ebola, anyone else mildly terrified?

ebola, anyone else mildly terrified?

Author
Discussion

otolith

55,899 posts

203 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
Conveniently, it was inconvenient to prove that he ever did actually have Ebola. Hmm.

Terminator X

14,920 posts

203 months

Monday 24th November 2014
quotequote all
Isn't it still located in a very small part of a massive country? Nasty for them of course but continues to be a tiny risk for the rest of the world.

TX.

TransverseTight

753 posts

144 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
I just watched an episode of panorama from last week about doctors treating ebola with MSF. One of the saddest programmes I have ever watched in my life. People just dropping dead at the care centre who looked to have been making a recovery. It was like watching all the tear jerky bits of comic relief back to back for half an hour. Flippin Tivo missed the end though. Anyone saw what happened to the orphan baby girl who's dad dies when he went off for a shower?. Second thoughts I can guess. She was getting pretty sick and had that look of fear in her eyes. Had to watch Russell narrow eyes good news after just to cheer me up a bit. It was seeing the kids suffer that upset me. At least the adults know what is happening. Not that it's any better for them. Horrible horrible disease.

This still isn't reassuring...

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-a...

At least they are still using linear axis starting at 0 and haven't swapped to using logarithminc scales so it fits on the page!

I just noticed though they don't have a total cases grpah across the region. so being an excel whizz - added the 3 figures together in a new column and plotted a graph with the "exponential trend line" added. Follows pretty damn close. Give us 50,000 cases by xmas day and 15,000 deaths.
100,000 by mid feb and 40,000 deaths, with 250,000/75,000 by end of March.

That's doesn't sound too bad... but if you plot it on a logarithmic scale and extend the dates a bit further... you get 10,000,000 cases by mid September next year, 100,000,000 by december and 1 billion by end of March 2016. Sometime between June and July 2016 - every one on the planet. Obviously worse case scenario assuming it reaches criticial mass and can't be controlled and governments don't put everyone on lock down for 42 days.

That's why it's important to get it under control now. Or buy lots of gaffa tape for sealing downstairs windows, black bin bags, several bags of rice, and some disinfectant wipes and some rehydration and diocalm sachets. Hmmmn.

The only good bit of news... when plotted on a logarithmic scale.. the rate of increase may appear to be slowing in the last 2 weeks. But that could be down to under reporting as work loads have increased.

Mr Whippy

28,944 posts

240 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
TransverseTight said:
so being an excel whizz - added the 3 figures together in a new column and plotted a graph with the "exponential trend line" added. Follows pretty damn close. Give us 50,000 cases by xmas day and 15,000 deaths.

you get 10,000,000 cases by mid September next year, 100,000,000 by december

That's why it's important to get it under control now.
It's easy to ignore this reality, but I came to similar figures above and bar the very recent adjustments that may be a positive sign, it's following all expectations of a logarithmic spread.

Given the aid and help in the area right now you'd have to imagine that if this graph keeps curving up, then there will be no stopping it.

It's relatively contained for now, but if numbers get higher that containment will be under more pressure. I can imagine that it'll spread terribly around the African continent if borders begin to fail and people panic travel around.


A crappy situation. I'm just amazed that more help wasn't sent sooner. With something like this a lot of aid early on would have stamped it out easily. But now even a huge amount of aid may be ineffective. Bonkers.


Dave

VeeDubBigBird

440 posts

128 months

Sunday 7th December 2014
quotequote all
Looks like the scaremongers and idiots who believed them were wrong again.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29957338

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/29/30-O...

Try and learn after this, that like SARS, Bird Flu and BSE, these disease only escalate for a short period before a plan of action is implemented.

Sure they are serious and we should always take immediate action but seriously, who honestly believed that there would be millions of deaths.

Croutons

9,807 posts

165 months

Sunday 7th December 2014
quotequote all
VeeDubBigBird said:
Looks like the scaremongers and idiots who believed them were wrong again.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29957338

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/29/30-O...

Try and learn after this, that like SARS, Bird Flu and BSE, these disease only escalate for a short period before a plan of action is implemented.

Sure they are serious and we should always take immediate action but seriously, who honestly believed that there would be millions of deaths.
You're a nice one aren't you? Personally I don't think this is anything to be happy about

Case Counts*

As of December 2, 2014
(Updated December 4, 2014)

Total Cases: 17290

Laboratory-Confirmed Cases: 10825

Total Deaths: 6128

  • Case counts updated in conjunction with the World Health Organization updates and are based on information reported by the Ministries of Health.

VeeDubBigBird

440 posts

128 months

Sunday 7th December 2014
quotequote all
Croutons said:
You're a nice one aren't you? Personally I don't think this is anything to be happy about

Case Counts*

As of December 2, 2014
(Updated December 4, 2014)

Total Cases: 17290

Laboratory-Confirmed Cases: 10825

Total Deaths: 6128

  • Case counts updated in conjunction with the World Health Organization updates and are based on information reported by the Ministries of Health.
Unfortunately Africa will always be a hot bed for disease and when this is over it still won't account for a fraction of the overall death toll in the nation. My point is still valid, does anyone still expect this to hit millions across the world by January.

Regarding my feelings about this news, yes i am happy it's in decline, however i never said i was happy it happened in the first place.

As a side note look at the nations most prevalent for this sort of thing, most are over populated, poor hygiene/ education, but high on corruption and exploitation of its general populace.

Mr Whippy

28,944 posts

240 months

Sunday 7th December 2014
quotequote all
VeeDubBigBird said:
My point is still valid, does anyone still expect this to hit millions across the world by January.

Regarding my feelings about this news, yes i am happy it's in decline, however i never said i was happy it happened in the first place.

As a side note look at the nations most prevalent for this sort of thing, most are over populated, poor hygiene/ education, but high on corruption and exploitation of its general populace.
I think people suggested, based on the current plots of cases/deaths vs time, the outcome could be millions by January 2016. Ie, about a year from now.

That is the nature of the exponential spread characteristic we know occurs, because it's directly evident and visible in the plot of cases vs time we have already for this Ebola outbreak.


Until we see a plot of cases/deaths vs time that is flat or going down, then it's not getting better.

All I've seen recently are poppy graphics or single point in time tables which are impossible to see the obvious trends on.

All we need is a load of curves on a graph. You can't manipulate that data to tell you what you want to see. You just see lines either going up more steeply (bad), same gradient (stable), or going down (good)


It's a cold way to look at it, but we know this is the behaviour of Ebola spreading. If it gets it's chance it'll spread like wild fire.

But if we see no signal in the data suggestive that all the aid we have sent so far is doing anything, then that is a very bad signal indeed!

Dave

otolith

55,899 posts

203 months

Sunday 7th December 2014
quotequote all
I wonder if the people working their arses off to contain Ebola will feel a bit like those who did the same for the millennium bug, only to be told there mustn't have been a problem because nothing happened?

Negative Creep

24,942 posts

226 months

Sunday 7th December 2014
quotequote all
otolith said:
I wonder if the people working their arses off to contain Ebola will feel a bit like those who did the same for the millennium bug, only to be told there mustn't have been a problem because nothing happened?
I seem to recall those saying we had to do everything to stop the Y2K bug were the ones you had to pay to fix it scratchchin

TransverseTight

753 posts

144 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
VeeDubBigBird said:
Looks like the scaremongers and idiots who believed them were wrong again.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29957338

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/29/30-O...

Try and learn after this, that like SARS, Bird Flu and BSE, these disease only escalate for a short period before a plan of action is implemented.

Sure they are serious and we should always take immediate action but seriously, who honestly believed that there would be millions of deaths.
Unformtunatley the articles you picked there are from October and November respectively. A bit out of date.

Check here regularly for the latest official stats.

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-a...

You'll see that in the last week the graphs have started to rise more steeply than before. That doesn't show less cases, it is showing an increase in the number of new cases up to December 1st. Until that graph starts a downward trend for several weeks there's no one got this under control. Bear in mind a lot of cases are going unreported as the villages in the sticks aren't getting as well covered and some people are just wandering off into the woods to die. That and the offical team appear to be a bit swamped and seem to be doing the paper work in batches.

TransverseTight

753 posts

144 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
Negative Creep said:
otolith said:
I wonder if the people working their arses off to contain Ebola will feel a bit like those who did the same for the millennium bug, only to be told there mustn't have been a problem because nothing happened?
I seem to recall those saying we had to do everything to stop the Y2K bug were the ones you had to pay to fix it scratchchin
I was sat next to the Y2K team for a large water utility. Took up half a floor of a large building. In Jan 1999 I was telling people, stockpile water and purification tables, and buy tinned food. By September I was saying, looks like it will all right. They have all critical water delivery systems tested/fixed, though you might get the odd £1,000,000 bill or free water for life, which will be picked up by checking routines they added. And you won't get stuck in the lifts at midnight.

Terminator X

14,920 posts

203 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
Whilst I agree with the general sentiment, being foolhardy in the face of something that can infect you very easily IF you are exposed, and has a 25%+ mortality rate isn't exactly sensible either.
What is the mortality rate for flu? Are you worried about flu?

TX.

<Influenza spreads around the world in a yearly outbreak, resulting in about three to five million cases of severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths>

superkartracer

8,959 posts

221 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
TransverseTight said:
VeeDubBigBird said:
Looks like the scaremongers and idiots who believed them were wrong again.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29957338

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/29/30-O...

Try and learn after this, that like SARS, Bird Flu and BSE, these disease only escalate for a short period before a plan of action is implemented.

Sure they are serious and we should always take immediate action but seriously, who honestly believed that there would be millions of deaths.
Unformtunatley the articles you picked there are from October and November respectively. A bit out of date.

Check here regularly for the latest official stats.

http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-a...

You'll see that in the last week the graphs have started to rise more steeply than before. That doesn't show less cases, it is showing an increase in the number of new cases up to December 1st. Until that graph starts a downward trend for several weeks there's no one got this under control. Bear in mind a lot of cases are going unreported as the villages in the sticks aren't getting as well covered and some people are just wandering off into the woods to die. That and the offical team appear to be a bit swamped and seem to be doing the paper work in batches.
It's easy to become confusszed hehe

Mr Whippy

28,944 posts

240 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
Terminator X said:
Mr Whippy said:
Whilst I agree with the general sentiment, being foolhardy in the face of something that can infect you very easily IF you are exposed, and has a 25%+ mortality rate isn't exactly sensible either.
What is the mortality rate for flu? Are you worried about flu?

TX.

<Influenza spreads around the world in a yearly outbreak, resulting in about three to five million cases of severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths>
The question is, is there a vaccine for Ebola like there is for Flu?

And is the mortality rate for Ebola significantly impacted by age/health like it is for Flu?


I'd rather be exposed to the Influenza virus than the Ebola one thanks.

otolith

55,899 posts

203 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
The question is, is there a vaccine for Ebola like there is for Flu?

And is the mortality rate for Ebola significantly impacted by age/health like it is for Flu?


I'd rather be exposed to the Influenza virus than the Ebola one thanks.
Young, healthy adults have the best chance of surviving Ebola - in previous outbreaks at least.

Not predictably the case, though - the 1918 flu had a very odd shaped age-mortality curve:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC274091...

Terminator X

14,920 posts

203 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
Terminator X said:
Mr Whippy said:
Whilst I agree with the general sentiment, being foolhardy in the face of something that can infect you very easily IF you are exposed, and has a 25%+ mortality rate isn't exactly sensible either.
What is the mortality rate for flu? Are you worried about flu?

TX.

<Influenza spreads around the world in a yearly outbreak, resulting in about three to five million cases of severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths>
The question is, is there a vaccine for Ebola like there is for Flu?

And is the mortality rate for Ebola significantly impacted by age/health like it is for Flu?

I'd rather be exposed to the Influenza virus than the Ebola one thanks.
So you're not worried about flu even though it kills 500k people per year ish yet you are worried about Ebola which has killed a few thousand as a one off spin

TX.

Mr Whippy

28,944 posts

240 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
otolith said:
Mr Whippy said:
The question is, is there a vaccine for Ebola like there is for Flu?

And is the mortality rate for Ebola significantly impacted by age/health like it is for Flu?


I'd rather be exposed to the Influenza virus than the Ebola one thanks.
Young, healthy adults have the best chance of surviving Ebola - in previous outbreaks at least.

Not predictably the case, though - the 1918 flu had a very odd shaped age-mortality curve:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC274091...
Given that data I think I'd still rather have a case of that, than Ebola!

Dave

moanthebairns

17,917 posts

197 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
I was more afraid of Mad Cow Disease, mind you I was about 10 when that hit and I thought I was going to die every time I eat my Grans mince and tatties.

Surprisingly I just looked it up, 177 died in the UK from it, feck me that's quite a few for here.

Mr Whippy

28,944 posts

240 months

Monday 8th December 2014
quotequote all
Terminator X said:
Mr Whippy said:
Terminator X said:
Mr Whippy said:
Whilst I agree with the general sentiment, being foolhardy in the face of something that can infect you very easily IF you are exposed, and has a 25%+ mortality rate isn't exactly sensible either.
What is the mortality rate for flu? Are you worried about flu?

TX.

<Influenza spreads around the world in a yearly outbreak, resulting in about three to five million cases of severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths>
The question is, is there a vaccine for Ebola like there is for Flu?

And is the mortality rate for Ebola significantly impacted by age/health like it is for Flu?

I'd rather be exposed to the Influenza virus than the Ebola one thanks.
So you're not worried about flu even though it kills 500k people per year ish yet you are worried about Ebola which has killed a few thousand as a one off spin

TX.
The issue is if you get it and then it kills you easily.

I'm merely responding 'coldly' to the graph. Flu doesn't have a graph of deaths vs time going up exponentially. It's always been high and the risk factors and ways we can alleviate it's impacts are part of our daily lives.

Ebola hasn't always been high. It's come out of nowhere and is showing an exponential growth of deaths vs time and no abating despite intervention.


It's worthwhile having a healthy dose of scepticism but the simplest projection of figures is the most stark at telling the truth. Until the figures show reason for optimism then you'd be foolish to be optimistic about never feeling at risk from Ebola in the relative near future.

Dave