Ebola Virus...

[HunterGreene]

So the good news update is that Duncan's girlfriend and others that were in proximity to him while he was most infectious (before he went to the hospital the second time) have successfully gotten out of quarantine and are ebola-free. Pretty solid proof that the virus isn't airborne, IMO.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

So the good news update is that Duncan's girlfriend and others that were in proximity to him while he was most infectious (before he went to the hospital the second time) have successfully gotten out of quarantine and are ebola-free. Pretty solid proof that the virus isn't airborne, IMO.

That is good news!

NPR had another story this morning about the outbreak in Nigeria and how well it was handled.

ONE airline passenger inefected 11 hospital workers.
I guess every one of those workers was licking the implements to care for this patient.
Again - people trained to not be contaminated by sick people yet it still got a very large number for a single carrier.

I predict that what we will learn before this is over is that for a very short window in the contagious period, the virus is equivalent to being airborne.
This is probably due to massive coughing and possibly projectile vomiting causing the particles to become suspended in air currents.
Shit spiders can become "airborne" and we question the ability of microscopic particles?

In the case of the Duncan family, this period appeared to occur at the hospital and not at home.

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by stugray

That is good news!

NPR had another story this morning about the outbreak in Nigeria and how well it was handled.

...

In the case of the Duncan family, this period appeared to occur at the hospital and not at home.

Nigeria was called "Ebola-free" by the WHO as of yesterday (Senegal as well, late last week), which is very encouraging. The "1.4 million" estimate was if no extra effort was applied to containment, of which there obviously has been, if a bit late.

And most reports I heard said that Duncan was vomiting at home, which is part of that extremely contagious period.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by stugray

That is good news!

NPR had another story this morning about the outbreak in Nigeria and how well it was handled.

ONE airline passenger inefected 11 hospital workers.
I guess every one of those workers was licking the implements to care for this patient.
Again - people trained to not be contaminated by sick people yet it still got a very large number for a single carrier.

In the case of the Duncan family, this period appeared to occur at the hospital and not at home.

I work in EH&S and have made a very good living for the last 25 years dealing with people that do not, or will not, follow simple protocols to keep themselves and others safe.
As much as you would like to think that all medical staff follow all the rules, all the time, I can assure you they do not. Much the same as a person that has worked on heavy manufacturing equipment for decades can become complacent and shove their hand into moving machinery medical staff can and do "forget" sometimes. Even those dealing with Ebola (if they even know they are at the time) are not guaranteed to follow all the requirements.
I mentioned improper mask use in a prior post but have also seen:

An ER nurse take a patient's temperature, wipe the thermometer off on her sleeve and shove it her pocket.

A doctor take a glove off one hand and then take the other off with the bare hand.

A bedpan of vomit sit on a gurney in a hallway for at least 2 hours.

A nurse handle contaminated tissues then give their hands a 2 second rinse with plain water

A nursing assistant clean up a blood spill with a 2 inch alcohol swab and walk away with a "good enough" shrug.

I could go on but I think you get my drift!

The point is, I bet if you asked every one of these people if they followed proper procedure they would say "YES".
These bad habits are hard to break and even when the risk increases they still go on. I don't think that there is any justification for saying it went airborne as there are 100s of other ways the medical personnel could have come in contact!

[stugray]

I still say that any disease that can infect 11 trained health care workers is "highly contagious".

If Ebola is not "highly contagious" then what are some examples of diseases that are MORE contagious?

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by stugray

I still say that any disease that can infect 11 trained health care workers is "highly contagious".

If Ebola is not "highly contagious" then what are some examples of diseases that are MORE contagious?

Ok, since you apparently have forgotten to use google, or can't simply remember anything, I'll jump on this grenade.

The Common Cold
Influenza
Chickenpox
Smallpox
Measles
Tuberculosis

All of which would be considered much more infectious, although maybe not as deadly due to the nature of the beast, understanding of the virus and vaccinations that have been in use for decades (although chickenpox vaccine was developed more recently).

What makes these health care workers more susceptible is their close proximity to the patient and working directly with them all day. More frequent exposure to dangerous conditions increases likelihood of transmission.

Something that is "highly contagious," as you propose Ebola to be, would have infected dozens of people in the US by now (including the people Duncan was living with in close quarters), not the 5 confirmed cases we have seen.

[murdoc]

Originally Posted by stugray

I still say that any disease that can infect 11 trained health care workers is "highly contagious".

If Ebola is not "highly contagious" then what are some examples of diseases that are MORE contagious?

Ebola is not very contagious because it requires direct contact with a person's bodily fluids.

There are diseases that spread without direct contact, e.g. Measles, Chicken Pox, Influenza.

Measles is spread through respiration (contact with fluids from an infected person's nose and mouth, either directly or through aerosol transmission), and is highly contagious—90% of people without immunity sharing living space with an infected person will catch it.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

Ok, since you apparently have forgotten to use google, or can't simply remember anything, I'll jump on this grenade.

The Common Cold
Influenza
Chickenpox
Smallpox
Measles
Tuberculosis

All of which would be considered much more infectious, although maybe not as deadly due to the nature of the beast, understanding of the virus and vaccinations that have been in use for decades (although chickenpox vaccine was developed more recently).

What makes these health care workers more susceptible is their close proximity to the patient and working directly with them all day. More frequent exposure to dangerous conditions increases likelihood of transmission.

Something that is "highly contagious," as you propose Ebola to be, would have infected dozens of people in the US by now (including the people Duncan was living with in close quarters), not the 5 confirmed cases we have seen.

Thank you!
You fell right into that.

NOW tell me how the mechanism for contracting Influenza DIFFERs from contracting Ebola.

Come on, your google skills appear to be working fine.

So I get it: Influenza is a "Highly contagious disease" but Ebola is not, even though they have exactly the same infection mechanisms.
Got it!

[stugray]

Originally Posted by murdoc

There are diseases that spread without direct contact, e.g. Measles, Chicken Pox, Influenza.

And Ebola.

Or are you saying that all 11 health workers in Nigeria had direct contact with bodily fluids?

[murdoc]

Originally Posted by stugray

And Ebola.

Or are you saying that all 11 health workers in Nigeria had direct contact with bodily fluids?

Influenza is a respiratory infection, so virus particles are typically present in large numbers throughout the respiratory tract. This means the virus is more easily expelled through coughing and sneezing. Add to this that the virus likes low humidity and lack of sunlight, means that the virus can be in the air in indoor spaces for large periods of time.

The virus is able to be transmitted before showing symptoms, where as EVD can only be transmitted once symptoms appear.

I am saying that all 11 health workers in Nigeria had contact with bodily fluids containing virus particles, which could have been on any one of hundreds of surfaces. Just think about how many places one contaminated hand could touch in a hospital. I don't see why you seem to think the virus needs to be airborne when there are other ways for viruses to be transmitted.

For some reason you seem to believe this to be true, when the people who are working with the disease and who are creating guidelines for it's prevention, think otherwise.

Why do you think you are being lied to?

[HunterGreene]

Originally Posted by stugray

And Ebola.

Or are you saying that all 11 health workers in Nigeria had direct contact with bodily fluids?

Well, yes, that's pretty much implied, indirect and direct contact are pretty much the same thing when it comes to infection, contact is contact. And the health workers, once again, are in close, continuous contact. And as Tcoat pointed out, we as humans make mistakes. The more time you spend in a dangerous situation, the more likely you are to make a dangerous mistake.

Originally Posted by stugray

Thank you!
You fell right into that.

NOW tell me how the mechanism for contracting Influenza DIFFERs from contracting Ebola.

Come on, your google skills appear to be working fine.

So I get it: Influenza is a "Highly contagious disease" but Ebola is not, even though they have exactly the same infection mechanisms.
Got it!

Oops, I went back on my promise to avoid feeding the troll....which you pretty much just proved you are in this case. I'm glad you are enjoying yourself, however.

But what the hell. One important difference between the two viruses (Flu and ebola, as you decided to pick) is the timeframe in which they become infectious. As it is understood, this "shedding" period for ebola begins at the onset of symptoms, whereas with the flu it can happen a full day before the onset of symptoms. That right there makes Flu a much more contagious.

Add to that simple fact that once someone is cured of ebola (which is sadly infrequent, currently) they do not, in general, continue to shed the virus (although it has been shown to be sexually transmitted by men for up to 40 days after recovery, to make a fair point). With the flu, it has been found, especially in children, that they can be shedding active virus (and therefore be contagious) for up to two weeks after the infection has run its course. Having children yourself, you can attest as to how much harder it is to keep young children from running around than to stay sexually abstinent for 40 days.

Next point, which I have already addressed: Area of transmission. Influenza, in a natural scenario, *has* to be inhaled or exposed to the respiratory tract to cause infection. Ebola has an *entirely* different set of bindings that are suited for blood vessel cells, not lung or respiratory cells. Yes, you can get infected by inhaling the expectorant of someone with ebola, but, frankly, if you are in that close a proximity for that length of time, you are likely a healthcare worker and not just a casual passer-by.

Also taken into account here is out-of-body persistence. The flu can survive, in general for one to two days on hard surfaces, whereas ebola has been showing to have a life of only a few hours, at most (more study admittedly is needed in this area, but its still going to be shorter than the flu).

You don't have to be in a hospital or caring for infected people to get the Flu. To get ebola, you have to have sustained, close contact with someone who is infected, or their bodily fluids.

I also repeat myself in saying this, but if this were truly airborne like the Flu is, we would be seeing multiple 10,000s of people infected, especially after being in densely populated areas of West Africa.

Bottom line is, there is crossover in their methods of infection, but the Flu is by far the more contagious/infectious of the two diseases.

Last point: I know this won't change your mind, stu. If you had bothered to read my previous posts fully, you would have seen your statement about them having the "same infection mechanisms" was completely misguided. But beating down your misinformation and fear-mongering is worth the effort.

[Ultramaroon]

Unfortunately, Stu is not trolling. Stu, I think you've truly painted yourself into a corner here. No harm in admitting you've learned a thing or two and moving on.

[Tcoat]

Do we have to go back to the invasion discussions too break the circular argument pattern again?????


The Canadians are prepping:

[stugray]

Originally Posted by murdoc

Influenza is a respiratory infection, so virus particles are typically present in large numbers throughout the respiratory tract. This means the virus is more easily expelled through coughing and sneezing. Add to this that the virus likes low humidity and lack of sunlight, means that the virus can be in the air in indoor spaces for large periods of time.

The virus is able to be transmitted before showing symptoms, where as EVD can only be transmitted once symptoms appear.

I am saying that all 11 health workers in Nigeria had contact with bodily fluids containing virus particles, which could have been on any one of hundreds of surfaces. Just think about how many places one contaminated hand could touch in a hospital. I don't see why you seem to think the virus needs to be airborne when there are other ways for viruses to be transmitted.

For some reason you seem to believe this to be true, when the people who are working with the disease and who are creating guidelines for it's prevention, think otherwise.

Why do you think you are being lied to?

I dont think I am being intentionally lied to, but I think the govt. is guessing a lot.
What was the #1 thing that both the CDC and the Dallas hospital said was done wrong in the first few days? "we underestimated the threat"
and "we werent properly educated and trained"

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

Well, yes, that's pretty much implied, indirect and direct contact are pretty much the same thing when it comes to infection, contact is contact. And the health workers, once again, are in close, continuous contact. And as Tcoat pointed out, we as humans make mistakes. The more time you spend in a dangerous situation, the more likely you are to make a dangerous mistake.



Oops, I went back on my promise to avoid feeding the troll....which you pretty much just proved you are in this case. I'm glad you are enjoying yourself, however.

Not a troll, but go on.

Originally Posted by HunterGreene

But what the hell. One important difference between the two viruses (Flu and ebola, as you decided to pick) is the timeframe in which they become infectious. As it is understood, this "shedding" period for ebola begins at the onset of symptoms, whereas with the flu it can happen a full day before the onset of symptoms. That right there makes Flu a much more contagious.

Add to that simple fact that once someone is cured of ebola (which is sadly infrequent, currently) they do not, in general, continue to shed the virus (although it has been shown to be sexually transmitted by men for up to 40 days after recovery, to make a fair point). With the flu, it has been found, especially in children, that they can be shedding active virus (and therefore be contagious) for up to two weeks after the infection has run its course. Having children yourself, you can attest as to how much harder it is to keep young children from running around than to stay sexually abstinent for 40 days.

Next point, which I have already addressed: Area of transmission. Influenza, in a natural scenario, *has* to be inhaled or exposed to the respiratory tract to cause infection. Ebola has an *entirely* different set of bindings that are suited for blood vessel cells, not lung or respiratory cells. Yes, you can get infected by inhaling the expectorant of someone with ebola, but, frankly, if you are in that close a proximity for that length of time, you are likely a healthcare worker and not just a casual passer-by.

Also taken into account here is out-of-body persistence. The flu can survive, in general for one to two days on hard surfaces, whereas ebola has been showing to have a life of only a few hours, at most (more study admittedly is needed in this area, but its still going to be shorter than the flu).

You don't have to be in a hospital or caring for infected people to get the Flu. To get ebola, you have to have sustained, close contact with someone who is infected, or their bodily fluids.

I also repeat myself in saying this, but if this were truly airborne like the Flu is, we would be seeing multiple 10,000s of people infected, especially after being in densely populated areas of West Africa.

Bottom line is, there is crossover in their methods of infection, but the Flu is by far the more contagious/infectious of the two diseases.

Last point: I know this won't change your mind, stu. If you had bothered to read my previous posts fully, you would have seen your statement about them having the "same infection mechanisms" was completely misguided. But beating down your misinformation and fear-mongering is worth the effort.

So lets look at some quick statistics (that I just made up).
IF a trained healthcare worker has a 20% chance of making a mistake and coming in contact with a patient's bodily fluids.
(1 in 5 caretakers)
IF coming in contact with bodily fluids has a 10% chance of transmitting the virus to the "contactor"
(1 in 10 of those that contacted bodily fluids)
(1-in-10 of 1-in-5 is 1 in 50)
Then eleven sick healthcare workers in Nigeria means that 550 healthcare workers came in contact with the patient????

I am sure the "actual" statistics in my assumptions are actually much lower.

So this means one of three things:
1 - there is a greater chance of transferring bodily fluids than we think in a hospital situation
2 - There is a greater chance that bodily fluid contact results in contagion transfer
OR
3 - There is another transferal mechanism that we do not understand.

Originally Posted by Ultramaroon

Unfortunately, Stu is not trolling. Stu, I think you've truly painted yourself into a corner here. No harm in admitting you've learned a thing or two and moving on.

Definitely not in a corner.

Oh, I am definitely learning, and I am not trolling.

I actually looked for a medical definition of "airborne".
It means:
" carried through the air. In health care settings, viruses or bacteria may become airborne, e.g., when someone sneezes or coughs"
So a virus can be "airborne" if it can be contracted by sneezes or coughs.

Ebola fits this definition - period.
HOW can anyone say (with a straight face) that Ebola is NOT an airborne threat?
Even the CDC has now said 3 feet is a risk - SO the CDC is saying that "Ebola is a threat even if you do not physically touch the person" " But it is not airborne"
WAIT WHAT?

Clearly there is some misinformation out there.