ebola, anyone else mildly terrified?
Discussion
k it. Haven't got a clue what I'm typing today.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/ebola-dea...
Nearly 5k dead now, little news but another 400+ death in a few days.
Yeah all fine nothing to worry about...
Nearly 5k dead now, little news but another 400+ death in a few days.
Yeah all fine nothing to worry about...
superkartracer said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/ebola-dea...
Nearly 5k dead now, little news but another 400+ death in a few days.
Yeah all fine nothing to worry about...
And these are official reported figures, but it's a good bet there are many more unaccounted for.Nearly 5k dead now, little news but another 400+ death in a few days.
Yeah all fine nothing to worry about...
It'll be news again soon unless all these people they are sending to help can make an actual impact. Fingers crossed it's enough of an impact given the relatively slow response.
Dave
Jimbeaux said:
Doctor in New York City confirmed to have Ebola. He worked with Ebola patients in Africa. Questions abound why people known to have treated Ebola patients in Africa, are not made to isolate for 21 days upon their return.
In Africa its spread is enhanced by ignorance.In the west it will be enhanced by arrogance.
Snappy, but not inaccurate.
They're not contagious until they're symptomatic and as returning healthcare workers perfectly capable of self-monitoring it isn't a big deal. It's also not considered a stigma so there's no issue. The worry is that someone less well educated, who does consider it a stigma might ignore the symptoms.
And a three week quarantine period might put some off from volunteering. As we're trying to stop it at source quarantine would seem short sighted.
They're not contagious until they're symptomatic and as returning healthcare workers perfectly capable of self-monitoring it isn't a big deal. It's also not considered a stigma so there's no issue. The worry is that someone less well educated, who does consider it a stigma might ignore the symptoms.
And a three week quarantine period might put some off from volunteering. As we're trying to stop it at source quarantine would seem short sighted.
thehawk said:
Snoggledog said:
If it gets into SE Asia or India then it will get really interesting..
Why? They are probably better prepared than we are.On another note entirely...
Now that there's another case in the US from a returning health worker, I'm curious as to the breakdown of the volumes of health workers per country versus the number of cases of infection.
How does vaccine development work?
When this all started 'there is no known cure' was said a lot. Now there is one? Can stuff like this really be developed this quickly when its needed? Results due in December but surely they must have a good idea if this works with them announcing something like this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29756301
Either way, good news.
When this all started 'there is no known cure' was said a lot. Now there is one? Can stuff like this really be developed this quickly when its needed? Results due in December but surely they must have a good idea if this works with them announcing something like this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29756301
Either way, good news.
Bill said:
Snappy, but not inaccurate.
They're not contagious until they're symptomatic and as returning healthcare workers perfectly capable of self-monitoring it isn't a big deal. It's also not considered a stigma so there's no issue. The worry is that someone less well educated, who does consider it a stigma might ignore the symptoms.
And a three week quarantine period might put some off from volunteering. As we're trying to stop it at source quarantine would seem short sighted.
He is fully capable, and isolated himself after feeling symptoms. However, he was "feeling tired and under the weather" the day before he isolated himself. In that day, he went bowling, rode a subway, and took an uber taxi. While not likely, he could have infected someone at that time. Why not have all those who return from treating overseas Ebola patients stay in isolation for a set period of time before being re-introduced to the population? 700 years ago, those who cared for Plague victims were isolated for 14 days as a precaution; they had that at least figured out. Politics trump common sense once again.They're not contagious until they're symptomatic and as returning healthcare workers perfectly capable of self-monitoring it isn't a big deal. It's also not considered a stigma so there's no issue. The worry is that someone less well educated, who does consider it a stigma might ignore the symptoms.
And a three week quarantine period might put some off from volunteering. As we're trying to stop it at source quarantine would seem short sighted.
vescaegg said:
How does vaccine development work?
When this all started 'there is no known cure' was said a lot. Now there is one? Can stuff like this really be developed this quickly when its needed? Results due in December but surely they must have a good idea if this works with them announcing something like this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29756301
Either way, good news.
There has been research into Ebola, including the possibility of vaccines, with vaccine candidates shown to be effective in animal models from at least as long ago as the late 90's. Research, but little development and no productionising. You have to consider who was and was not interested in Ebola and why - there was concern about potential applications as a biowarfare agent, so organisations like USAMRIID have a long history of defensive Ebola research, but the pharmaceuticals industry is interested in money. Africans don't have much money. Ebola has never spread into a population outside Africa. Now there is fear and funding, there is accelerated development of vaccines.When this all started 'there is no known cure' was said a lot. Now there is one? Can stuff like this really be developed this quickly when its needed? Results due in December but surely they must have a good idea if this works with them announcing something like this?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29756301
Either way, good news.
There is also something of an opportunity. You can't get a vaccine trial involving challenging people with Ebola virus past an ethics committee. You can vaccinate people during an outbreak and see what happens. You can perhaps also dispense with some red tape if you are in the middle of an emergency. Especially if the people you are going to vaccinate aren't likely to sue you if the vaccine has some bad side effects.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff