. Gary Kobinger suspects that the virus is transmitted through droplets
....
What do these findings mean? First and foremost, Ebola is not suddenly an airborne disease. .... Furthermore, because human Ebola outbreaks have historically been locally contained, it is unlikely that Ebola can spread between humans via airborne transmission.
The article says researchers believe the disease spread by droplets, NOT airborne.
As it happens, for once you're correct, he isn't.
I don't get the definition of "airborn" that they're talking about. Coughs and Sneezes leave droplets in the air some as small as 5 microns that could stay in the air indefinitely. If the ebola virus is contained in one of those droplets it can land on someone, be inhaled by them, go in their eye (mucus membrane) etc. Larger droplets will eventually fall onto surfaces which can then be picked up by someone touching that spot. The virus is transferred onto the other persons skin and then again into the eye or other mucus membrane. This is how the flu travels every year - the flu is a virus the same as ebola is a virus.
The article says researchers believe the disease spread by droplets, NOT airborne.
Yes, and I have demonstrated that the disease is also capable of airborne transmission.
Where did you demonstrate that? And if it's airborne, why is the rate of transmission so low except for healthcare workers and others in regular, and/or direct contact with bodily fluids?
Im not arguing that the current strain is airborne, as far as we know. Im saying its capable of airborne transmission and there is documented evidence of that.
The CDC runs down the research here: Review of Human-to-Human Transmission of Ebola Virus | Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever | CDC
It appears the primates were 20cm from the pigs, and pigs can generate large droplets very effectively. In other conditions - such as when a plexiglass barrier prevented large droplets, but wouldn't contain the small ones you refer to, there was no transmission. And in studies of humans, in the VAST majority of cases, the person infected is known to have directly contacted human bodily fluids, and indirect transmission can't be confirmed but is in any event very rare. That's consistent with the cases here where it's only healthcare workers directly treating the dying patient who got sick, and not other bystanders, including family members living in the same home.
I generally agree - the transmission rate via a cough/sneeze is very low percentage wise - but I do not think it's impossible to transfer that way. The plausibility may be low but given just the math - it's possible. That is why the CDC approved PPE includes a N95 mask the CDC requires filters down to 2 microns.
So what did the CDC miss in their rundown of previous outbreaks and their assessment of the risks?
We're on the same page.
The only thing I'm objecting to is the scare mongering that Ebola is an airborne disease like the flue or other highly contagious viruses. It's just not, and there is no reason to treat it as such. For a medical provider spending extended time in the same room as a person sick and dying, throwing up, coughing, etc. then there is no reason to take any risks of it spreading by droplets large or small. But the risk to the population of NYC while the doctor was bowling or walking on the streets with no fever and no symptoms was, for all practical purposes, zero.
My biggest issue is with its inconsistent policies (regarding adequate protection), its slow implementation (some aren't due to kick in until monday when we have exposure in nyc) and its refusal to recommend closing of the border.
Nonsense.
No it isn't. Obama and his CDC drone did nothing to keep Ebola out of the US.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?